MGMT 601: Assignment #2 – Three Levels of Ethical Analysis Paper
Read the posted article called “Business Leadership: Three Levels of Ethical Analysis” and write a paper discussing your understanding of the model presented and how it relates to leadership.
Use the Gibbs’ Cycle to discuss how you normally function and how you can improve your own functioning. How do you personally deal with these type of situations? How do your actions relate to the three levels discussed? Provide examples to substantiate and analyze concepts from the Three Levels of Ethical Analysis paper.
Write the paper using APA style with between 8 and 12 citations and references, in addition to the textbook, including several peer reviewed references. All sources MUST HAVE: authors, publication dates, and publishers. “Anonymous” authors will not be accepted as valid sources and marks will be deducted.
The paper should be at least 1750 words (8-9 pages), and should exhibit good writing and analytical skills – review the marking rubric. It holds a value of 10% of your final mark.
Written Communication Assessment 10%
1-2
Did not meet expectations 3-4
Met expectations 5
Exceeded expectations
Writing Conventions
(grammar, word use, punctuation, mechanics) Frequent
grammatical errors
and misspellings
inhibit readability Informal language, abbreviations and slang are used Few grammatical errors
(3 or fewer per page)
Correct verb tense used
Paragraphs flow from
one to another Active
voice pervasive Free of grammatical errors
and misspellings Effective verb tense used; Uses phrases and
construction that delight as
well as inform the reader
Primarily active voice
Overall Effectiveness appearance/format Not formatted to Specifications, Lacking professional appearance Formatting is generally
correct, acceptable
professional appearance. Assigned format followed
explicitly: Exceptional
professional appearance
Critical Thinking and Written Analyses Rubric 90%
Criteria 1-5
Did Not Meet Expectations 6-8
Met Expectations 9-10
Exceeded Expectations
Clarity Writing is not clear. It is
difficult to understand points
being made. The writing lacks
transitions, and few examples and/or illustrations are provided to support explanation or
recommendations. Writing is generally well organized and understood. Transitions are used to facilitate clarity. Some examples and/illustrations are used to support explanation or recommendations. Writing is succinct, precise,
effectively organized no ambiguity. Transitions, explanation and elaboration are extensive to elucidate points. Detailed illustrations and/or examples are used to support explanation & recommendations
Relevance Critical issues/questions are
omitted or ignored in the writing. Most of the critical issues/questions are addressed in the writing. All critical issues/questions
are addressed completely in writing
Depth of
Discussion
/20 Ignores bias; Omits arguments
Misrepresents issues; Excludes data; Includes but does not detect inconsistency of
information; Ideas contain
unnecessary gaps, repetition or extraneous details overlooks differences Detects bias; Recognizes arguments; Categorizes content; Paraphrases data;
Sufficient detail to support conclusions and/or recommendations
Analysis includes insightful
questions; Refutes bias; Discusses
issues thoroughly; Critiques content; Values information Examines inconsistencies;
Offers extensive detail to support conclusions and recommendations; Suggests solutions/ implementation
Breadth of Discussion
/20 Omits arguments or
perspectives; Misses major
content areas/concepts;
Presents few options Covers the breadth of the topic without being superfluous Considers multiple
perspectives; Thoroughly delves into the issues/questions;
Thoroughly discusses relevant facts
Integration
Elements of Reasoning
/20 Fails to draw conclusions or
conclusions rely on author’s
authority rather than strength of presentation; Draws faulty conclusions; Shows intellectual dishonesty Formulates clear conclusions with adequate support Assimilates and critically
reviews information, uses
reasonable judgment, and
provides balanced, well
justified conclusions
Internally Consistent There is little integration across the sections of the paper. Several inconsistencies or contradictions exist. Few of the issues, recommendation and explanations make sense; not well integrated. Sections of the paper are generally well linked/connected. Only minor contradictions exist. Most of the issues, recommendations and explanations make sense and are well integrated. All sections of the paper are
linked. There are no
contradictions in the
writing. All issues,
recommendations and
explanations make sense
and are well integrated
Read the posted article called “Business Leadership: Three Levels of Ethical Analysis” and write a paper discussing your understanding of the model presented and how it relates to leadership.
