| Course Code |
Class Code |
Assignment Title |
Total Points |
| MGT-410 |
MGT-410-O500 |
Leadership and Management Models |
90.0 |
| Criteria |
Percentage |
1: Unsatisfactory (0.00%) |
2: Less Than Satisfactory (65.00%) |
3: Satisfactory (75.00%) |
4: Good (85.00%) |
5: Excellent (100.00%) |
Comments |
Points Earned |
| Content |
70.0% |
| Visual Graphic Representing Servant Leadership |
| 1
| 5.0% |
Representation of personal understanding of servant leadership is absent, inappropriate, or irrelevant. |
Representation of personal understanding of servant leadership is unclear, incomplete, or confusing. |
Representation of personal understanding of servant leadership is appropriate, but at a cursory level. |
Representation of personal understanding of servant leadership is clear and above average in quality. |
Representation of personal understanding of servant leadership is complete, thorough, and exceptional in quality. |
| Differences Between Servant Leadership Models & Other Models |
15.0%
A description of the differences between servant leadership models and other models is absent, inappropriate, or irrelevant. |
A description of the differences between servant leadership models and other models is vague or incomplete. Supporting material is often confusing or inappropriate. |
A description of the differences between servant leadership models and other models is provided, but at a cursory level and may contain some inconsistencies. Supporting material of baseline acceptable quality and quantity is provided. |
A description of the differences between servant leadership models and other models is clear and integrated. Supporting material of above average quality and quantity is provided. |
A description of the differences between servant leadership models and other models is thorough and well-integrated. Supporting material of exceptional quality and quantity is provided. |
| Paradox of Servant Leadership |
|
| 20.0% |
A definition of the paradox of servant leadership and an explanation of where the paradox is present in the graphic representation are absent, inappropriate, or irrelevant. |
A definition of the paradox of servant leadership and an explanation of where the paradox is present in the graphic representation are vague or incomplete. Supporting material is often confusing or inappropriate. |
A definition of the paradox of servant leadership and an explanation of where the paradox is present in the graphic representation are provided, but at a cursory level. Supporting material of baseline acceptable quality and quantity is provided. |
A definition of the paradox of servant leadership and an explanation of where the paradox is present in the graphic representation is clear and integrated. Supporting material of above average quality and quantity is provided. |
A definition of the paradox of servant leadership and an explanation of where the paradox is present in the graphic representation is thorough and well-integrated. Supporting material of exceptional quality and quantity is provided. |
| Qualities/Characteristics of Effective Leadership |
20.0%
An analysis of the learner’s representation that captures the qualities or characteristics of their personal understanding of effective leadership is absent, inappropriate, or irrelevant. |
An analysis of the learner’s representation that captures the qualities or characteristics of their personal understanding of effective leadership is vague or incomplete. Supporting material is often confusing or inappropriate. |
An analysis of the learner’s representation that captures the qualities or characteristics of their personal understanding of effective leadership is provided, but at a cursory level. Supporting material of baseline acceptable quality and quantity is provided. |
An analysis of the learner’s representation capturing the qualities or characteristics of their personal understanding of effective leadership is clear and integrated. Supporting material of above average quality and quantity is provided. |
An analysis of the learner’s representation capturing the qualities or characteristics of their personal understanding of effective leadership is thorough and well-integrated. Supporting material of exceptional quality and quantity is provided. |
| Organization and Effectiveness |
20.0%
| Thesis Development and Purpose |
7.0% |
Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim. |
Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear. |
Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose. |
Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose. |
Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear. |
| Argument Logic and Construction |
8.0% |
Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources. |
Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility. |
Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis. |
Argument shows logical progression. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative. |
Clear and convincing argument presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative. |
| Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) |
5.0%
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used. |
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied. |
Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed. |
Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech. |
Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English. |
Format
|
| 10.0% |
| Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) |
10.0%
Template is not used appropriately, or documentation format is rarely followed correctly. |
Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent. |
Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present. |
Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style. |
All format elements are correct. |
| Total Weightage |
100% |
