[Solved] Final

✓ Verified Academic Solution Available

Executive Solution Overview

Instant Solution Download

$6.99

Immediate access to the full model answer, formatted citations, and rubric breakdown.

Need a Fresh Custom Paper?

Have this question answered from scratch according to your specific instructions and deadline.

Order on TutorsGallery →

Assignment Prompt & Instructions

– ## Draftfeedbackogl570.docx

– ## RubricforProspectusDraft.docx

– ThadCaindraftprospectus570-2.docx

**## Draftfeedbackogl570.docx**

Instructions for final paper: Please look at the feedback from the paper you did for me before, and write the final paper based off the input. I have attached the draft paper that you did for me.

**Purpose**: Complete an Applied Project Prospectus in OGL 570.

**Specifics:**

This is an outline for the final prospectus document. Please use APA formatting and the bolded headings and subheadings below to organize your document.

· Use APA (7th edition) Style with a minimum of 15 sources. Make sure to use in-text citations.

· Paraphrase authors instead of quoting them, unless absolutely essential. Include in-text citations.

· Do not use personal pronouns (I, me, we, us, they, them).

· Do not use contractions (don’t, isn’t, won’t, etc..).

· Use third person objective voice

· Since this is a proposal, avoid writing as if the research has already been conducted.

· Avoid the use of unnecessary adjectives or other descriptors (very, extremely,
always, never) and redundancies.

· Be careful of over-reaching claims not supported by academic or your research

· Numbers below 10 are written alphabetically (example, two, three, four). Numbers
above 10 are written numerically (example, 10, 11, 12)

Organize your prospectus using this format:

**Cover Page**

**Abstract**

**Introduction, Rationale and Problem Statement**

**Scope & Project Context**

**Literature Review** framed around
three knowledge areas in organizational leadership studies that align with your project. Don't use subtitles for the knowledge areas. Rather, use transitional word, phrase or sentence to move from one knowledge area to the next.

**Purpose Statement and Research Questions**

**Research Methodology and Data Collection Strateg** y

**Participants & Positionality**

**Ethical Considerations**

**Audience, Deliverables, Contribution**

**Assumptions & Limitations**

**Work Plan Schedule & Timeline**

**Conclusion:** This refers to the conclusion of the prospectus, a summary of the highlights. It should restate the research problem and purpose, expected deliverables and contributions and summary of the methodological approach and expected completion date or semester.

**References**(Ensure that all items on the list have been cited in the text).

**Appendix** (which may include consent form, survey/interview questions, IRB Approval/CITI training certificate, etc.)

**Below is the feedback and take from this to do the final paper.**

Hello Thad,

Please see my comments in the grading rubric and the annotations on the paper. Address these issues for the final prospectus. Also, use the following format to re-organize the sections for structural coherence:

Introduction, Rationale and Problem Statement

Scope & Project Context

Literature Review of three knowledge areas

Purpose Statement and Research Questions

Research Methodology and Data Collection Strategy

Participants & Positionality

Ethical Considerations

Audience, Deliverables, Contribution

Assumptions & Limitations

Work Plan Schedule & Timeline

Conclusion

References

Appendix (which may include consent form, survey/interview questions, IRB Approval/CITI training certificate, etc.)

