MGT672 Critical Thinking Writing Rubric - Module 6 Exceeds Expectation Meets Expectation Below Expectation Limited Evidence Content, Research, and Analysis 21-25 Points 16-20 Points 11-15 Points 6-10 Points Requirements Exceeds Expectation -Includes all of the required components, as specified in the assignment. Meets Expectation - Includes most of the required components, as specified in the assignment. Below Expectation - Includes some of the required components, as specified in the assignment. Limited Evidence - Includes few of the required components, as specified in the assignment. 21-25 Points 16-20 Points 11-15 Points 6-10 Points Content Exceeds Expectation - Demonstrates substantial and extensive knowledge of the materials, with no errors or major omissions. Meets Expectation - Demonstrates adequate knowledge of the materials; may include some minor errors or omissions. Below Expectation - Demonstrates fair knowledge of the materials and/or includes some major errors or omissions. Limited Evidence - Fails to demonstrate knowledge of the materials and/or includes many major errors or omissions. 25-30 Points 19-24 Points 13-18 Points 7-12 Points Analysis Exceeds Expectation - Provides strong thought, insight, and use of the Decision Matrix, as well as other concepts and applications. Meets Expectation - Provides adequate thought, insight, and use of the Decision Matrix, as well as other concepts and applications. Below Expectation - Provides poor thought, insight, and use of the Decision Matrix, as well as other concepts and applications. Limited Evidence - Provides little or no thought, thought, insight, and use of the Decision Matrix, as well as other concepts and applications. 13-15 Points 10-12 Points 7-9 Points 4-6 Points Sources Exceeds Expectation - Sources go above and beyond required criteria, and are well chosen to provide effective substance and perspectives on the issue under examination. Meets Expectation - Sources meet required criteria and are adequately chosen to provide substance and perspectives on the issue under examination. Below Expectation - Sources meet required criteria, but are poorly chosen to provide substance and perspectives on the issue under examination. Limited Evidence - Source selection and integration of knowledge from the course is clearly deficient. Mechanics and Writing 5 Points 4 Points 3 Points 1-2 Points Demonstrates college-level proficiency in organization, grammar and style. Exceeds Expectation - Project is clearly organized, well written, and in proper format as outlined in the assignment. Strong sentence and paragraph structure; contains no errors in grammar, spelling, APA style, or APA citations and references. Meets Expectation - Project is fairly well organized and written, and is in proper format as outlined in the assignment. Reasonably good sentence and paragraph structure; may include a few minor errors in grammar, spelling, APA style, or APA citations and references. Be ...

1. MGT672
Critical Thinking Writing Rubric - Module 6
Exceeds Expectation
Meets Expectation
Below Expectation
Limited Evidence
Content, Research, and Analysis
21-25 Points
16-20 Points
11-15 Points
6-10 Points
Requirements
Exceeds Expectation -Includes all of the required components,
as specified in the assignment.
Meets Expectation - Includes most of the required components,
as specified in the assignment.
Below Expectation - Includes some of the required components,
as specified in the assignment.
Limited Evidence - Includes few of the required components, as
specified in the assignment.
21-25 Points
16-20 Points
11-15 Points
6-10 Points
Content
Exceeds Expectation - Demonstrates substantial and extensive
knowledge of the materials, with no errors or major omissions.
Meets Expectation - Demonstrates adequate knowledge of the

2. materials; may include some minor errors or omissions.
Below Expectation - Demonstrates fair knowledge of the
materials and/or includes some major errors or omissions.
Limited Evidence - Fails to demonstrate knowledge of the
materials and/or includes many major errors or omissions.
25-30 Points
19-24 Points
13-18 Points
7-12 Points
Analysis
Exceeds Expectation - Provides strong thought, insight, and use
of the Decision Matrix, as well as other concepts and
applications.
Meets Expectation - Provides adequate thought, insight, and use
of the Decision Matrix, as well as other concepts and
applications.
Below Expectation - Provides poor thought, insight, and use of
the Decision Matrix, as well as other concepts and applications.
Limited Evidence - Provides little or no thought, thought,
insight, and use of the Decision Matrix, as well as other
concepts and applications.
13-15 Points
10-12 Points
7-9 Points
4-6 Points
Sources
Exceeds Expectation - Sources go above and beyond required
criteria, and are well chosen to provide effective substance and
perspectives on the issue under examination.
Meets Expectation - Sources meet required criteria and are
adequately chosen to provide substance and perspectives on the
issue under examination.
Below Expectation - Sources meet required criteria, but are
poorly chosen to provide substance and perspectives on the

