This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePart 1: Work Environment Assessment *Template, completed in the week 7 discussion, should not be submitted with this assignment · Describe the results of the Work Environment Assessment you completed on your workplace. · Identify two things that surprised you about the results and one idea that you believed prior to conducting the assessment that was confirmed. · Explain what the results of the assessment suggests about the health and civility of your workplace.
|
45 to >40.0 pts
Excellent
The responses accurately and thoroughly describe the results of the Work Environment Assessment completed on a workplace. … The responses thoroughly and clearly identify two surprising things about the results and thoroughly describe at least one idea that was believed prior to conducting the assessment that was confirmed. … The responses accurately and thoroughly explain in detail what the results of the assessment suggests about the health and civility of a workplace.
|
40 to >35.0 pts
Good
The responses accurately describe the results of the Work Environment Assessment completed on a workplace. … The responses accurately identify two surprising things about the results and describe at least one idea that was believed prior to conducting the assessment that was confirmed. … The responses accurately explain what the results of the assessment suggests about the health and civility of a workplace.
|
35 to >31.0 pts
Fair
The responses describe the results of the Work Environment Assessment completed on a workplace that is vague or inaccurate. … The responses identify two surprising things about the results and describe at least one idea that was believed prior to conducting the assessment that was confirmed that is vague or inaccurate. … The responses explain what the results of the assessment suggests about the health and civility of a workplace that is vague or inaccurate.
|
31 to >0 pts
Poor
The responses describe the results of the Work Environment Assessment completed on a workplace that is vague and inaccurate, or is missing. … The responses identify two surprising things about the results and describe at least one idea that was believed prior to conducting the assessment that was confirmed that is vague and inaccurate, or is missing. … The responses explain what the results of the assessment suggest about the health and civility of a workplace that is vague and inaccurate, or is missing.
|
|
45 pts
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePart 2: Reviewing the Literature · Briefly describe the theory or concept presented in the article you selected. · Explain how the theory or concept presented in the article relates to the results of your Work Environment Assessment. · Explain how your organization could apply the theory highlighted in your selected article to improve organizational health and/or stronger work teams. Be specific and provide examples.
|
15 to >13.0 pts
Excellent
The responses accurately and thoroughly describe the theory or concept presented in the article selected. … The responses accurately and completely explain how the theory or concept presented in the article relates to the results of the Work Environment Assessment. … The responses accurately and thoroughly explain how an organization could apply the theory highlighted in the selected article to improve organizational health and/or stronger work teams. … Specific and detailed examples are provided which fully support the responses.
|
13 to >11.0 pts
Good
The responses accurately describe the theory or concept presented in the article selected. … The responses accurately explain how the theory or concept presented in the article relates to the results of the Work Environment Assessment. … The responses accurately explain how an organization could apply the theory highlighted in the selected article to improve organizational health and/or stronger work teams. … Specific examples are provided which may support the responses.
|
11 to >10.0 pts
Fair
The responses describe the theory or concept presented in the article selected that is vague or inaccurate. … The responses explain how the theory or concept presented in the article relates to the results of the Work Environment Assessment that is vague or inaccurate. … The responses explain how an organization could apply the theory highlighted in the selected article to improve organizational health and/or create stronger work teams that is vague or inaccurate. … Vague or inaccurate examples are provided which may support the responses.
|
10 to >0 pts
Poor
The responses describe the theory or concept presented in the article selected that is vague and inaccurate, or is missing. … The responses explain how the theory or concept presented in the article relates to the results of the Work Environment Assessment that is vague and inaccurate, or is missing. … The responses explain how an organization could apply the theory highlighted in the selected article to improve organizational health and/or create stronger work teams that is vague and inaccurate, or is missing. … Specific examples are not provided to support the responses.
|
|
15 pts
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePart 3: Evidence-Based Strategies to Create High-Performance Interprofessional Teams · Recommend at least two strategies, supported in the literature, that can be implemented to address any shortcomings revealed in your Work Environment Assessment. · Recommend at least two strategies that can be implemented to bolster successful practices revealed in your Work Environment Assessment.
|
20 to >17.0 pts
Excellent
Using the literature, the responses clearly and thoroughly recommend at least two strategies that can be implemented to address any shortcomings revealed in the Work Environment Assessment. … The responses clearly and thoroughly recommend at least two strategies that can be implemented to bolster successful practices revealed in the Work Environment Assessment.
|
17 to >15.0 pts
Good
Using the literature, the responses accurately recommend at least two strategies that can be implemented to address any shortcomings revealed in the Work Environment Assessment. … The responses accurately recommend at least two strategies that can be implemented to bolster successful practices revealed in the Work Environment Assessment.
|
15 to >13.0 pts
Fair
Using the literature, the responses recommend at least two strategies that can be implemented to address any shortcomings revealed in the Work Environment Assessment that is vague or inaccurate, or only recommends one strategy. … The responses recommend at least two strategies that can be implemented to bolster successful practices revealed in the Work Environment Assessment that is vague or inaccurate, or only recommends one strategy.
|
13 to >0 pts
Poor
Using the literature, the responses recommend at least two strategies that can be implemented to address any shortcomings revealed in the Work Environment Assessment that is vague and inaccurate, only recommends one strategy, or is missing. … The responses recommend at least two strategies that can be implemented to bolster successful practices revealed in the Work Environment Assessment that is vague and inaccurate, only recommends one strategy, or is missing.
|
|
20 pts
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeResource Synthesis
|
5 to >4.0 pts
Excellent
Using proper in-text citations, the response fully integrates at least 2 outside resources and 2 or 3 course-specific resources.
|
4 to >3.0 pts
Good
Using proper in-text citations, the response fully integrates at least 2 outside resources and 1 course-specific resource.
|
3 to >2.0 pts
Fair
Using proper in-text citations, the response minimally integrates outside and course-specific resources.
|
2 to >0 pts
Poor
The response does not integrate outside and course-specific resources or no in-text citations are used.
|
|
5 pts
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting— Paragraph Development and Organization: Paragraphs make clear points that support well-developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused—neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement and introduction is provided, which delineates all required criteria.
|
5 to >4.0 pts
Excellent
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity. … A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion are provided, which delineates all required criteria.
|
4 to >3.0 pts
Good
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time. …Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment are stated but are brief and not descriptive.
|
3 to >2.0 pts
Fair
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60–79% of the time. … Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is vague or off topic.
|
2 to >0 pts
Poor
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity less than 60% of the time. … No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion is provided.
|
|
5 pts
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting— English Writing Standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation.
|
5 to >4.0 pts
Excellent
Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors.
|
4 to >3.0 pts
Good
Contains a few (one or two) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.
|
3 to >2.0 pts
Fair
Contains several (three or four) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.
|
2 to >0 pts
Poor
Contains many (five or more) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding.
|
|
5 pts
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting: The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, running head, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list.
|
5 to >4.0 pts
Excellent
Uses correct APA format with no errors.
|
4 to >3.0 pts
Good
Contains a few (one or two) APA format errors.
|
3 to >2.0 pts
Fair
Contains several (three or four) APA format errors.
|
2 to >0 pts
Poor
Contains many (five or more) APA format errors.
|
|
5 pts
|
|
Total Points: 100
|
Reviews
There are no reviews yet.