Interview a person in a formal position of leadership within your organization (e.g., a supervisor, a manager, a director). Begin your interview with the following questions:
What is your role as a health care team member?
How do you define professionalism and how does professional responsibility influence your work?
Do you consider yourself a steward of health care? Why or Why not?
Is it important to you that leaders exercise professional advocacy and authenticity as well as power and influence when working with colleagues? Why or why not?
In 500-750 words, summarize your interview and share your impressions of the leader’s responses.
Compare and contrast responses provided by your peer (in Professional Identity and Stewardship – Part I: Peer Interview assignment) with those provided by the leader. Share your impressions of their differences and similarities.
Prepare this assignment according to the APA guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.
This assignment uses a grading rubric. Instructors will be using the rubric to grade the assignment; therefore, students should review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the assignment criteria and expectations for successful completion of the assignment.
You are required to submit this assignment to Turnitin.
GRADING RUBRIC BELOW –
Less Than Satisfactory 72-75%
70.0 %Detailed Summary of Leader Interview
Summary of leader interview is not provided or is incomplete.
Summary of leader review is unclear or inconsistent with professionalism and the role of stewardship.
Summary of leader interview is clear but one of the four components of the interview is lacking.
Summary of leader interview is provided with detailed explanation of each component of professionalism, stewardship, advocacy and authenticity.
Comprehensive summary of leader interview is provided with detailed explanations of each component of professional identity and a thoughtful discussion of the interviewer’s perceptions of the interview experience.
10.0 %Compares and contrasts the peer responses, from Professional Identify and Stewardship-Part 1, with those provided by the leader. Shares impression of differences and similarities.
No comparison and contrast of peer responses with those provided by the leader are provided.
Comparison and contrast of peer responses with those provided by the leader and student’s impression of those differences and similarities are not adequately addressed.
Comparison and contrast of peer responses with those provided by the leader and student’s impression of those differences and similarities meet the basic expectations of the assignment as indicated by the assignment instructions.
Comparison and contrast of peer responses with those provided by the leader and student’s impression of those differences and similarities demonstrate a clear understanding of roles, professionalism, stewardship, and advocacy as it applies to leadership.
Comparison and contrast of peer responses with those provided by the leader and student’s impression of those differences and similarities demonstrate a clear understanding of roles, professionalism, stewardship, and advocacy as it applies to leadership, while demonstrating higher level thinking as indicated by evidence of reflective thought.
15.0 %Organization and Effectiveness
5.0 %Thesis Development and Purpose
Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.
Thesis and/or main claim are insufficiently developed and/or vague; purpose is not clear.
Thesis and/or main claim are apparent and appropriate to purpose.
Thesis and/or main claim are clear and forecast the development of the paper. It is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.
Thesis and/or main claim are comprehensive; contained within the thesis is the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.
5.0 %Paragraph Development and Transitions
Paragraphs and transitions consistently lack unity and coherence. No apparent connections between paragraphs are established. Transitions are inappropriate to purpose and scope. Organization is disjointed.
Some paragraphs and transitions may lack logical progression of ideas, unity, coherence, and/or cohesiveness. Some degree of organization is evident.
Paragraphs are generally competent, but ideas may show some inconsistency in organization and/or in their relationships to each other.
A logical progression of ideas between paragraphs is apparent. Paragraphs exhibit a unity, coherence, and cohesiveness. Topic sentences and concluding remarks are appropriate to purpose.
There is a sophisticated construction of paragraphs and transitions. Ideas progress and relate to each other. Paragraph and transition construction guide the reader. Paragraph structure is seamless.
5.0 %Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are used.
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, and/or word choice are present.
Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used.
Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used.
Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
5.0 %Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)
Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.
Template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent.
Template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.
Template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style.
All format elements are correct.