For EXPERT_RESEARCHER

BUSM 4194 Leading for Change

Semester 2, 2014

Assessment Task 2: Leadership Development Report

Writing instructions and Marking Rubric

This assessment task is a REPORT.

The RMIT College of Business requires you to use a particular style of writing which involves both the way the report is structured and the way that you acknowledge other people’s ideas used in your work.

The structuring of a report is very clearly described in the RMIT Study and Learning Centre Report Writing Skills Online Tutorial available on the BUSM4194 course Blackboard site

Investing time before you start writing will result in a better report.

You should by now should be proficient in the art of referencing. There are many styles of referencing in use in different disciplines and geographical locations. You are required to use the RMIT Business Referencing System. This is available to you via the Library website, in your course site on myRMIT and is uploaded to the assessments folder in the BUSM 4194 course site. This is a 50 page document but reading it through will be enormously helpful for you in this and future assessment tasks.

Make sure that you can clearly distinguish the difference between an essay (page 28 of the document) and a report (page 36).

Remember: this current assessment task is a REPORT not an ESSAY.

The critical thinking element

We want you to be very comfortable with questioning everything you read and hear.

Anyone can remember facts and state other people’s views but a far more useful skill is to critically review what you read and hear and decide for yourself how reliable, accurate, applicable, contemporary, objective and fair it is.

In this report, your assessor will value the fact that you are able to see both benefits and deficiencies in a particular theory. Make sure you look through the critical thinking exercises in the course site to get a clear understanding of critical thinking!

How will the report be marked?

Your lecturers have already created a marking rubric that will be used to award you a mark out of 50 as the report comprises 50 of the overall 100 marks available in this course.

The rubric is reproduced over the page and will be used as a way of providing feedback to you on how you performed.

The most important thing about the rubric is that it DEFINES what you will be marked on. If you include additional material that is not mentioned in the rubric it will not attract any marks, if you forget to write about something listed in the rubric, you’ll lose marks.

So the rubric is like a “contract” between you and your lecturer. Following the rubric clearly is your best strategy for a good result

BUSM 4194 Leading for Change task 2 Marking Rubric [sem 2 2014, Singapore]

The task and its marking rubric

	Steps in the task	Considerations	Link to literature	Marks
1.	Explore the Central Michigan University and National Health Service competencies models and select ONE of the two models as the framework or foundation of your own leadership development.	Decide which of the two models you want to use as the foundation for your leadership development plan (LDP). Explain your rationale / logic for the choice you made. Is your selected model a better “fit” for your future profession? Does it seem to align better with a particular industry type? Does it blend better with your culture and customs?	Simply cite the model chosen	5
2.	Select some competencies from your chosen model that you want to develop in order to improve your leadership.	Select some of the competencies from your chosen competency model to work on for your LDP. You are advised to select competencies broadly from across the model rather than focussing one just one section of the model. Explain why you chose these competencies Explain the likely impact of choosing only some of the competencies in the model (ie the fact that you have left out some components of the overall model?	Support your selection of competencies with at least 5 scholarly articles	10
3.	Consider how you will achieve the skill level described in your chosen competencies This should include: a. An assessment of your current strength (or weakness) in these competencies b. The steps you will take to build these skills c. A (very approximate) timeline for achieving each skill d. Explanation of how you will know that you’ve (eventually) achieved your desired skill level e. A brief summary of how these enhanced skills will enhance your leadership	How did you assess your current level of competence? What will you do to build your skills in the competencies you’ve chosen? How long will it take you to achieve your desired skill level for each of the competencies you’ve selected? Is there a way to measure / assess / evaluate whether you have actually succeeded in building your skill in each of these competencies? What are these measures? When would apply these measures? What does the academic literature say about the impact that these skills on leadership success?		30
f.	g.
h.	i.		Support this section with at least 5 scholarly articles
j.	k.
l.	m.
4.	Combine above steps into a draft leadership development plan	Create a document that describes and justifies all of the above steps.		-
5.	Show your draft to someone in a leadership position who is able to give honest and helpful feedback.	Show your document to someone who has experience as a leader and ask her / him to suggest improvements.		-
6.	Describe what you changed in your draft plan as a result of the feedback you got from this person	Describe what you changed in your document. You are not required to detail what the person said… just focus on what you changed in the document.		5
7.	Put all of the above together in a report that has a brief executive summary, main body, brief conclusion and properly cited scholarly articles	· Word limit 2500 words (not including references) · Written in the first person… eg I will enhance my leadership capacity by / I will use the 360 degree feedback tool to evaluate my skill development ) · In text citation of at least 10 scholarly articles · Correctly formatted reference list		-
	Total marks for this assessment task			50

The School of Management Undergraduate Marking Scale

Serious Fail (NN) 0-29%

Fail (NN) 30 – 49%

Pass (PA) 50 – 59%

Credit (CR) 60 – 69%

Distinction (DI) 70 – 79%

High Distinction (HD) 80 – 100%

Attainment Standards for assessment Levels

Serious Fail (NN) 0 – 29%

Flawed work – showing evidence of the following:

· Inadequate understanding of the subject in terms of knowledge, skills and application. Minimal reading and inadequate planning.

