Analyze and evaluate one’s own work practices for individual improvement and development.

Analyze and evaluate one’s own work practices for individual improvement and development.

This assignment allows you to demonstrate mastery in outcome # 5: Analyze and evaluate one’s own work practices for individual improvement and development.

Final Knowledge Gained and Further Development Activity

In this final paper, students will draw upon knowledge gained in both this capstone class, but also other classes they have taken in their degree program. Students will select two of the following concepts that represent key concepts related to the key knowledge areas in HR for the selected concepts, students will describe, the concepts selected, knowledge about it with scholarly support for the statements. Provide at least two scholarly sources for your information. Include a title page and a reference page for the paper. Use topic heading to identify the segments of the paper.

1. Title Page

2. Introduction and Purpose of Paper

3. Concept Selected

A. Academic definitions of the key terms

B. The value that is added to the organization through the concept

C. Examples of the concept in practice

D. Risks of not utilizing the concept

E. Your personal evaluation of your own competencies in the concept area

F. How you will continue to develop your competencies in the area and how you will apply the concept in your own organization

4. Concluding Comments on Knowledge of the HR function

5. Reference Page

Choose from the following: pick 2

1. HR Competencies for the 21st Century

2. The Strategic Role of Human Resources

3. HR Metrics that Matter

4. The HR So That Statement

5. Differentiation of Rewards and Segmentation of Current or Potential Employees

6. Employment Brand

7. Employee Engagement

Due Date March 10th Sunday @ 8 PM. Eastern time

PLEASE Proof-Read paper ……

Rubric Name: Assignment 4: Knowledge Gained and Personal Assessment (16%)

This table lists criteria and criteria group name in the first column. The first row lists level names and includes scores if the rubric uses a numeric scoring method.Criteria

Level 5 Exceeds Expectations

4 points

Level 4 Meets Expectations

3.6 points

Level 3 Meets Some Expectations

3.2 points

Level 2 Does Not Meet Expectations

2.5 points

Level 1 Did Not Submit or Did Not Meet Minimum Expectations

0 points

Criterion 1 Academic definitions of the key terms; The value that is added to the organization through the concept

Definitions are complete, relevant, current and supported with outstanding academic citation (s). The value to the organization was explained well and was convincing in both an academic and professional manner. The topic two topics selected exceeded the expectations.

Definitions are complete, relevant, current and supported with academic citation (s). The value to the organization was explained and was convincing in both an academic and professional manner. Each of the two topic areas met the expectations for the assignment.

For the two concept areas, some but not all meet the expectations. Definitions were not complete, relevant, current and/or supported with academic citation (s). The value to the organization was explained in some but not all and was not all were convincing in both an academic and professional manner.

Combined, the twp concept areas did not meet the expectations. Definitions were not complete, relevant, current and/or supported with academic citation (s). The value to the organization was explained in some but not all and was not all were convincing in both an academic and professional manner. Overall, the segment did not meet the expectations for the capstone class.

Did Not Submit or Did Not Meet Minimum Expectations

/ 4

Criterion 2 Examples of the concept in practice; Risks of not utilizing the concept

Examples were excellent, relevant and insightful. Risks were identified in an also insightful manner and were justified robustly. Scholarly support was given for the assertions made. The segment exceeded that of most submissions.

Examples were good, relevant and insightful. Risks were identified in an also insightful manner and were justified adequately. Scholarly support was given for the assertions made in a manner that met the expectations for an upper level course. .

The examples and risks identified met some of the expectations of being appropriate, relevant and insightful. Risks were identified but could have been justified more robustly. Scholarly support was given for the assertions made but not in a fully convincing manner.

The examples and risks identified did not met the expectations of being appropriate, relevant and insightful. Risks were wither not identified or but could have been justified more robustly. Scholarly support was either not given for the assertions made or were not in a fully convincing manner. This segment did not meet the expectations of a upper level course.

Did Not Submit or Did Not Meet Minimum Expectations

/ 4

Criterion 3 Your personal evaluation of your own competencies in the concept; How you will continue to develop your competencies in the concept and how you will apply the concept in your own organization

For the area selected, the personal evaluation is credible and candid with convincing information shared. The evaluation is very well written and explained. Explanation is thorough, convincing and relevant to the organization. It exceeds the expectations for the personal evaluation and relevance to the organization.

For the two areas selected, the personal evaluation is credible and candid with convincing information shared. It was written in a good manner. The explanation is thorough, convincing and relevant to the organization. The segment meets the general expectations for a capstone level course.

For most of the concpets selected, the personal evaluation is credible and candid with convincing information. Explanation for most is thorough, convincing and relevant to the organization. Some but not all the expectations for the entire two were met.

The personal evaluation is not credible and/or candid with convincing information shared for the two concept areas. Explanations for each is not as thorough, convincing and/or relevant to the organization as was expected.

Did Not Submit or Did Not Meet Minimum Expectations

/ 4

Criterion 4 Academic Writing Style Including Introduction, Purpose Statement, Citations and References

Writes in an error free manner, includes all the required elements, writing is clear, logical, flows well and is convincing. Citations and references are provided in accurate APA format

Generally writes in an error free manner, includes all the required elements, writing is mostly clear, logical, flows well and is convincing. Citations and references are provided and are in accurate APA format.

In a portion but not all the final paper, the writing style was in an error free manner, includes all the required elements, writing is mostly clear, logical, flows well and is convincing. Citations and references are not all provided and/or are not all in accurate APA format for some but not all the sources.

Generally does not write in an error free manner, does not include all the required elements, does not writing is a mostly clear, logical manner and is not always convincing. Citations and references are not provided and/or are not in accurate APA format.

Did Not Submit or Did Not Meet Minimum Expectations

You may also like...