Hyde-Woodstock Senior English John Rigney
Leadership Development 2010-11
Grading rubric for Senior Leadership Reflection Papers[1]
I. Focus -- Coherence
Papers need to have a clear focus and coherence. Poorly rated papers would be disjointed, episodic, with little or no overall focus.
Excellent (13-15) Clearly organized and coherent
Effort (9-12) Focused in places, but pieces don't hang together
Motions -OT (0-8) Largely unfocused and unconnected
II. Grounded in Personal Leadership Experience
Your reflections in this paper should be explicitly grounded in any readings, your personal or leadership journal entries, experiences in class(es), life here on campus, or other related events in your life. Highly rated papers will draw on specific examples from a variety of sources to document and demonstrate your learning; poorly rated papers would draw on few or no sources.
Excellence (27-30) Exceptional use of a variety of experiences to ground paper
Effort-Excellence (24-27) Good use of a variety of experiences
Effort (21-24) Statements in paper are adequately supported by experiences
Motions (15-21) Few or no experiential grounding statements; vague and abstract
Off-Track (>15) Substantially missing on this category
III. Connection to Leadership Theory / Practice as we’ve studied it.
The reflective papers focus on your practice of leadershi p theory. Highly rated papers in this category will explicitly connect the ideas of leadership to your own thoughts about your development as a leader, addressing, if you wish, the technical, interpersonal, and/or goals you hope to reach this year. If appropriate, this may include reference to the goals you set in prior papers or to yourself, feedback you’ve received from members of this community, or personal reflections you’ve had. Additionally, your reflections should be grounded in the work you are actively doing within the Hyde process (e.g.: applying The Five Words & Principles, AICR, Learning Triangle and Rigor à Synergy à Conscience ) . As part of the Action-Reflection cycle, these assignments require that you reflect on your growth in steps. Papers that are technically competent academic discussions of leadership theory (tie into various readings, etc.), but that remain unconnected to your own experience would be rated lower in this category.
Excellence (27-30) Exceptional connections made between leadership material, theory, and personal growth and development
Effort-Excellence (24-27) Good, clear connections made with only some clear example
Effort (21-24) Adequate connections made but note expanded upon fully
Motions (Needs more) (15-21) Largely unconnected, material kept at a theoretical distance
Off-track (>15) Substantially missing on this category
IV. Metacognition
This category shows insight into the way you see yourself learning best in the class, but more importantly, beyond this setting and in your broader life. Effort to Excellent responses will reflect on what you find works best for you throughout the school’s various arenas, as well as what you are learning about your learning that can apply in other situations. (While your metacognitive reflections may be woven throughout the paper, it is important that you highlight one section of your paper, explicitly reflecting on this. In other words: Be explicit with this.)
Excellent (12-15) Very clear on own learning process in and out of course and implications of that for other settings
Acceptable (9-12) Basic understanding of own metacognition in or out of the course
Unacceptable (>9) Substantially missing on this category
V. Clarity, writing mechanics
This category reflects on the surface mechanics of writing -- spelling, grammar, punctuation, turning the paper in on time.
Excellent (10) Clear writing, correct grammar and punctuation, few or no
typos, paper turned in on time
Needs Editing (5) Substantial errors in grammar, spelling or punctuation
______________________________________________________________________________
Submitting the finished draft:
In keeping with appropriate email etiquette, please send your finished document as an attachment. Your email subject line and the attachment should be labeled “Last Name, First Name – MYRP.” This will ensure that your paper is properly sorted and collected.
Note: If you disagree with your assessment, or feel that some other evaluative framework (rubric) would better reflect, support, and document your learning, please let me know. If you wish to rewrite any section(s) of the paper to meet a higher standard on the rubric, you are welcome to do so at any time prior to the end of the course. If you have any comments or suggestions on this rubric and this overall approach for assessment, I would welcome them.
Rewriting Papers
You are welcome to respond to the comments on your paper to clarify, add, or rewrite a section of your paper. If you choose to do this, there is a specific procedure to follow:
· Include the original paper, with comments.
· Since you will probably be writing in response to comments written, put a cover note on your revised paper that paraphrases or summarizes the comment(s) you are responding to from my comments and that explains where in your revisions the specific changes, additions, etc. are to be found.
· Clearly identify by bolding, italics, or some other marks on your paper what it is you are adding, clarifying or rewriting and why (this should be tied to the cover sheet, described above)
· Because of this ability to revise your own reflections, you should really not receive less than an 80 on any of these assignments.
Rewrites of papers that do not do this will not be read.
This Leadership Rubric is used with permission Professor Lee Teitel and originated in the Harvard Graduate School of Education A307 -Leadership in Non-Traditional Settings course.
A portion or quote from your paper may be selected out to be compiled anonymously into an annual collection of Mid-Year Reflections. Please speak to your teacher if you have questions regarding this.
2
[1] All papers will fall within Seminar Guideline 10 but may be shared with DG leaders.