· Little understanding of underlying principles and concepts, and no effective analysis.

· Reflective statements provide an incomplete or inaccurate description of the task, with no evidence of effective collaboration with others.

· Work failed for one or more of the following: non-submission, academic misconduct, answering a different question from the one asked, poor or incoherent vocabulary, no evidence of correct scholarly referencing.

Fail (NN) 30-49%

Deficient work – showing evidence of the following:

· Lack of academic rigour, with material that is incomplete or irrelevant.

· Little evidence of knowledge of the relevant body of knowledge to make a persuasive case.

· Failure to review critically, analyse, consolidate and combine knowledge and draw relevant conclusions.

· Reflective statements provide a basic description of the task with no insight into behaviour or learning preferences for collaborative practice.

· Does not demonstrate sufficient grasp of the required scholarly standards in relation to presentation, with errors, bad spelling or grammar, lack of organisation, insufficient arguments.

· Improper citation of sources and referencing of work.

· Late submission.

Pass (PA) 50 –59%

Satisfactory work – showing evidence of the following:

· The subject is covered satisfactorily but the volume of reading is insufficient for Credit.

· Reasonable coverage of the relevant body of knowledge but does not review critically, analyse, consolidate with a high level of insight.

· Factual and descriptive rather than carefully argued and analytical style of work. Lacks evidence of intellectual independence to adapt knowledge in diverse contexts.

· Conclusions are limited in scope.

· Reflective statements provide a nuanced insight into behaviour and learning preferences and practice in collaboration with others.

· English, including spelling, grammar, vocabulary, and communication style is competent and coherent

· Only minor lapses in referencing and/or use of sources.

· Work is not well organised or structured.

Credit (CR) 60 – 69%

Good work – showing evidence of the following:

· Broad understanding of the subject or area of practice and has read widely.

· Volume of reading of sufficient breadth and depth for a competent understanding of main issues, underlying principles and concepts but without the comprehensiveness of higher grades.

· Well-developed skills to present critical arguments and competent use of theoretical and technical knowledge with depth in some areas.

· Displays competence in reviewing critically, analysing, consolidating and synthesising the various cases made within a body of knowledge.

· Coherent arguments supported by evidence and illustration from the work of other authorities or by direct empirical analysis, but without the intellectual independence found in the higher grades.

· The work is clearly structured and the exposition of knowledge and ideas is clear and competent.

· Reflective statements provide a thoughtful commentary on the task, learning and relationships with others, ability to critically evaluate relevant theories, but without the self- awareness and self-questioning found in higher grades.

· Clear, coherent and interesting presentation, with responsibility and accountability to deal with questions and criticisms well.

· English, including spelling, grammar, vocabulary, and/or use of sources, and communication style is good.

· Work is fully referenced according to accepted scholarly standards.

Distinction (DI) 70 – 79%

Excellent work – showing evidence of the following:

· Demonstrates a comprehensive knowledge of the subject.

· Material is deployed in a disciplined way with sophisticated comprehension of key issues

· Demonstrated ability to critically review, analyse, synthesise and apply theoretical and technical body knowledge in a broad range of areas and diverse contexts.

· Shows reasoning and creative skills to use knowledge and awareness to exercise critical thinking and judgement in selecting and applying methods and technologies in identifying and solving problems with intellectual independence

· The work is clearly structured and convincingly supported by appropriate evidence, argument or illustration.

· Reflective statements provide a thoughtful commentary on the task with insights into learning and interaction.

· Demonstrates critical evaluation and analysis of relevant theories as a basis for independent lifelong learning.

· Extremely solid, thorough, comprehensive written work, with a high level of academic integrity but without great originality.

High Distinction (HD) 80 – 100%

Exceptional work – showing evidence of the following:

· Highly original or insightful work.

· Evidence of formulated and sustained arguments with sophisticated analysis, inferences, synthesis of material and identifying flaws in published work.

· Could not be improved at this learning