Warning: Trying to access array offset on value of type bool in /home/topgsnkq/timelyhomework.com/wp-content/themes/enfold/framework/php/function-set-avia-frontend.php on line 570
Strategies to Grow and Expand a Nonprofit Business
Comprehensive exam Due Aug 10 by 11:59pm
- Points 300
- Submitting a file upload
Action Items
- Submit the completed first draft of your assignment. Your work will automatically be checked by Turnitin.
- Access your Turnitin report by reviewing your Submission Details for this assignment. Please review the Turnitin Similarity Report to ensure the highlighted areas in the report are appropriately paraphrased or quoted. The percentage provided by Turnitin should not be your focus; rather, we recommend the following considerations for utilizing the Similarity Report to edit your writing:
- Check that you have not included prior writing verbatim without further writing development. It makes sense that you would draw upon prior writing, but you should not include long passages of verbatim prior writing.
- Cite paraphrased work from your prior courses (for more information on this, please see the descriptions of Self-Plagiarism in the APA Manual). Again, you should be adding significantly to the paraphrased portions of your prior work.
- By the due date indicated, re-submit the final version of your work.
Rubric
Revised Rubric for CE Q1
| Revised Rubric for CE Q1 | ||
|---|---|---|
| Criteria | Ratings | Pts |
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeEvidence of Discipline Knowledge & Integration of Theory and Practice One or two leading theorists and their research as well as their impact on the student’s proposed study are clearly described in depth. Underpinning theories to support the proposed study are well explained and cited. Research abilities are clearly demonstrated. Overall Turnitin score, excluding quotes, citations and references is an acceptable match and student has less than 10% of previous personally written content in the response. |
100 to >94.9 pts Exemplary Response demonstrates a deep understanding of a narrow (one to two) selection of theories. Includes substantial, well-chosen evidence to describe the foundations in full and exposits the significance of these theories. The response rarely includes previously personally-written content. Overall Turnitin score, excluding quotes, citations and references is an acceptable match. 94.9 to >89.9 pts Competent Response demonstrates sufficient and appropriate understanding and contextualizes a narrow selection of theories. There is description of the foundations and the significance of these theories is made clear through the discussion. The response includes minimal previously personally-written content. Overall Turnitin score, excluding quotes, citations and references is an acceptable match. 89.9 to >83.9 pts Developing Response demonstrates an understanding and provides context for a narrow selection of theories, but the response could be more integrated. There is description of the foundations and discussion of the significance of these theories. The response includes minimal previously personally-written content. Overall Turnitin score, excluding quotes, citations and references is an acceptable match. 83.9 to >74.9 pts Poor Response demonstrates limited understanding of a selection of theories through narrative or anecdotal evidence. Or, the response is in need of stronger integration to understand the significance of the theories. Or, the response includes more than miminal previously personally-written content. Overall Turnitin score, excluding quotes, citations and references is an acceptable match. 74.9 to >0 pts Unacceptable Response includes little or no evidence cited to support responses. Or, the response includes significant previously personally-written content. The Turnitin score does not meet acceptable standards. |
100 pts |
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeQuality of Writing Writing demonstrated doctoral level scholarship and quality. Writing is concise and clear. Organization of paragraphs enhances readability. Sentences within paragraph all build upon or relate to a single issue. Good lead-in sentence for each paragraph. Good transition between paragraphs. |
100 to >94.9 pts Exemplary The writing demonstrates precise diction, syntactic variety, and a clear command of standard English in support of communicating the ideas represented. The response contains appropriate, clear, and adequate transitions between sentences and paragraphs to build a strong and compelling academic argument. 94.9 to >89.9 pts Competent The writing demonstrates apt diction, syntactic variety, and a command of standard English in support of communicating the ideas represented. The response contains distinct units of thought in paragraphs, coherently arranged to build a strong academic argument. 89.9 to >83.9 pts Developing The writing demonstrates acceptable and appropriate diction and syntax, and a command of standard English. The writing mechanics are developing, but the needed revisions do not detract from the overall communication of ideas. The response builds an academic argument. 83.9 to >74.9 pts Poor The writing is in need of major and/or many revisions in diction and syntax to communicate the ideas represented. The response needs to be more organized to support a clear academic argument. 74.9 to >0 pts Unacceptable The writing is in need of major and many revisions in diction and syntax to communicate the ideas represented. The academic argument is difficult to ascertain due to the quality of writing. |
100 pts |
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeOverall analysis, synthesis, and interpretation of questions Responses demonstrate analysis, synthesis, integration, and interpretation of questions with appropriate depth and critical thinking and are aligned with the respective doctoral program outcomes. Responses abundantly cite scholarly work through citations and references; at least 60% of references are from relevant peer-reviewed literature published in the last ten years. APA 7 style guidelines are followed, including writing in third person. |
100 to >94.9 pts Exemplary The response incorporates specific, defendable, and complex claims with strong supporting evidence. The topics discussed are aligned with the respective doctoral program learning outcomes. Doctoral-level critical thinking is demonstrated through the integration of a diverse set of multiple perspectives building academic arguments for a broad range of nuanced possibilities and limitations. 94.9 to >89.9 pts Competent The response incorporates defendable claims with a narrowed focus and strong supporting evidence. The topics discussed are aligned with the respective doctoral program learning outcomes. Doctoral-level critical thinking is demonstrated through the integration of multiple perspectives building academic arguments for a broad range of possibilities and limitations. 89.9 to >83.9 pts Developing The response incorporates claims and supporting evidence. The topics discussed are aligned with the respective doctoral program learning outcomes. Doctoral-level critical thinking is developing through the inclusion of varied perspectives building academic arguments for a range of possibilities and limitations. 83.9 to >74.9 pts Poor The response includes claims without supporting evidence, or evidence without a clear claim to support. Or, the topics discussed are not aligned with the respective doctoral program learning outcomes. The perspectives shared are limited with little discussion about possibilities and limitations. 74.9 to >0 pts Unacceptable There are few to no claims and evidence included. The topics discussed are not aligned with the respective doctoral program learning outcomes. There are few to no perspectives shared. |
100 pts |
| Total Points: 300 | ||
"Looking for a Similar Assignment? Order now and Get 10% Discount! Use Code "GET10" in your order"