**## RubricforProspectusDraft.docx**

| | | |
| — | — | — |
| **Rubric for Prospectus Draft** |
| **Criteria** | **Ratings** | **Pts** |
| Introduction, Rationale and Problem Statement | **5 to >3 pts** **Meets Expectation** Introduction is engaging, clearly presents the background, organizational context, and identifies three relevant knowledge areas while transitioning smoothly into the rationale and problem statement. **3 to >1 pts** **Approaches Expectation** Introduction includes background and problem statement, but may lack clarity or depth in connecting to the knowledge areas, rationale of the project and problem statement. **1 to >0 pts** **Fails to Meet Expectation** Introduction is vague or lacks a clear problem statement. Limited or no mention of leadership theories or knowledge areas. | 3 / 5 pts |
| Scope & Project Context | **5 to >3 pts** **Meets Expectation** Scope is well-defined; context includes organizational overview, trends, and internal/external factors. **3 to >1 pts** **Approaches Expectation** Problem and purpose statements are present but lack clarity or depth. **1 to >0 pts** **Fails to Meet Expectation** Scope and context are present but lack detail. **Comments** The focus and scope of the project are not clear. | 2.5 / 5 pts |
| Literature Review of three knowledge areas | **5 to >3 pts** **Meets Expectation** Each area is clearly defined and supported with synthesis of at least five sources; strong alignment with purpose statement, **3 to >1 pts** **Approaches Expectation** Literature review of knowledge areas is strong but with minor alignment issues. **1 to >0 pts** **Fails to Meet Expectation** Limited synthesis; fewer than five sources per knowledge area; weak alignment. **Comments** While the required number of sources is present, the literature review is not robust enough to demonstrate the studies that have been done around the chosen topic and the gap that the proposed project is expected to address. | 3.5 / 5 pts |
| Purpose Statement and Research Questions | **5 to >3 pts** **Meets Expectation** Purpose statement and research questions are present, align with each other as well as with the problem statement and project rationale. **3 to >1 pts** **Approaches Expectation** Purpose statement and research questions are present, but fail to align with each other and/or with the problem statement and project rationale. **1 to >0 pts** **Fails to Meet Expectation** Purpose statement and research questions are vague and/or fail to align with the problem statement or rationale. **Comments** These need major revisions. | 3 / 5 pts |
| Research Methodology and Data Collection Strategy | **5 to >3 pts** **Meets Expectation** Methodology is clearly articulated, appropriate to the research questions, and well-justified. Data collection methods are specific, feasible, and aligned with the project’s purpose. Analytical strategies are clearly explained and appropriate for the data type. **3 to >1 pts** **Approaches Expectation** Methodology and data collection strategy are mostly clear and appropriate, though some details may be underdeveloped. Analytical methods are mentioned but may lack depth or specificity. **1 to >0 pts** **Fails to Meet Expectation** Methodology is vague or only partially aligned with research questions. Data collection methods are unclear or lack justification. Analytical approach is minimally described or inappropriate. **Comments** The methodology is not clear. | 2 / 5 pts |
| Participants & Positionality | **3.5 to >2.5 pts** **Meets Expectation** Clear identification of participants and thoughtful reflection on researcher’s positionality. **2.5 to >1 pts** **Approaches Expectation** Participants identified; positionality discussed briefly. **1 to >0 pts** **Fails to Meet Expectation** Limited detail on participants or positionality. | 2.5 / 3.5 pts |
| Audience, Deliverables, Contribution | **3.5 to >2.5 pts** **Meets Expectation** Clear identification of audience; detailed deliverables; strong contribution to the field of organizational leadership. **2.5 to >1 pts** **Approaches Expectation** Audience and deliverables present; contribution to organizational leadership somewhat clear. **1 to >0 pts** **Fails to Meet Expectation** Vague audience or deliverables; limited contribution to the field. | 2 / 3.5 pts |
| Ethical Considerations | **3.5 to >2.5 pts** **Meets Expectation** Ethical concerns are fully addressed; bias and conflict of interest considered. **2.5 to >1 pts** **Approaches Expectation** Ethical concerns addressed but not fully. **1 to >0 pts** **Fails to Meet Expectation** Limited discussion of ethics or bias. | 2.5 / 3.5 pts |
| Assumptions & Limitations | **3.5 to >2.5 pts** **Meets Expectation** Thoughtful identification of assumptions and limitations; scope clearly defined. **2.5 to >1 pts** **Approaches Expectation** Assumptions and limitations present but need more detail. **1 to >0 pts** **Fails to Meet Expectation** Limited discussion of assumptions or limitations. | 2.5 / 3.5 pts |
| Work Plan Schedule & Timeline | **3.5 to >2.5 pts** **Meets Expectation** Detailed and realistic timeline with clear milestones. **2.5 to >1 pts** **Approaches Expectation** Timeline present but lacks detail or it is unrealistic. **1 to >0 pts** **Fails to Meet Expectation** Vague or incomplete timeline. **Comments** Timeline seems to extend beyond the duration of OGL 593, | 2.5 / 3.5 pts |
| Conclusion | **2.5 to >1.5 pts** **Meets Expectation** Conclusion effectively restates and summarizes the essential elements of the prospectus, and reflects on the broader implications of the proposed applied project for organizational leadership practice and future research. **1.5 to >0.5 pts** **Approaches Expectation** Conclusion restates the purpose and summarizes main points, but lacks depth in reflection or implications. **0.5 to >0 pts** **Fails to Meet Expectation** Conclusion is brief or repetitive, with minimal synthesis or insights. **Comments** The conclusion is missing. | 0.5 / 2.5 pts |
| Writing Style and Grammar | **2.5 to >1.5 pts** **Meets Expectation** Writing is clear, concise, and consistently academic in tone. Uses third-person objective voice, past tense, and avoids contractions and personal pronouns. Grammar, punctuation, and sentence structure are flawless. **1.5 to >0.5 pts** **Approaches Expectation** Writing is mostly clear and academic. Minor lapses in tone, voice, or tense. Few grammatical or punctuation errors that do not impede understanding. **0.5 to >0 pts** **Fails to Meet Expectation** Writing is inconsistent in tone and style. Frequent use of personal pronouns, contractions, or present tense. Grammar and sentence structure issues occasionally interfere with clarity. | 1 / 2.5 pts |
| References | **2.5 to >1.5 pts** **Meets Expectation** Minimum of 15 sources; correctly formatted in APA style with hanging indent. **1.5 to >0.5 pts** **Approaches Expectation** Minor formatting issues; meets source requirement. **0.5 to >0 pts** **Fails to Meet Expectation** Fewer than 15 sources or inconsistent formatting. | 2.5 / 2.5 pts |
| |

