Style(s) and How it Has Benefited Them 20.0% Interviewer Explains Why He She Chose Each Leader Interviewed 20.0% Compare and Contrast Leadership Styles of Servant Leaders 20.0% Interviewer Notes Examples of Servant Leadership or Missed Opportunities During the Interview 10.0% Organization and Effectiveness 20.0% Thesis Development and Purpose 7.0% Argument Logic and Construction 8.0% Mechanics of Writing (Includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, and language use.) 5.0% Format 10.0% Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) 5.0% Research Citations (In-text citations for paraphrasing and direct quotes, and reference page listing and formatting, as appropriate to assignment and style.) 5.0% Total Weightage 100% Nurse Leader Interviews Paper No submission (0.00%) None None None None None None None None None 132.0 Unsatisfactory (75.00%) Content neglects to address some or all areas of leadership style identification, preferred leadership styles, and how chosen leadership style has benefited leader as addressed by assignment criteria. Interviewer neglects to explain why he or she chose each leader interviewed. Interviewer neglects to compare and contrast leadership styles of servant leaders. Content neglects to cover examples of servant leadership and or missed opportunities during the interview. Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim. Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources. Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and or sentence construction are used. Template is not used appropriately, or documentation format is rarely followed correctly. No reference page is included. No citations are used. Less than Satisfactory (80.00%) Content minimally addresses some or all areas of leadership style identification, preferred leadership styles, and how chosen leadership style has benefited leader as addressed by assignment criteria. Interviewer does not adequately explain why he or she chose each leader interviewed. Interviewer neglects to adequately compare and contrast leadership styles of servant leaders. Content is minimal in its coverage of examples of servant leadership and or missed opportunities during the interview. Thesis and or main claim are insufficiently developed and or vague; purpose is not clear. Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility. Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, and or word choice are present. Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent. Reference page is present. Citations are inconsistently used. Satisfactory (88.00%) Content covers all areas of leadership style identification, preferred leadership styles, and how chosen leadership style has benefited leader as addressed by assignment criteria. Interviewer adequately explains why he or she chose each leader interviewed. Interviewer adequately compares and contrasts leadership styles of servant leaders. Content accurately covers examples of servant leadership and missed opportunities during the interview. Thesis and or main claim are apparent and appropriate to purpose. Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis. Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used. Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present. Reference page is included and lists sources used in the paper. Sources are appropriately documented, although some errors may be present. Good (92.00%) Content is accurate in covering all areas of leadership style identification, preferred leadership styles, and how chosen leadership style has benefited leader as addressed by assignment criteria. Interviewer offers detailed reasons about why he or she chose each leader interviewed. Interviewer compares and contrasts leadership styles of servant leaders in a detailed manner. Content accurately covers examples of servant leadership and missed opportunities during the interview while providing detail. Thesis and or main claim are clear and forecast the development of the paper. It is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose. Argument shows logical progression. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative. Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used. Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style. Reference page is present and fully inclusive of all cited sources. Documentation is appropriate and citation style is usually correct. Excellent (100.00%) Content is comprehensive and accurate in covering all areas of leadership style identification, preferred leadership styles, and how chosen style leadership has benefited leader as addressed by assignment criteria, along with thoughtful reflection. Interviewer offers detailed reasons about why he or she chose each leader interviewed, while demonstrating reflective thought. Interviewer compares and contrasts leadership styles of servant leaders in a detailed manner, while offering thoughtful

ORDER A PLAGIARISM FREE PAPER NOW

reflection. Content accurately covers examples of servant leadership and missed opportunities during the interview while providing detail along with thoughtful reflection. Thesis and or main claim are comprehensive. The essence of the paper is contained within the thesis. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear. Clear and convincing argument presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative. Comments Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English. All format elements are correct. In-text citations and a reference page are complete and correct. The documentation of cited sources is free of error. Points Earned
Purchase answer to see full attachment