Evaluating Effective Team/Group Work Definitions of the three criteria for evaluating effective team/group work and an analysis of whether the team in the video is effective or not are absent, inappropriate, or irrelevant. Definitions of the three criteria for evaluating effective team/group work and an analysis of whether the team in the video is effective or not are vague or incomplete. Supporting material is often confusing or inappropriate. Definitions of the three criteria for evaluating effective team/group work and an analysis of whether the team in the video is effective or not are provided, but at a cursory level. Supporting material is of baseline acceptable quality and quantity. Definitions of the three criteria for evaluating effective team/group work and an analysis of whether the team in the video is effective or not are clear and well-developed. Supporting material is of above average quality and quantity. Definitions of the three criteria for evaluating effective or not team/group work and an analysis of whether the team in the video is effective are thorough and detailed. The paper provides examples and personal insight to further understanding. Supporting material is of exceptional quality and quantity.
10.0 %Review of Tuckman’s Five Stages of Group Formation A review of Tuckman’s five stages of group formation is absent, inappropriate, or irrelevant. An evaluation of what stage the individuals in the video currently occupy is absent, inappropriate, or irrelevant. A review of Tuckman’s five stages of group formation is vague or incomplete. An evaluation of what stage the individuals in the video currently occupy is weak or marginal with gaps in presentation. Supporting material is often confusing or inappropriate. A review of Tuckman’s five stages of group formation is provided, but at a cursory level. It includes a rudimentary evaluation of what stage the individuals in the video currently occupy. Supporting material is of baseline acceptable quality and quantity. A review of Tuckman’s five stages of group formation is clear and well-integrated. A clear evaluation of what stage the individuals in the video currently occupy is included. Supporting material is of above average quality and quantity. A review of Tuckman’s five stages of group formation is thorough and well integrated. A detailed evaluation of what stage the individuals in the video currently occupy is included. The paper provides examples and personal insight to further understanding. Supporting material is of exceptional quality and quantity.
10.0 %Team Tasks, Maintenance, and Dysfunctional Roles Review A review of the specific types of task, maintenance, and dysfunctional roles in teams is absent, inappropriate, or irrelevant. An identification of who is playing what specific role in the video is absent, inappropriate, or irrelevant. A review of the specific types of task, maintenance, and dysfunctional roles in teams is vague or incomplete. An identification of who is playing what specific role in the video is weak or marginal with gaps in presentation. Supporting material is often confusing or inappropriate. A review of the specific types of task, maintenance, and dysfunctional roles in teams is provided, but on a cursory level. A rudimentary identification of who is playing what specific role in the video is included. Supporting material is of baseline acceptable quality and quantity. A review of the specific types of task, maintenance, and dysfunctional roles in teams is clear and well-integrated. An identification of who is playing what specific role in the video is clearly articulated. Supporting material is of above average quality and quantity. A review of the specific types of task, maintenance, and dysfunctional roles in teams is thorough and well-integrated. An identification of who is playing what specific role in the video is clearly developed, with examples and personal insight to further understanding. Supporting material is of exceptional quality and quantity.
10.0 %Effectiveness of Communication in the Video A discussion regarding the effectiveness of the communication evident in the video is absent, inappropriate, or irrelevant. A discussion regarding the effectiveness of the communication evident in the video is vague or incomplete. Justification for the discussion is weak or marginal with gaps in presentation. Supporting material is often confusing or inappropriate. A discussion regarding the effectiveness of the communication evident in the video is provided, but on a cursory level. Supporting material is of baseline acceptable quality and quantity. A discussion regarding the effectiveness of the communication evident in the video is clear and well-integrated. Justification for the discussion is clearly articulated. Supporting material is of above average quality and quantity. A discussion regarding the effectiveness of the communication evident in the video is thorough and well integrated. Justification is clearly developed, with examples and personal insight to further understanding. Supporting material is of exceptional quality and quantity.