**ThadCaindraftprospectus570-2.docx**

This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/thadcaindraftprospectus570-2-docx)

**ThadCaindraftprospectus570-2.docx**

This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/thadcaindraftprospectus570-2-docx)

**## Draftfeedbackogl570.docx**

Instructions for final paper: Please look at the feedback from the paper you did for me before, and write the final paper based off the input. I have attached the draft paper that you did for me.

**Purpose**: Complete an Applied Project Prospectus in OGL 570.

**Specifics:**

This is an outline for the final prospectus document. Please use APA formatting and the bolded headings and subheadings below to organize your document.

· Use APA (7th edition) Style with a minimum of 15 sources. Make sure to use in-text citations.

· Paraphrase authors instead of quoting them, unless absolutely essential. Include in-text citations.

· Do not use personal pronouns (I, me, we, us, they, them).

· Do not use contractions (don’t, isn’t, won’t, etc..).

· Use third person objective voice

· Since this is a proposal, avoid writing as if the research has already been conducted.

· Avoid the use of unnecessary adjectives or other descriptors (very, extremely,
always, never) and redundancies.

· Be careful of over-reaching claims not supported by academic or your research

· Numbers below 10 are written alphabetically (example, two, three, four). Numbers
above 10 are written numerically (example, 10, 11, 12)

Organize your prospectus using this format:

**Cover Page**

**Abstract**

**Introduction, Rationale and Problem Statement**

**Scope & Project Context**

**Literature Review** framed around
three knowledge areas in organizational leadership studies that align with your project. Don't use subtitles for the knowledge areas. Rather, use transitional word, phrase or sentence to move from one knowledge area to the next.

**Purpose Statement and Research Questions**

**Research Methodology and Data Collection Strateg** y

**Participants & Positionality**

**Ethical Considerations**

**Audience, Deliverables, Contribution**

**Assumptions & Limitations**

**Work Plan Schedule & Timeline**

**Conclusion:** This refers to the conclusion of the prospectus, a summary of the highlights. It should restate the research problem and purpose, expected deliverables and contributions and summary of the methodological approach and expected completion date or semester.

**References**(Ensure that all items on the list have been cited in the text).

**Appendix** (which may include consent form, survey/interview questions, IRB Approval/CITI training certificate, etc.)

**Below is the feedback and take from this to do the final paper.**

Hello Thad,

Please see my comments in the grading rubric and the annotations on the paper. Address these issues for the final prospectus. Also, use the following format to re-organize the sections for structural coherence:

Introduction, Rationale and Problem Statement

Scope & Project Context

Literature Review of three knowledge areas

Purpose Statement and Research Questions

Research Methodology and Data Collection Strategy

Participants & Positionality

Ethical Considerations

Audience, Deliverables, Contribution

Assumptions & Limitations

Work Plan Schedule & Timeline

Conclusion

References

Appendix (which may include consent form, survey/interview questions, IRB Approval/CITI training certificate, etc.)

