essay

Rubic_Print_Format

Course Code Class Code Assignment Title Total Points

Leadership Research

Criteria Percentage Unsatisfactory (0.00%) Less Than Satisfactory (74.00%) Satisfactory (79.00%) Good (87.00%) Excellent (100.00%) Comments Points Earned

Content 70.0%

Identify how you could coach a person to engage in behaviors that might elicit higher levels of antecedents in followers. 35.0% Essay is irrelevant, it fails to identify how student could coach a person to engage in behaviors that might elicit higher levels of antecedents in followers. Essay is somewhat relevant, it is underdeveloped and inadequately identifies how student could coach a person to engage in behaviors that might elicit higher levels of listed antecedents in followers. Essay is relevant; it adequately identifies how student could coach a person to engage in behaviors that might elicit higher levels of listed antecedents in followers. Essay is relevant, it proficiently identifies how student could coach a person to engage in behaviors that might elicit higher levels of listed antecedents in followers. Essay is relevant, it insightfully identifies how student could coach a person to engage in behaviors that might elicit higher levels of listed antecedents in followers.

Describe how strategies might change depending on organizational setting for a leader. 35.0% Content is incomplete and omits description of how strategies might change depending on organizational setting for a leader. Major points are irrelevant to the assignment. Content is incomplete or omits description of how strategies might change depending on organizational setting for a leader. Major points are not clear or persuasive. Content is not comprehensive or persuasive. Description of how strategies might change depending on organizational setting for a leader is not well-supported by outside sources. Research is inadequate in either relevance, quality of outside sources, or currentness. Content is comprehensive and accurate; definitions are clearly stated. Description of how strategies might change depending on organizational setting for a leader is supported. Research is adequate, current, relevant, and addresses all of the issues stated in the assignment’s criteria. Content is comprehensive, accurate, and persuasive; definitions are clearly stated. Description of how strategies might change depending on organizational setting for a leader are well supported. Research is adequate, current, relevant, and addresses all of the issues stated in the assignment’s criteria.

Organization and Effectiveness 20.0%

Thesis Development and Purpose 7.0% Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim. Thesis and/or main claim are insufficiently developed and/or vague; purpose is not clear. Thesis and/or main claim are apparent and appropriate to purpose. Thesis and/or main claim are clear and forecast the development of the paper. It is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose. Thesis and/or main claim are comprehensive. The essence of the paper is contained within the thesis. 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 progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative. Clear and convincing argument that 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 and/or sentence construction are used. Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, and/or word choice are present. Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used. Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used. Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.

Format 10.0%

Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) 5.0% 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.

Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) 5.0% Sources are not documented. Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors. Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present. Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct. Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.

Total Weightage 100%