|
Evaluating Reflection Papers MS360:
Church Leadership, Administration, & Finance Spring 2004 Scott Cormode & Becky Bane Categories of Evaluation 1. Understanding: We will be looking for how well you
understood the article(s) about which you write. When you use an author’s idea, we will look
to see if you can explain it succinctly and to see if you understand the
connotations that the idea implies.
For example, if you write about Bolman &
Deal’s “structural frame,” we want to see if you understand what “structural”
means (particularly over against their other frames) and we will want to see
if you have figured out what a “frame” is.
You will not have to give a formal definition. But we will want
to be convinced that you have a clear sense of what the idea means. 2. Integration: We will be looking to see if you can
integrate the idea into real-world work situations. These situations can be real or
hypothetical. They can take place in
nonprofit, for-profit, or personal life settings. But we will want
you to say something about how the idea applies to some organizational
context. So,
to continue the example, you might say that, “I work with a boss who sees the
world entirely within the structural frame.
Whenever some job is not getting done, he
thinks about changing the job description or finding someone else to fill the
role. He never discusses re-training
nor tries to re-interpret the situation for the worker.” 3. Personal Application: This
category comes from Chris Argyris, who you will
read the first week. It is not enough
simply to apply the concepts to other people or organizations. We want to know what you plan
to do differently because of what you learned from this reading. So, you might say, “Because my boss is so
structural and I prefer the HR frame, I will have to practice explaining what
matters to me in terms of ‘roles and responsibilities’ rather than in
interpersonal terms. For example…” (Then we would look for you to be specific
about how you would apply the learning to a particular situation.) 4. Writing Style: There are very mechanical ways to
write. And
there are elegant ones. This category
exists in order to provide a forum for rewarding elegant writers. We are not looking to dock people for
piddling grammar mistakes. We are more
interested in rewarding clarity and discouraging muddled thinking. (Please note, however, that this category will NOT be used to judge students from other countries.) Rubric: We will assign a numerical value to each of these
categories. A three or a four will be
the usual number assigned. NOTE: these
numbers do NOT correspond to letter grades.
We are instead looking for a way to signal to you where you are excelling
and where you can improve. At the end
of the semester, we will add up the total number of points for each
student. Then we will plot them to see
the distribution. Experience suggests
that these point totals tend to appear in clumps. we will then
assign letter grades according to the distribution. 5: Excellent 4: Good job 3: Okay 2: Problematic 1: Incorrect 0: Absent |