**## RubricforProspectusDraft.docx**

| | | |
| — | — | — |
| **Rubric for Prospectus Draft** |
| **Criteria** | **Ratings** | **Pts** |
| Introduction, Rationale and Problem Statement | **5 to >3 pts** **Meets Expectation** Introduction is engaging, clearly presents the background, organizational context, and identifies three relevant knowledge areas while transitioning smoothly into the rationale and problem statement. **3 to >1 pts** **Approaches Expectation** Introduction includes background and problem statement, but may lack clarity or depth in connecting to the knowledge areas, rationale of the project and problem statement. **1 to >0 pts** **Fails to Meet Expectation** Introduction is vague or lacks a clear problem statement. Limited or no mention of leadership theories or knowledge areas. | 3 / 5 pts |
| Scope & Project Context | **5 to >3 pts** **Meets Expectation** Scope is well-defined; context includes organizational overview, trends, and internal/external factors. **3 to >1 pts** **Approaches Expectation** Problem and purpose statements are present but lack clarity or depth. **1 to >0 pts** **Fails to Meet Expectation** Scope and context are present but lack detail. **Comments** The focus and scope of the project are not clear. | 2.5 / 5 pts |
| Literature Review of three knowledge areas | **5 to >3 pts** **Meets Expectation** Each area is clearly defined and supported with synthesis of at least five sources; strong alignment with purpose statement, **3 to >1 pts** **Approaches Expectation** Literature review of knowledge areas is strong but with minor alignment issues. **1 to >0 pts** **Fails to Meet Expectation** Limited synthesis; fewer than five sources per knowledge area; weak alignment. **Comments** While the required number of sources is present, the literature review is not robust enough to demonstrate the studies that have been done around the chosen topic and the gap that the proposed project is expected to address. | 3.5 / 5 pts |
| Purpose Statement and Research Questions | **5 to >3 pts** **Meets Expectation** Purpose statement and research questions are present, align with each other as well as with the problem statement and project rationale. **3 to >1 pts** **Approaches Expectation** Purpose statement and research questions are present, but fail to align with each other and/or with the problem statement and project rationale. **1 to >0 pts** **Fails to Meet Expectation** Purpose statement and research questions are vague and/or fail to align with the problem statement or rationale. **Comments** These need major revisions. | 3 / 5 pts |
| Research Methodology and Data Collection Strategy | **5 to >3 pts** **Meets Expectation** Methodology is clearly articulated, appropriate to the research questions, and well-justified. Data collection methods are specific, feasible, and aligned with the project’s purpose. Analytical strategies are clearly explained and appropriate for the data type. **3 to >1 pts** **Approaches Expectation** Methodology and data collection strategy are mostly clear and appropriate, though some details may be underdeveloped. Analytical methods are mentioned but may lack depth or specificity. **1 to >0 pts** **Fails to Meet Expectation** Methodology is vague or only partially aligned with research questions. Data collection methods are unclear or lack justification. Analytical approach is minimally described or inappropriate. **Comments** The methodology is not clear. | 2 / 5 pts |
| Participants & Positionality | **3.5 to >2.5 pts** **Meets Expectation** Clear identification of participants and thoughtful reflection on researcher’s positionality. **2.5 to >1 pts** **Approaches Expectation** Participants identified; positionality discussed briefly. **1 to >0 pts** **Fails to Meet Expectation** Limited detail on participants or positionality. | 2.5 / 3.5 pts |
| Audience, Deliverables, Contribution | **3.5 to >2.5 pts** **Meets Expectation** Clear identification of audience; detailed deliverables; strong contribution to the field of organizational leadership. **2.5 to >1 pts** **Approaches Expectation** Audience and deliverables present; contribution to organizational leadership somewhat clear. **1 to >0 pts** **Fails to Meet Expectation** Vague audience or deliverables; limited contribution to the field. | 2 / 3.5 pts |
| Ethical Considerations | **3.5 to >2.5 pts** **Meets Expectation** Ethical concerns are fully addressed; bias and conflict of interest considered. **2.5 to >1 pts** **Approaches Expectation** Ethical concerns addressed but not fully. **1 to >0 pts** **Fails to Meet Expectation** Limited discussion of ethics or bias. | 2.5 / 3.5 pts |
| Assumptions & Limitations | **3.5 to >2.5 pts** **Meets Expectation** Thoughtful identification of assumptions and limitations; scope clearly defined. **2.5 to >1 pts** **Approaches Expectation** Assumptions and limitations present but need more detail. **1 to >0 pts** **Fails to Meet Expectation** Limited discussion of assumptions or limitations. | 2.5 / 3.5 pts |
| Work Plan Schedule & Timeline | **3.5 to >2.5 pts** **Meets Expectation** Detailed and realistic timeline with clear milestones. **2.5 to >1 pts** **Approaches Expectation** Timeline present but lacks detail or it is unrealistic. **1 to >0 pts** **Fails to Meet Expectation** Vague or incomplete timeline. **Comments** Timeline seems to extend beyond the duration of OGL 593, | 2.5 / 3.5 pts |
| Conclusion | **2.5 to >1.5 pts** **Meets Expectation** Conclusion effectively restates and summarizes the essential elements of the prospectus, and reflects on the broader implications of the proposed applied project for organizational leadership practice and future research. **1.5 to >0.5 pts** **Approaches Expectation** Conclusion restates the purpose and summarizes main points, but lacks depth in reflection or implications. **0.5 to >0 pts** **Fails to Meet Expectation** Conclusion is brief or repetitive, with minimal synthesis or insights. **Comments** The conclusion is missing. | 0.5 / 2.5 pts |
| Writing Style and Grammar | **2.5 to >1.5 pts** **Meets Expectation** Writing is clear, concise, and consistently academic in tone. Uses third-person objective voice, past tense, and avoids contractions and personal pronouns. Grammar, punctuation, and sentence structure are flawless. **1.5 to >0.5 pts** **Approaches Expectation** Writing is mostly clear and academic. Minor lapses in tone, voice, or tense. Few grammatical or punctuation errors that do not impede understanding. **0.5 to >0 pts** **Fails to Meet Expectation** Writing is inconsistent in tone and style. Frequent use of personal pronouns, contractions, or present tense. Grammar and sentence structure issues occasionally interfere with clarity. | 1 / 2.5 pts |
| References | **2.5 to >1.5 pts** **Meets Expectation** Minimum of 15 sources; correctly formatted in APA style with hanging indent. **1.5 to >0.5 pts** **Approaches Expectation** Minor formatting issues; meets source requirement. **0.5 to >0 pts** **Fails to Meet Expectation** Fewer than 15 sources or inconsistent formatting. | 2.5 / 2.5 pts |
| |

