Discussion 3: Review of a Scholarly Article: Getting strategic about strategic planning research
Each paragraph must have at least 5 to 6 academic sentences with at least two current scholarly sources. Review the rubric below.
Getting strategic about strategic planning research article.pdf
After reading this current scholarly article (listed above) regarding strategic planning research, give your synopsis of this entire article. You will write at least two full academic paragraphs consisting of at least 5 to 6 academic level sentences. There will be no use of abbreviations, acronyms, bullets, contractions, or direct quotes; only academic level narratives. Do not use any other sources, as you will only be analyzing the provided article. Do note that there is no right or wrong, rather just your understanding of the scholarly article.
Next, in a final paragraph, consider the contemporary themes in the study of public-sector strategic planning that the article identifies beginning on page 327. If you were to do research related to one of these themes, which one would it be and why? What might be some possible research topics related to that theme?
You will be graded on the following Rubric information:
|
Responses to Initial Discussions Responses to discussion questions are expected to be comprehensive, well organized, and well written. They must demonstrate familiarity with the material covered (i.e., assigned readings, scholarly sources), ability to explicate ideas discussed (e.g., clear presentation of key terms and ideas), and interpretation and application of the material in relevant contexts (i.e., how the ideas relate to concrete situations in today’s environments). Your initial submission must be in depth with a required minimum of 350 words. Points will be deducted if the word count is not met. |
||
|
Exemplary (full credit) |
Acceptable (half credit) |
Unacceptable (no credit) |
|
The response is well organized and well written, and most of the elements above are evident. |
The response includes some of the elements above and is well written and/or well organized. Points deleted for being late. |
The response is not well organized, not well written, and missing three or more of the elements noted above. No points for no submission. |
|
Responses to Other Students’ Posts You are expected to respond to TWO of your classmates’ posts for each discussion submission. In responding to your classmates’ posts, you are expected to seriously engage the ideas of the student whose work you are addressing. You should demonstrate your knowledge of the ideas or practices you are addressing, and your responses should be on target, directly related to what is under discussion, rather than moving off into barely related tangential matters. Just responding with kudos or posing questions is not sufficient. At least 75 word responses are mandatory per peer response. Points will be deducted if the word count is not met. This will include subtracting words and phrases giving praise/kudos. |
||
|
Exemplary (full credit) |
Acceptable (half credit) |
Unacceptable (no credit) |
|
Responses cover most of the elements above and attempt to encourage others to explore their ideas on the matters under discussion. |
Responses include some of the elements noted above, but they do not demonstrate a serious attempt to encourage others to explore ideas in greater depth. Points deleted for being late. |
You respond only once or not at all, and/or responses merely offer a brief statement of agreement or disagreement, with little evidence of engagement with the material. No points for no submission. |