Use the Gibbs’ Cycle to discuss how you normally function and how you can improve your own functioning. How do you personally deal with these type of situations? How do your actions relate to the three levels discussed? Provide examples to substantiate and analyze concepts from the Three Levels of Ethical Analysis paper.
Write the paper using APA style with between 8 and 12 citations and references, in addition to the textbook, including several peer reviewed references. All sources MUST HAVE: authors, publication dates, and publishers. “Anonymous” authors will not be accepted as valid sources and marks will be deducted.
The paper should be at least 1750 words (8-9 pages), and should exhibit good writing and analytical skills – review the marking rubric. It holds a value of 10% of your final mark.
Written Communication Assessment 10%
1-2
Did not meet expectations 3-4
Met expectations 5
Exceeded expectations
Writing Conventions
(grammar, word use, punctuation, mechanics) Frequent
grammatical errors
and misspellings
inhibit readability Informal language, abbreviations and slang are used Few grammatical errors
(3 or fewer per page)
Correct verb tense used
Paragraphs flow from
one to another Active
voice pervasive Free of grammatical errors
and misspellings Effective verb tense used; Uses phrases and
construction that delight as
well as inform the reader
Primarily active voice
Overall Effectiveness appearance/format Not formatted to Specifications, Lacking professional appearance Formatting is generally
correct, acceptable
professional appearance. Assigned format followed
explicitly: Exceptional
professional appearance
Critical Thinking and Written Analyses Rubric 90%
Criteria 1-5
Did Not Meet Expectations 6-8
Met Expectations 9-10
Exceeded Expectations
Clarity Writing is not clear. It is
difficult to understand points
being made. The writing lacks
transitions, and few examples and/or illustrations are provided to support explanation or
recommendations. Writing is generally well organized and understood. Transitions are used to facilitate clarity. Some examples and/illustrations are used to support explanation or recommendations. Writing is succinct, precise,
effectively organized no ambiguity. Transitions, explanation and elaboration are extensive to elucidate points. Detailed illustrations and/or examples are used to support explanation & recommendations
Relevance Critical issues/questions are
omitted or ignored in the writing. Most of the critical issues/questions are addressed in the writing. All critical issues/questions
are addressed completely in writing
Depth of
Discussion
/20 Ignores bias; Omits arguments
Misrepresents issues; Excludes data; Includes but does not detect inconsistency of
information; Ideas contain
unnecessary gaps, repetition or extraneous details overlooks differences Detects bias; Recognizes arguments; Categorizes content; Paraphrases data;
Sufficient detail to support conclusions and/or recommendations
Analysis includes insightful
questions; Refutes bias; Discusses
issues thoroughly; Critiques content; Values information Examines inconsistencies;
Offers extensive detail to support conclusions and recommendations; Suggests solutions/ implementation
Breadth of Discussion
/20 Omits arguments or
perspectives; Misses major
content areas/concepts;
Presents few options Covers the breadth of the topic without being superfluous Considers multiple
perspectives; Thoroughly delves into the issues/questions;
Thoroughly discusses relevant facts
Integration
Elements of Reasoning
/20 Fails to draw conclusions or
conclusions rely on author’s
authority rather than strength of presentation; Draws faulty conclusions; Shows intellectual dishonesty Formulates clear conclusions with adequate support Assimilates and critically
reviews information, uses
reasonable judgment, and
provides balanced, well
justified conclusions
Internally Consistent There is little integration across the sections of the paper. Several inconsistencies or contradictions exist. Few of the issues, recommendation and explanations make sense; not well integrated. Sections of the paper are generally well linked/connected. Only minor contradictions exist. Most of the issues, recommendations and explanations make sense and are well integrated. All sections of the paper are
linked. There are no
contradictions in the
writing. All issues,
recommendations and
explanations make sense
and are well integrated
Comments
Post a Comment