**ThadCaindraftprospectus570-2.docx**

This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/thadcaindraftprospectus570-2-docx)

**## Draftfeedbackogl570.docx**

Instructions for final paper: Please look at the feedback from the paper you did for me before, and write the final paper based off the input. I have attached the draft paper that you did for me.

**Purpose**: Complete an Applied Project Prospectus in OGL 570.

**Specifics:**

This is an outline for the final prospectus document. Please use APA formatting and the bolded headings and subheadings below to organize your document.

· Use APA (7th edition) Style with a minimum of 15 sources. Make sure to use in-text citations.

· Paraphrase authors instead of quoting them, unless absolutely essential. Include in-text citations.

· Do not use personal pronouns (I, me, we, us, they, them).

· Do not use contractions (don’t, isn’t, won’t, etc..).

· Use third person objective voice

· Since this is a proposal, avoid writing as if the research has already been conducted.

· Avoid the use of unnecessary adjectives or other descriptors (very, extremely,
always, never) and redundancies.

· Be careful of over-reaching claims not supported by academic or your research

· Numbers below 10 are written alphabetically (example, two, three, four). Numbers
above 10 are written numerically (example, 10, 11, 12)

Organize your prospectus using this format:

**Cover Page**

**Abstract**

**Introduction, Rationale and Problem Statement**

**Scope & Project Context**

**Literature Review** framed around
three knowledge areas in organizational leadership studies that align with your project. Don't use subtitles for the knowledge areas. Rather, use transitional word, phrase or sentence to move from one knowledge area to the next.

**Purpose Statement and Research Questions**

**Research Methodology and Data Collection Strateg** y

**Participants & Positionality**

**Ethical Considerations**

**Audience, Deliverables, Contribution**

**Assumptions & Limitations**

**Work Plan Schedule & Timeline**

**Conclusion:** This refers to the conclusion of the prospectus, a summary of the highlights. It should restate the research problem and purpose, expected deliverables and contributions and summary of the methodological approach and expected completion date or semester.

