Employee engagement

CATEGORY

EXCELLENT – above expectations

GOOD – met expectations

FAIR – below expectations

POOR – significantly below expectations or missing

SCORE

Analysis of the health of the organization.

(28 points possible)

The analysis of the health of the organization shows depth, breath, and clarity in critical thinking as it identifies the strength and areas of improvement.

Analysis critically analyzes the result of the employee survey.

(25–28 points)

The analysis of the health of the organization fully addresses the strength and areas of improvement.

Analysis of the result of the employee survey was fully addressed.

(22–24 points)

The analysis of the health of the organization lacks depth, breath, and clarity in critical thinking as it identifies the strength and areas of improvement.

(19–21 points)

The analysis of the health of the organization does not address (zero points) or poorly addresses two areas of strengths and/or of improvement.

(0–18 points)

Plan to improve low engagement scores.

(36 points possible)

The plan shows depth, breath, and clarity in critical thinking when addressing how to improve low engagement scores and celebrate high engagement scores.

(32–36 points)

The plan fully addresses how to improve low engagement scores and celebrate high engagement scores.

(28–31 points)

The plan lacks depth, breath, and clarity in critical thinking when addressing how to improve low engagement scores and celebrate high engagement scores.

(24–27 points)

The plan does not address (zero points) or poorly addresses how to improve low engagement scores and celebrate high engagement scores.

(0–23 points)

Writing

(16 points possible)

The paper is well organized, uses scholarly tone, contains original writing and proper paraphrasing, contains very few or no writing and/or spelling errors, and is fully consistent with graduate level writing style.

The work is supported by the Learning Resources and more than three additional scholarly sources.

Images and design elements are used purposefully, and they effectively support audience engagement and understanding of key concepts.

The paper is 3–4 pages plus a title and a reference page.

(15–16 points)

The paper is mostly consistent with graduate level writing style, and minimal writing errors.

The work is supported by the Learning Resources and at least three additional scholarly sources.

Images and layout generally support audience understanding of key concepts.

The paper is 3–4 pages plus a title and a reference page.

(14 points)

The paper is somewhat consistent with graduate level writing style, and writing errors.

The work is supported by the Learning Resources and less than three additional scholarly sources.

Images or layout provide limited support for audience understanding of key concepts.

The paper is not 3–4 pages plus a title and a reference page.

(13 points)

The paper is well below graduate level writing style expectations for organization, scholarly tone, or shows heavy reliance on quoting.

The work is not supported by the Learning Resources or additional scholarly sources.

Images and layout are inappropriate, hard to read, and/or impede audience understanding of key concepts.

The paper is not 3–4 pages plus a title and a reference page.

(0–12 points)

Instructor comments:      

Total Score (80 possible points):

      points