conflict paper

Criteria

Failed to Meet Minimum Standards

Met Minimum Standards

Satisfactory

Good

Superior

Background

(30 points)

Introduction is not apparent

0

Introduction is vague; introduction is incomplete; lacks a focus

12

Introduction reflects barely adequate information to acquaint reader to the conflict scenario context.

18

Contains a focus and provides sufficient detail to set the stage for the analysis but may contain extraneous information

24

Introduction has a sharp, distinct focus; complete information

30

Literature Review

(50points)

None provided

0

Too shallow; insufficient depth; provides review of only one source; does not cite sources properly; may include analysis of the conflict resolution in this section

13

Provides a review of only 2–3 sources; does not address topic areas germane to the conflict resolution; including analysis of the conflict; does not cite some sources properly

25

Provides a review of the minimum four research articles; lacks reference to insights or findings from many of the readings that are applicable to the conflict under study

38

Discusses the concepts, ideas, or insights that have the most value for helping make sense of conflict resolution; excellent use of citations and follows proper citation protocol; exceeds all standards defined in the Syllabus guidelines for the project.

50

Analysis

(50 points)

No analysis evident or presents a simplistic, inappropriate, or incoherent analysis of or response to the conflict situation; analysis may suggest some significant misapplication of the course concepts

8

Analyze illogically the conflict situation; it may lack coherent structure or elaboration with examples; it may reflect an incomplete understanding of the conflict scenario; does not apply findings from literature review; clear lack of evidence to support analysis—making broad generalizations and unsupported assertions,

evidence of reductive reasoning where it reduces a complex effect to a single cause.

Forgotten what is the conflict situation and wandering all over the landscape

21

Presents an adequate analysis of the conflict situation, elaborating that response with sufficient examples and acceptable reasoning; may not apply findings from literature review or lack of evidence to support analysis—making broad generalizations and unsupported assertions

34

Presents a thoughtful analysis of the conflict situation, elaborating that response with appropriate examples and sensible reasoning

42

Presents a cogent analysis of the stated conflict situation, elaborating that response with well-chosen examples and persuasive reasoning supported by the literature

50

Conflict Resolution

Recommendation

(40 points)

Solutions and recommendation not apparent

6

The choice of solutions is not linked to the analysis

10

Presents only a single solution that may or may not be fully supported by the analysis

20

Solution or recommendations linked to the analysis; partially supported and defended

30

Solution or recommendations logically flow from the analysis; well supported and defended

40

References

(20 points)

Few or no references listed

4

Insufficient references listed; inconsistent format

8

A few appropriate references listed;

12

Well chosen references used; minor errors

16

Well chosen references used; follows correct format for listing; no errors

20