**References**(Ensure that all items on the list have been cited in the text).

**Appendix** (which may include consent form, survey/interview questions, IRB Approval/CITI training certificate, etc.)

**Below is the feedback and take from this to do the final paper.**

Hello Thad,

Please see my comments in the grading rubric and the annotations on the paper. Address these issues for the final prospectus. Also, use the following format to re-organize the sections for structural coherence:

Introduction, Rationale and Problem Statement

Scope & Project Context

Literature Review of three knowledge areas

Purpose Statement and Research Questions

Research Methodology and Data Collection Strategy

Participants & Positionality

Ethical Considerations

Audience, Deliverables, Contribution

Assumptions & Limitations

Work Plan Schedule & Timeline

Conclusion

References

Appendix (which may include consent form, survey/interview questions, IRB Approval/CITI training certificate, etc.)

**## RubricforProspectusDraft.docx**

| | | |
| — | — | — |
| **Rubric for Prospectus Draft** |
| **Criteria** | **Ratings** | **Pts** |
| Introduction, Rationale and Problem Statement | **5 to >3 pts** **Meets Expectation** Introduction is engaging, clearly presents the background, organizational context, and identifies three relevant knowledge areas while transitioning smoothly into the rationale and problem statement. **3 to >1 pts** **Approaches Expectation** Introduction includes background and problem statement, but may lack clarity or depth in connecting to the knowledge areas, rationale of the project and problem statement. **1 to >0 pts** **Fails to Meet Expectation** Introduction is vague or lacks a clear problem statement. Limited or no mention of leadership theories or knowledge areas. | 3 / 5 pts |
| Scope & Project Context | **5 to >3 pts** **Meets Expectation** Scope is well-defined; context includes organizational overview, trends, and internal/external factors. **3 to >1 pts** **Approaches Expectation** Problem and purpose statements are present but lack clarity or depth. **1 to >0 pts** **Fails to Meet Expectation** Scope and context are present but lack detail. **Comments** The focus and scope of the project are not clear. | 2.5 / 5 pts |
| Literature Review of three knowledge areas | **5 to >3 pts** **Meets Expectation** Each area is clearly defined and supported with synthesis of at least five sources; strong alignment with purpose statement, **3 to >1 pts** **Approaches Expectation** Literature review of knowledge areas is strong but with minor alignment issues. **1 to >0 pts** **Fails to Meet Expectation** Limited synthesis; fewer than five sources per knowledge area; weak alignment. **Comments** While the required number of sources is present, the literature review is not robust enough to demonstrate the studies that have been done around the chosen topic and the gap that the proposed project is expected to address. | 3.5 / 5 pts |
| Purpose Statement and Research Questions | **5 to >3 pts** **Meets Expectation** Purpose statement and research questions are present, align with each other as well as with the problem statement and project rationale. **3 to >1 pts** **Approaches Expectation** Purpose statement and research questions are present, but fail to align with each other and/or with the problem statement and project rationale. **1 to >0 pts** **Fails to Meet Expectation** Purpose statement and research questions are vague and/or fail to align with the problem statement or rationale. **Comments** These need major revisions. | 3 / 5 pts |
| Research Methodology and Data Collection Strategy | **5 to >3 pts** **Meets Expectation** Methodology is clearly articulated, appropriate to the research questions, and well-justified. Data collection methods are specific, feasible, and aligned with the project’s purpose. Analytical strategies are clearly explained and appropriate for the data type. **3 to >1 pts** **Approaches Expectation** Methodology and data collection strategy are mostly clear and appropriate, though some details may be underdeveloped. Analytical methods are mentioned but may lack depth or specificity. **1 to >0 pts** **Fails to Meet Expectation** Methodology is vague or only partially aligned with research questions. Data collection methods are unclear or lack justification. Analytical approach is minimally described or inappropriate. **Comments** The methodology is not clear. | 2 / 5 pts |
