|
Criteria↓ Standards→
|
LO
|
Mark
|
High Distinction (38.25-45)
|
Distinction (33.75-37.8)
|
Credit (29.25-33.329.25-33.329.25-33.329.25-33.3)
|
|
An organisation that is or has been in the news during the past two years (work-related learning) is used to identify an ethical dilemma an example.
|
|
/2
|
Highly appropriate organisation is Identified that provides an outstanding and critical basis for further examination.
|
Identification of organisation provides a detailed and accurate basis from which to develop further examination.
|
Identification of organisation provides a sufficiently detailed basis for further examination.
|
|
At least two theoretical concepts from managerial ethics are applied to examine this dilemma critically
|
3
|
/8
|
Identifies, explains, applies and critiques major alternative theoretical concepts with depth, detail and clarity.
|
Identifies, applies and critiques major alternative theoretical concepts clearly and accurately.
|
Identifies, explains & applies important alternative theoretical concepts but occasionally lacks clarity or accuracy. Critique is limited.
|
|
Examination and critical evaluation of how these theoretical concepts influence managerial practices in the chosen organisation.
|
1
2
|
/15
|
Clearly demonstrates a high level ability to synthesise theory and practice using readings and/or alternative perspectives.
|
Able to interpret the relationship between theory and practice accurately. Offers appropriate and relevant examples to support line of argument.
|
Able to identify the relevant relationships between theory and practice. Offers some evaluation, but occasionally lack consistency.
|
|
Conclusions reflect critically on how leaders may ensure organisational decisions are made ethically.
|
5
|
/10
|
Shows deep critical reflection of and engagement with leadership and ethical decision-making.
A strong and reasoned argument is made to support the conclusions.
|
Shows detailed critical reflection of and engagement with leadership and ethical decision-making.
A strong argument is made to support the conclusions.
|
Shows a degree of critical reflection of and engagement with leadership and ethical decision-making. Notes alternative perspectives and provides examples where necessary to support conclusions.
|
|
Academic and professional communication skills:
Follows an essay structure.
Writing style must follow professional literacy: Citations and a final reference list that follows the APA6 guidelines accurately; the quality of writing and presentation: accurate mechanics (spelling, grammar, punctuation etc.); use respectful language to discuss all people; avoid emotive language; employ inclusive, non-sexist language. Minimum of ten (10) citations/references used.
|
|
/10
|
Structure uses clear and concise topic and linking sentences, and connected paragraphs. Sophisticated level of professional language achieved. Paragraphs succinct with excellent ability with grammar, vocabulary and spelling. Impeccable referencing in APA6. Outstanding presentation.
|
Structure that uses paragraphs and sentences. Extensive use of topic and linking sentences. Leads the reader through the argument in a clear and logical way. Follows guidelines comprehensively. Professional literacy well demonstrated. Substantial ability with grammar, spelling and vocabulary. Ample relevant, accurate referencing using APA6.
|
Clear structure. Adequate use of sentences and paragraphs. Guidelines followed clearly. Level of professional language used. Paragraphs are succinct. Generally good ability with grammar, and spelling; appropriate vocabulary. Significant but limited referencing.
|
|
Total marks:
|
|
/45
|
|
|
|
|
Comments:
|
|
|
Ethics, Leadership & Decision Making