Sound standard of formatting. Word count is within +/– 10% of word limit. Mostly clear writing style in first or third person perspective. Adequate essay structure, expression, spelling, punctuation and grammar. Uses Harvard Referencing style correctly. Provides minimum (5) sources, mostly correct formatting in-text and in List of References. Mostly correct formatting throughout. Within +/– 10% of word limit. Coherent writing style in first or third person perspective. Mostly correct essay structure, expression, spelling, punctuation and grammar. Provides minimum five (5) references, correctly formatted in-text and in List of References in Harvard style. Correct formatting throughout. Within +/– 10% of word limit. Clear and coherent writing style in first or third person perspective. Detailed attention to essay structure, expression, spelling, punctuation and grammar. Provides minimum five (5) references, correctly formatted in-text and in List of References in Harvard style.

5. Formats and presents essay clearly and correctly. (4) Incorrect font, font-size, line spacing, margins and no line spacing between paragraphs. Word count not within +/– 10% of word limit. Unclear and incoherent writing style in first or third person perspective. Poor essay structure, expression, spelling, punctuation and grammar. Provides less than five (5) sources, incorrect formatting in-text and in List of References. Does not use Harvard Referencing style correctly. Adequate standard of formatting. Word count is within +/– 10% of word limit. Unprofessional writing style in first or third person perspective. Adequate essay structure, expression, spelling, punctuation and grammar. Uses Harvard Referencing style mostly correctly. Provides minimum (5) sources but incorrect formatting in-text and in List of References. Sound standard of formatting. Word count is within +/– 10% of word limit. Mostly clear writing style in first or third person perspective. Adequate essay structure, expression, spelling, punctuation and grammar. Uses Harvard Referencing style correctly. Provides minimum (5) sources, mostly correct formatting in-text and in List of References.

4. Identifies and assesses conclusions, implications and consequences. (7) Fails to identify conclusions, implications, and consequences of the issue or the key relationships between the other elements of the problem, such as context, implications, assumptions, or data and evidence. Draws incomplete conclusions or considers only some of the consequences of the conclusions. Fails to reconsider assumptions identified earlier. Fails to reflect upon own work. Draws satisfactory conclusions and considers some of the consequences of the conclusions. Reconsiders assumptions identified earlier and reflects upon own work. Identifies and discusses conclusions, implications, and consequences. Partially considers context, assumptions, data, and evidence. Reflects upon their own assertions. Identifies and discusses conclusions, implications, and consequences considering context, assumptions, data, and evidence. Objectively reflects upon their own assertions.

3. Identifies and considers the influence of the context * on the issue. (6) Discusses the problem only in egocentric or socio-centric terms. Does not present the problem as having connections to other contexts—cultural, political, etc. Recognises the importance of issues such as ethical, political and cultural elements related to the task but does not discuss their impact. Recognises the importance of issues such as ethical, political and cultural elements related to the task and discusses their impact. Analyses the issue considering relevant contexts, but fails to consider one important context. Analyses the issue with a clear sense of scope and context, including an assessment of the audience of the analysis. Considers other pertinent contexts.

2. Identifies and assesses the key assumptions. (7) Does not surface the assumptions and ethical issues that underlie the issue, or does so superficially. Identifies some, but not all, of the assumptions that have been made in their analysis. Only superficially considers the validity of those assumptions. Identifies the assumptions made in their analysis and considers their validity, yet fails to surface important ethical issues. Identifies the validity of the key assumptions and ethical dimensions that underlie the issue. Identifies and addresses the validity of the key assumptions and ethical dimensions that underlie the issue.

MNG03217: Assignment 3 Marking Rubric Not Satisfactory Pass Credit Distinction High Distinction 1. Identifies and presents the STUDENT’S OWN perspective and position as it is important to the analysis of the issue. (6) Addresses a single source or view of the argument and fails to clarify the established or presented position relative to one’s own. Fails to establish other critical distinctions. Identifies own position on the issue, relative to other positions but does not provide supporting evidence for the position. Fails to acknowledge the possible validity of other positions. Identifies, appropriately own position on the issue, drawing support from experience, and information from course materials. Recognises that there are other valid points of view. Identifies, appropriately, one’s own position on the issue, drawing support from experience, and information available from course materials. Recognises other valid points of view and counter-arguments that may be made.

Identifies and assesses conclusions, implications and consequences. (7) • See Marking Rubric below Presentation: (4) • Times New Roman font, 12-point font-size, 1.5 or double-spaced line spacing, 2.54 cm margins and 1-line spacing between paragraphs. • Within +/– 10% of word limit. • Demonstrates clear and coherent writing stylein first or third person perspective. • Demonstrates detailed attention to essay structure, expression, spelling, punctuation and grammar. • Provides minimum five (5) references, correctly formatted in-text and in List of References in Harvard style.

MNG03217: Assessment 3 – Reflective Essay 30% NAME: Student ID: Marking Criterion NS P C D HD Identifies and presents the STUDENT’S OWN perspective and position. (6) • See Marking Rubric below Identifies and assesses key assumptions.(7) • See Marking Rubric below Identifies and considers the influence of thecontext *. (6) • See Marking Rubric below

This paper will be evaluated using an adaptation of the “Critical Thinking Rubric” created by the Critical Thinking Project at Washington State University and will be assessed on overall presentation and the following four areas: • Does your paper reflect your ownperspective and position? (e.g., are you clearly writing about your approach and not simply describing someone else’s) • Do you identify and assess the key assumptions that underlie your perspective and position? (e.g., do you talk about how you arrived at your theory/model or do you simply state your conclusions?) • Do you identify and consider the influence of context on your approach? (e.g., do you describe how your approach applies to the specific context and setting of your profession?) • Do you identify and assess the logical conclusions, implications, and/or consequences of acting on your approach to leadership? (e.g., do you describe how your professional life and work setting would be different if your approach were practiced by you and by others?)