| Participants & Positionality | **3.5 to >2.5 pts** **Meets Expectation** Clear identification of participants and thoughtful reflection on researcher’s positionality. **2.5 to >1 pts** **Approaches Expectation** Participants identified; positionality discussed briefly. **1 to >0 pts** **Fails to Meet Expectation** Limited detail on participants or positionality. | 2.5 / 3.5 pts |
| Audience, Deliverables, Contribution | **3.5 to >2.5 pts** **Meets Expectation** Clear identification of audience; detailed deliverables; strong contribution to the field of organizational leadership. **2.5 to >1 pts** **Approaches Expectation** Audience and deliverables present; contribution to organizational leadership somewhat clear. **1 to >0 pts** **Fails to Meet Expectation** Vague audience or deliverables; limited contribution to the field. | 2 / 3.5 pts |
| Ethical Considerations | **3.5 to >2.5 pts** **Meets Expectation** Ethical concerns are fully addressed; bias and conflict of interest considered. **2.5 to >1 pts** **Approaches Expectation** Ethical concerns addressed but not fully. **1 to >0 pts** **Fails to Meet Expectation** Limited discussion of ethics or bias. | 2.5 / 3.5 pts |
| Assumptions & Limitations | **3.5 to >2.5 pts** **Meets Expectation** Thoughtful identification of assumptions and limitations; scope clearly defined. **2.5 to >1 pts** **Approaches Expectation** Assumptions and limitations present but need more detail. **1 to >0 pts** **Fails to Meet Expectation** Limited discussion of assumptions or limitations. | 2.5 / 3.5 pts |
| Work Plan Schedule & Timeline | **3.5 to >2.5 pts** **Meets Expectation** Detailed and realistic timeline with clear milestones. **2.5 to >1 pts** **Approaches Expectation** Timeline present but lacks detail or it is unrealistic. **1 to >0 pts** **Fails to Meet Expectation** Vague or incomplete timeline. **Comments** Timeline seems to extend beyond the duration of OGL 593, | 2.5 / 3.5 pts |
| Conclusion | **2.5 to >1.5 pts** **Meets Expectation** Conclusion effectively restates and summarizes the essential elements of the prospectus, and reflects on the broader implications of the proposed applied project for organizational leadership practice and future research. **1.5 to >0.5 pts** **Approaches Expectation** Conclusion restates the purpose and summarizes main points, but lacks depth in reflection or implications. **0.5 to >0 pts** **Fails to Meet Expectation** Conclusion is brief or repetitive, with minimal synthesis or insights. **Comments** The conclusion is missing. | 0.5 / 2.5 pts |
| Writing Style and Grammar | **2.5 to >1.5 pts** **Meets Expectation** Writing is clear, concise, and consistently academic in tone. Uses third-person objective voice, past tense, and avoids contractions and personal pronouns. Grammar, punctuation, and sentence structure are flawless. **1.5 to >0.5 pts** **Approaches Expectation** Writing is mostly clear and academic. Minor lapses in tone, voice, or tense. Few grammatical or punctuation errors that do not impede understanding. **0.5 to >0 pts** **Fails to Meet Expectation** Writing is inconsistent in tone and style. Frequent use of personal pronouns, contractions, or present tense. Grammar and sentence structure issues occasionally interfere with clarity. | 1 / 2.5 pts |
| References | **2.5 to >1.5 pts** **Meets Expectation** Minimum of 15 sources; correctly formatted in APA style with hanging indent. **1.5 to >0.5 pts** **Approaches Expectation** Minor formatting issues; meets source requirement. **0.5 to >0 pts** **Fails to Meet Expectation** Fewer than 15 sources or inconsistent formatting. | 2.5 / 2.5 pts |
| |

**ThadCaindraftprospectus570-2.docx**

This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/thadcaindraftprospectus570-2-docx)

– 1
– 2
– 3

Executive Solution Overview

Instant Solution Download

Need a Fresh Custom Paper?

Assignment Prompt & Instructions

Comments

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

More posts

[Solved] Biology Read chapter 10: High Performance Teams Participate in the weekly discussion – due Sunday Submit the weekly assignment – due Sunday November 24

[Solved] Biology Read chapter 10: High Performance Teams Participate in the weekly discussion – due Sunday Submit the weekly assignment – due Sunday November 24

[Solved] Biology Read chapter 8: High Performance Teams Read chapter 9: The Challenge of Diversity Participate in the weekly discussion – due Sunday Submit the weekly assignment – due Sunday November 17

[Solved] Describe three key features of the system that supported positive client or organizational outcomes.