3. issue under examination.
Limited Evidence - Source selection and integration of
knowledge from the course is clearly deficient.
Mechanics and Writing
5 Points
4 Points
3 Points
1-2 Points
Demonstrates college-level proficiency in organization,
grammar and style.
Exceeds Expectation - Project is clearly organized, well written,
and in proper format as outlined in the assignment. Strong
sentence and paragraph structure; contains no errors in
grammar, spelling, APA style, or APA citations and references.
Meets Expectation - Project is fairly well organized and written,
and is in proper format as outlined in the assignment.
Reasonably good sentence and paragraph structure; may include
a few minor errors in grammar, spelling, APA style, or APA
citations and references.
Below Expectation - Project is poorly organized and written,
and may not follow proper format as outlined in the assignment.
Inconsistent to inadequate sentence and paragraph development,
and/or includes numerous or major errors in grammar, spelling,
APA style, or APA citations and references.
Limited Evidence - Project is not organized or well written, and
is not in proper format as outlined in the assignment. Poor
quality work; unacceptable in terms of grammar, spelling, APA
style, and APA citations and references.
Total points possible = 100

4. Instructions
Write a proposal in which you answer the following prompts.
Part I
Discuss your thought process as a new leader. After studying
several theories, which theory will you employ in your
leadership practice? Do you believe that there is a difference
between leadership and management? If so, what is the
distinction? You have read Kouzes and Posner’s (2009) best
practices of leadership. Did you find any other leadership best
practices in your research that interested you? Were the findings
enough to sway your personal philosophy of leadership? What
factors influence you when you need to make a decision? How
might making a diagram help you? Before this course were you
aware that your area of specialization had professional
standards? What other uses might you find for professional
standards in the future (ethical, curricular, other matters)?
Part II
Explain the educational problem you chose in Week 3. How did
you justify your choice? How did you evaluate the problem
through the human resources, political, symbolic, structural, and
technological perspectives? Did you use any other perspectives
not mentioned here as you contemplated the problem? Now
describe the potential solutions that you came up with and how
you filtered them through the above-mentioned perspectives and
any other perspectives not listed here.
Part III
What is your recommended solution? It is fine if you have more
than one. Why did you choose it/them?

5. Length: 8-10 pages, not including title and reference pages
References: Include a minimum of seven credible resources
appropriate to your specialization of which at least two should
be from scholarly journals.
Euro Disneyland
This week you were introduced to several decision-making
tools in the course content. Using the Decision Matrix Analysis
(https://expertprogrammanagement.com/2017/09/decision-
matrix-analysis/ ) along with the Decision Matrix Analysis
video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j2HtqQjyt5s ), make
the following decisions relative to the case study about Euro
Disneyland (p. 262):
The first section of your paper should be an explanation of this
process and how you decided on each of the factors in the
matrix.
1. List all of the cultural challenges posed by Disney’s
expansion into Europe. (Side of matrix.)
2. Next, list the variables that influenced these challenges. (Top
of matrix.)
3. Decide on a score (1-5) for each of these challenges
according to the relative importance of the factors. Multiply
each of these scores by 2 to find the weighted scores for each
option/factor combination.
Next, respond to the following questions in the rest of your
essay:
1. Using Hofstede’s four cultural dimensions as a point of
reference noted in the case, what are some of the main cultural
differences between the United States and France?
2. In managing its Euro Disneyland operations, what are three
mistakes that the company made? Explain your response with
examples.
3. As a conclusion, reflect on your overall thoughts on this case.
Your well-written paper should meet the following
requirements:

6. · Be 5-6 pages in length, which does not include the title page,
abstract, or required reference page, which are never a part of
the content minimum requirements.
· Use Saudi Electronic University academic writing standards
and APA style guidelines.
· Support your submission with course material concepts,
principles, and theories from the textbook and at least two
scholarly, peer-reviewed journal articles.
· Review the Critical Thinking Grading RubricCritical
Thinking Grading Rubric - Alternative Formats to see how you
will be graded for this assignment.
Euro Disneyland
This week you were introduced to several decision-making
tools in the course content. Using the Decision Matrix Analysis
(https://expertprogrammanagement.com/2017/09/decision-
matrix-analysis/ ) along with the Decision Matrix Analysis
video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j2HtqQjyt5s ), make
the following decisions relative to the case study about Euro
Disneyland (p. 262):
The first section of your paper should be an explanation of this
process and how you decided on each of the factors in the
matrix.
1. List all of the cultural challenges posed by Disney’s
expansion into Europe. (Side of matrix.)
2. Next, list the variables that influenced these challenges. (Top
of matrix.)
3. Decide on a score (1-5) for each of these challenges
according to the relative importance of the factors. Multiply
each of these scores by 2 to find the weighted scores for each
option/factor combination.
Next, respond to the following questions in the rest of your
essay:
1. Using Hofstede’s four cultural dimensions as a point of
reference noted in the case, what are some of the main cultural

7. differences between the United States and France?
2. In managing its Euro Disneyland operations, what are three
mistakes that the company made? Explain your response with
examples.
3. As a conclusion, reflect on your overall thoughts on this case.
Your well-written paper should meet the following
requirements:
· Be 5-6 pages in length, which does not include the title page,
abstract, or required reference page, which are never a part of
the content minimum requirements.
· Use Saudi Electronic University academic writing standards
and APA style guidelines.
· Support your submission with course material concepts,
principles, and theories from the textbook and at least two
scholarly, peer-reviewed journal articles.
· Review the Critical Thinking Grading RubricCritical
Thinking Grading Rubric - Alternative Formats to see how you
will be graded for this assignment.