BUSI1802: Advanced Business Communication
Spring, 2024
Assignment: Individual Reflection
Due Date: May 8 by 23:59 to class Moodle in the Assignment section.
Points: 25 points
Instruction:
Please spend some time reflecting on your communication skills. Write a retrospection discussing your strengths and weaknesses as a communicator, draw connection to the communication topics we have covered in class to enrich your analysis and use examples (your communication/negotiation/presentation/writing style in class, in group, at work, etc.) to illustrate your points.
Your reflection also needs include a discussion on how you would do differently now in the example that you have cited (if the example is your own experience), and/or what you will improve specifically in the future.
Format:
This is an individual assignment. Please make your negotiation retrospection an essay format.
The page limit is 1-2 single-spaced A4 size pages with a font size of Times New Roman 12” and page margin of 1”.
Grading Criteria:
Grading is based on the following criteria:
1) The depth and thoroughness of your analysis of your negotiation behaviors;
2) Incorporation of concepts/strategies discussed in class in your analysis;
3) Correct understanding of negotiation concepts/theories as demonstrated in your analysis;
4) Clarity and conciseness of writing;
5) Logical argument and coherence in organization of ideas.
Individual Reflection Grading Rubrics
|
Grade Level |
Rubrics |
|
A+ A A- |
Content: Demonstrates evidence of superb analytical and critical abilities as well as a thorough grasp of the topic from analysis, practice and reflection; very clear positions and relevant analysis of negotiation experience.
Organization and Language: All arguments are logical and coherent; writing is always very clear, concise and easy to follow; appropriate use of phrases and grammatical structures to show reflection; follows the correct font and line spacing requirements.
|
|
B+ B B- |
Content: Demonstrates evidence of critical and analytical thinking but not necessarily thorough in the understanding of the topic; mostly clear positions and relevant analysis of negotiation experience. Organization and Language: Arguments are mostly logical and coherent; writing is mostly clear, concise and easy to follow; mostly appropriate use of phrases and grammatical structures to show reflection; follows the correct font and line spacing requirements.
|
|
C+ C C- |
Content: Demonstrates evidence of a reasonable grasp of the topic but little evidence of critical thinking; mostly unclear positions; lack of relevant analysis of negotiation experience. Organization and Language: Arguments lacks some logical linkage and the reflection is not very coherent; consistent errors in drafting; writing is mostly unclear or hard to follow; lacks of appropriate use of phrases and grammatical structures to show reflection; fails to follow the correct font and line spacing requirements. |
|
D+ D |
Content: Demonstrates evidence of being able to assemble the bare minimum of information; Position is unclear; Little evidence of critical thinking; poor or lacks of relevant analysis of negotiation experience.
Organization and Language: Arguments are illogical or incoherent in general; writing is unclear or hard to follow; inappropriate use of phrases and grammatical structures to show reflection; fails to follow the correct font and line spacing requirements.
|
|
F |
Content: Demonstrates evidence of poor knowledge and understanding of the subject, and reflection is largely irrelevant. Work fails to reach degree level. Organization and Language: Significant rafting errors; writing is confusing; incorrect use of phrases and grammatical structures to show reflection; fails to follow the correct font and line spacing requirements. |