Order ID:89JHGSJE83839 | Style:APA/MLA/Harvard/Chicago | Pages:5-10 |
Instructions:
Edmonton Walter Dale Bridge Case Study Discussion
CASE STUDY: for unit 2 – Chapter 3 Pg 57 Edmonton’s Walter dale Bridge by Heather Stewart and Paul R. Messenger
For each Assignment part you will be required to analyze one or more of the case studies assigned in the reading. Case studies give students a sense of reality that few classroom exercises can equal. The format for the analysis of the case studies will vary somewhat from case to case depending upon the circumstances and content of the individual case itself. You will have to decide how to best approach your analysis of the cases and questions presented. Length of your case study analysis will naturally vary depending on complexity and variables of the case.
Generally, most cases can be covered in three pages, typed double spaced in Times New Roman, using a 12 font. Below is an outline that I would like you to follow when you do your case study. This format makes it easy for you to do your analysis and makes it easier for me to correct. There are five (5) topics outlined below for you to follow. Each study will begin with a Problem and end with a solution. The best way is to analysis each topic as it relates to your case using it as a title, then give your explanation for that title. Place in the appropriate area.
The Problem
Central issue/facts: a few sentences/paragraphs characterizing the central theme of the case study. Avoid restatements. Use your own words to systematically apprise the reader about the problem(s). Why is the case significant?
The History
Major factors contributing to the problem: A basic chronology of facts in the case can be helpful. What is the basic sequence of events? How did the situation occur? What events, actions, policies, attitudes led up to the circumstances on which the case is based?
Alternatives
Alternatives for solving the problem: What other actions/decisions might have been possible that would have changed the outcome? Where any of these alternatives considered but not acted on?
Specific Concepts
Tie the case into specific theoretical concepts under review: What central problems and dilemmas for the field does it emphasize? What answers, if any, does it provide to the precise theoretical questions being addressed?
Solution
Conclusion/lessons for future administrators: What was the outcome of the case? What could be learned from the events and actions of the case itself that may apply to future, but different circumstances? Is the case only providing lessons applicable to that specific instance, or are their larger lessons that can be adopted in a broader context? If so, which ones?
Edmonton Walter Dale Bridge Case Study Discussion
RUBRIC |
||||||
Excellent Quality 95-100%
|
Introduction
45-41 points The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned. |
Literature Support 91-84 points The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned. |
Methodology 58-53 points Content is well-organized with headings for each slide and bulleted lists to group related material as needed. Use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. to enhance readability and presentation content is excellent. Length requirements of 10 slides/pages or less is met. |
|||
Average Score 50-85% |
40-38 points More depth/detail for the background and significance is needed, or the research detail is not clear. No search history information is provided. |
83-76 points Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is little integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are included. Summary of information presented is included. Conclusion may not contain a biblical integration. |
52-49 points Content is somewhat organized, but no structure is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. is occasionally detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met. |
|||
Poor Quality 0-45% |
37-1 points The background and/or significance are missing. No search history information is provided. |
75-1 points Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is no integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are not included in the summary of information presented. Conclusion does not contain a biblical integration. |
48-1 points There is no clear or logical organizational structure. No logical sequence is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects etc. is often detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met |
|||
You Can Also Place the Order at www.collegepaper.us/orders/ordernow or www.crucialessay.com/orders/ordernow |
Edmonton Walter Dale Bridge Case Study Discussion