Real Case Assessment

  • Due Oct 16, 2022 by 11:59pm
  • Points 25
  • Submitting a website url or a file upload

Instructions

Overview

In this assignment, you will research a real-world situation that illustrates the impact of environmental health hazards. You will conduct extensive research and apply course principles to your assessment of the case as part of your report. Do not use examples provided in the textbook.

Part 1

As part of the assessment, you will prepare an executive summary of the scenario in accordance with the following instructions, with the intent to present to the executive team. The report should be:

  • 2-3 pages in length, excluding the cover page and reference page.
  • 12 point font, double spaced.
  • Bullets, lists, charts, and graphics may be used where appropriate.
  • Provide a summary of the situation.
  • List the environmental health hazards in the incident.
  • State the specific impacts to health, environment, financial, and/or other factors.
  • Outline the hazard communication plan and process specific to this incident.
  • Describe the steps you would take as part of system management.
  • Explain how the Plan, Do, Check, Act (PDCA) can be used to improve the system to minimize future incidents. 

Part 2

The next part of the assessment is presenting to the executive team (your classmates) as follows:

The final aspect of the assessment is reviewing other assessments and providing constructive feedback as follows:

  • Review all other students’ presentations. Provide constructive feedback for at least two scenarios presented by other students by the end of next module.
  • Post the reviews using Flip.

The rubrics for grading are available in the Assignment Instructions Links to an external site.. 

Submission

Part 1

Click on Submit Assignment button above to upload documents or share links to your work. Please submit your work by the deadline shown above. On mobile devices, navigate to the Submissions tab.

Part 2

Use Flip to submit your presentation video and to provide feedback to your classmates.

1665982799 10/16/2022 11:59pm

Rubric

CMGT 4305 Real Case Assessment
CMGT 4305 Real Case Assessment
Criteria Ratings Pts
Accuracy
threshold: pts
Edit criterion description
5 to >4.5 pts Exemplary All facts included are correct and complete; facts complement the argument or reinforce the thesis and are appropriate to the reader’s level of understanding. No spelling or grammar errors.
4.5 to >4.0 pts Proficient All facts are correct, mostly complement or reinforce the argument, and are appropriate to the reader’s level of understanding. ErErrors may occur but are few and do not markedly distract the reader.
4 to >3.5 pts Developing All major facts are correct but may be missing crucial contextual information or be tangential to the argument or thesis. Generally appropriate for the audience. Errors may occur but are few; while they occasionally distract the reader, they do not detract from comprehension.
3.5 to >0 pts Below Expectations At least one, and sometimes more, major facts are incorrect; facts are taken out of context so they are distorted; facts are irrelevant to the argument or inappropriate to the audience.Errors occur frequently and negatively affect the reader’s comprehension. The writer has not proofread.
pts
5 pts
--
Additional Comments
Development
threshold: pts
Edit criterion description
5 to >4.5 pts Exemplary The points or claims are fully explained and supported. The writer provides helpful examples or details. When necessary, the writer anticipates or refutes counterarguments. Provides supporting materials where appropriate.
4.5 to >4.0 pts Proficient All important points or claims are adequately explained and supported with some extra detail.
4 to >3.5 pts Developing Most points or claims are adequately explained and supported but with minimal detail. Some minor points may be left unexplained or unsupported.
3.5 to >0 pts Below Expectations Many of the points are unexplained or unsupported, or inadequately explained or supported.
pts
5 pts
--
Additional Comments
Audience
threshold: pts
Edit criterion description
5 to >4.5 pts Exemplary The writer employs appropriate word choice, style, and content based on audience and genre. It is clear who the intended reader would be.
4.5 to >4.0 pts Proficient There is some attempt to address the specified audience, but the writer sometimes lapses into an alternate style (for example too academic for a newsletter).
4 to >3.5 pts Developing The writer tends to forget the audience and simply writes about the topic. Overall the language is general or the writer simply writes for the teacher.
3.5 to >0 pts Below Expectations The writer ignores the needs of the audience and the conventions of the genre.
pts
5 pts
--
Additional Comments
Organization
threshold: pts
Edit criterion description
5 to >4.5 pts Exemplary The whole document has a clear and obvious organization which makes it easy to read and understand; Paragraphs have a clear topic or function and are of an appropriate length. All parts of the document support the main point. Information presented in a clear, compelling manner.
4.5 to >4.0 pts Proficient Most of the document has a clear and obvious organization which makes it easy to read and understand; the document can be skimmed easily. Most paragraphs have a clear topic or function and are of an appropriate length. Information presented appropriately.
4 to >3.5 pts Developing The principle of organization may not always be clear, or there may be some straying from the thesis or main point. There may be some paragraphs which are very long or very short for no obvious reason. Information presented in an unclear manner.
3.5 to >0 pts Below Expectations There is no organization; most paragraphs are very long or very short for no obvious reason. Information is not clear or confusing.
pts
5 pts
--
Additional Comments
Research
threshold: pts
Edit criterion description
5 to >4.5 pts Exemplary Research indicated a clear and complete understanding of the case, with complex or unique character.
4.5 to >4.0 pts Proficient Research was good and demonstrated an interesting case with applicable environmental principles.
4 to >3.5 pts Developing Some environmental health principles were evident, more research would have improved the assessment.
3.5 to >0 pts Below Expectations Research and the case were inconsistent, not relevant, or could have provided a better example.
pts
5 pts
--
Additional Comments
Total Points: 25 out of 25