10.0 %Types of Conflict and Direct and Indirect Conflict Management in the Video A description of the two main types of conflict in the video is absent, inappropriate, or irrelevant. A recommendation of indirect conflict management and direct conflict management approaches that Joe Tanney could use to manage the conflict is absent, inappropriate, or irrelevant. A description of the two main types of conflict in the video is vague or incomplete. A recommendation of indirect conflict management and direct conflict management approaches that Joe Tanney could use to manage the conflict is weak or marginal with gaps in presentation. Supporting material is often confusing or inappropriate. A description of the two main types of conflict in the video is provided, but on a cursory level. A rudimentary recommendation of indirect conflict management and direct conflict management approaches that Joe Tanney could use to manage the conflict is included. Supporting material is of baseline acceptable quality and quantity. A description of the two main types of conflict in the video is clear and well-integrated. A recommendation of indirect conflict management and direct conflict management approaches that Joe Tanney could use to manage the conflict is clearly articulated. Supporting material is of above average quality and quantity. A description of the two main types of conflict in video is thorough and well-integrated. A recommendation of indirect conflict management and direct conflict management approaches that Joe Tanney could use to manage the conflict is clearly developed, with examples and personal insight to further understanding. Supporting material is of exceptional quality and quantity.
5.0 %Group vs. Team Evaluation An evaluation of whether the video portrays a group or a team is absent, inappropriate, or irrelevant. An evaluation of whether the video portrays a group or a team is vague or incomplete. Coverage is weak or marginal with gaps in presentation. Supporting material is often confusing or inappropriate. An evaluation of whether the video portrays a group or a team is provided, but on a cursory level. Supporting material is of baseline acceptable quality and quantity. An evaluation of whether the video portrays a group or a team is clear and well-integrated. Supporting material is of above average quality and quantity. An evaluation of whether the video portrays a group or a team is thorough and well-integrated. The evaluation is clearly developed and justified, with examples and personal insight to further understanding. Supporting material is of exceptional quality and quantity.
15.0 %Motivational Problems and Motivational Theories An identification of motivational problems evident in the video with four suggestions for motivating each team member is absent, inappropriate, or irrelevant. An identification of motivational problems evident in the video with four suggestions for motivating each team member is vague or incomplete. A motivational theory from each required area is not adequately addressed. Supporting material is often confusing or inappropriate. An identification of motivational problems evident in the video with four suggestions for motivating each team member is provided, but on a cursory level. A motivational theory from each required area is included but underdeveloped. Supporting material is of baseline acceptable quality and quantity. An identification of motivational problems evident in the video with four suggestions for motivating each team member is clear and well-integrated. A motivational theory from each required area is included and clearly articulated. Supporting material is of above average quality and quantity. An identification of motivational problems evident in the video with four suggestions for motivating each team member is thorough and well-integrated. A motivational theory from each required area is included and clearly developed and justified, with examples and personal insight to further understanding. Supporting material is of exceptional quality and quantity.
5.0 %Research Sources (relevancy, quantity, and type specifications) Sources are not used or cited as required in the assignment instructions. Noncredible sources are used. Source relevance is vague or inconsistent. References from appropriate sources are not included: at least two academic resources. Source relevance is mostly applicable and appropriate. References from appropriate sources are included: at least two academic resources. Source relevance is applicable and appropriate in all instances. References from appropriate sources are included: at least two academic resources. Source relevance is applicable and appropriate in all instances and sparks interest in the reader to pursue further investigation. References from appropriate sources are used: more than two academic resources.
17.0 %Organization and Effectiveness
6.0 %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; contained within the thesis is the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.
6.0 %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 non-credible 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 progression. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative. Clear and convincing argument 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 or sentence construction is used. Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied. Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed. Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech. Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
8.0 %Format
4.0 %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.
4.0 %Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) Sources are not documented. Documentation of sources is inconsistent and/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.
100 %Total Weightage
Introducing our Online Essay Writing Services Agency, where you can confidently place orders for a wide range of academic assignments. Our reputable homework writing company specializes in crafting essays, term papers, research papers, capstone projects, movie reviews, presentations, annotated bibliographies, reaction papers, research proposals, discussions, and various other assignments. Rest assured, our content is guaranteed to be 100% original, as every piece is meticulously written from scratch. Say goodbye to concerns about plagiarism and trust us to deliver authentic and high-quality work.
WRITE THIS ESSAY FOR ME
Tell us about your assignment and we will find the best writer for your paper.
Get Help Now!WRITE MY ESSAY NOW
