| |
1
Unsatisfactory
0.00%
|
2
Less Than Satisfactory
74.00%
|
3
Satisfactory
79.00%
|
4
Good
87.00%
|
5
Excellent
100.00%
|
|
70.0 %Content
|
|
|
10.0 %Discussion of Your Personal Model of Leadership and How You Might Apply It in Your Role as a Doctorally Prepared Advanced Practice Nurse
|
Discussion of your personal model of leadership and how you might apply it in your role as a doctorally prepared advanced practice nurse is not present.
|
Discussion of your personal model of leadership and how you might apply it in your role as a doctorally prepared advanced practice nurse is present but incomplete.
|
Discussion of your personal model of leadership and how you might apply it in your role as a doctorally prepared advanced practice nurse is present but rendered at a perfunctory level.
|
Discussion of your personal model of leadership and how you might apply it in your role as a doctorally prepared advanced practice nurse is present. Discussion is thorough and defines specific elements but not as completely as expected. Information presented is from scholarly but dated sources.
|
Discussion of your personal model of leadership and how you might apply it in your role as a doctorally prepared advanced practice nurse is clearly present. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.
|
|
10.0 %Analysis of How Your Personal Model Reflects a Practice of Servant Leadership
|
An analysis of how your personal model reflects a practice of servant leadership is not present.
|
An analysis of how your personal model reflects a practice of servant leadership is present but incomplete.
|
An analysis of how your personal model reflects a practice of servant leadership is present but rendered at a perfunctory level.
|
An analysis of how your personal model reflects a practice of servant leadership is clearly present but is not as complete as expected. Information presented is from scholarly but dated sources.
|
An analysis of how your personal model reflects a practice of servant leadership is clearly present. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.
|
|
10.0 %Comparison of Servant Leadership to Two Other Leadership Models
|
Comparison of servant leadership to two other leadership models is not present.
|
Comparison of servant leadership to two other leadership models is present but incomplete.
|
Comparison of servant leadership to two other leadership models is present but rendered at a perfunctory level.
|
Comparison of servant leadership to two other leadership models is present but is not as complete as expected. Information presented is from scholarly but dated sources.
|
Comparison of servant leadership to two other leadership models is clearly present. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.
|
|
10.0 %Discussion of How Leaders Implement Each of the Models and How They Fit With Your Personal Model
|
Discussion of how leaders implement each of the models and how they fit with your personal model is not present.
|
Discussion of how leaders implement each of the models and how they fit with your personal model is present but incomplete.
|
Discussion of how leaders implement each of the models and how they fit with your personal model is present but rendered at a perfunctory level.
|
Discussion of how leaders implement each of the models and how they fit with your personal model is thorough but not as complete as expected. Information presented is from scholarly but dated sources.
|
Discussion of how leaders implement each of the models and how they fit with your personal model is clearly present. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.
|
|
10.0 %Contrast of the Effectiveness of the Models to Bring About Change in an Organization
|
A contrast of the effectiveness of these models to bring about change in an organization is not present.
|
A contrast of the effectiveness of these models to bring about change in an organization is present but incomplete.
|
A contrast of the effectiveness of these models to bring about change in an organization is present but rendered at a perfunctory level.
|
A contrast of the effectiveness of these models to bring about change in an organization is thorough but not as complete as expected. Information presented is from scholarly but dated sources.
|
A contrast of the effectiveness of these models to bring about change in an organization is clearly present. Discussion is convincing, insightful, and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.
|
|
10.0 %Evaluation of How Your Personal Model of Leadership Works in Conjunction With Your Leadership Style
|
An evaluation of how your personal model of leadership works in conjunction with your leadership style is not present.
|
An evaluation of how your personal model of leadership works in conjunction with your leadership style is present but incomplete.
|
An evaluation of how your personal model of leadership works in conjunction with your leadership style is present but rendered at a perfunctory level.
|
An evaluation of how your personal model of leadership works in conjunction with your leadership style is thorough but is not as complete as expected. Information presented is from scholarly but dated sources.
|
An evaluation of how your personal model of leadership works in conjunction with your leadership style is clearly present. Discussion is convincing, insightful, and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.
|
|
10.0 %Action Plan Using SMART (Specific, Measurable, Actionable, Relevant, and Timely) Goals With an Evaluation of Personal Development to Work on Two Areas of Personal Improvement for Your Leadership Style
|
An action plan using SMART (Specific, Measurable, Actionable, Relevant, and Timely) goals with an evaluation of personal development to work on at least two areas of personal improvement for your leadership style is not present.
|
An action plan using SMART (Specific, Measurable, Actionable, Relevant, and Timely) goals with an evaluation of personal development to work on at least two areas of personal improvement for your leadership style is present but incomplete.
|
An action plan using SMART (Specific, Measurable, Actionable, Relevant, and Timely) goals with an evaluation of personal development to work on at least two areas of personal improvement for your leadership style is present but rendered at a perfunctory level.
|
An action plan using SMART (Specific, Measurable, Actionable, Relevant, and Timely) goals with an evaluation of personal development to work on at least two areas of personal improvement for your leadership style is presented but is not as complete as expected.
|
An action plan using SMART (Specific, Measurable, Actionable, Relevant, and Timely) goals with an evaluation of personal development to work on at least two areas of personal improvement for your leadership style is presented.
|
|
20.0 %Organization and Effectiveness
|
|
|
7.0 %Thesis Development and Purpose
|
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.
|
|
8.0 %Argument Logic and Construction
|
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.
|
|
5.0 %Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)
|
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.
|
|
10.0 %Format
|
|
|
5.0 %Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)
|
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.
|
|
5.0 %APA Format
|
Required format is rarely followed correctly. An appropriate number of topic-related scholarly research sources and related in-text citations are not present. No reference page is included. No citations are used.
|
Required format is attempted, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent. Some sources are not scholarly research or topic-related. Reference page is present. Citations are inconsistently used.
|
Required format is used correctly, although some minor errors may be present. Scholarly research sources are present and topic-related, but the source and quality of some references is questionable. Reference page is included and lists sources used in the paper. Sources are appropriately documented, although some errors may be present.
|
Required format is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting. Scholarly research accounts for the majority of sources presented and is topic-related and obtained from reputable professional sources. Reference page is present and fully inclusive of all cited sources. Documentation is appropriate and citation style is usually correct.
|
The document is correctly formatted to publication standards. All research presented is scholarly, topic-related, and obtained from highly respected, professional, original sources. In-text citations and a reference page are complete and correct. The documentation of cited sources is free of error. The paper could readily be accepted for publication.
|
|
100 %Total Weightage
|
|
