Skip to main content

HMD 307: Hospitality Leadership, Management & Ethics: Getting Started

Resources to support the assignments for the course.

Welcome!

HMD 307 Group Writing Assignment - Spring 2020

Group Writing Assignment (150 points)

Groups: Ethical argument papers completed in groups.

Purpose: Ethical Arguments are designed to promote dialog among students by offering opportunities to discuss ethical challenges in the context of real-life situations. This assignment is designed to stimulate students' critical thinking, provide models of how to think professionally, and enable students to use theoretical concepts to illuminate a position.

Skills: Critical thinking and writing are skills essential to effective communication, problem solving, and analysis of leadership, management, and ethics. Your work will be evaluated for critical thinking skills that will enable you, if you apply them, to create tighter, better reasoned, and more compelling analysis and arguments. This rubric represents a brief overview of the main points to bear in mind as you prepare your analysis

Task

  1. Develop an argument that SUPPORTS or OPPOSES a position
  2. Research academic journals to find theory-based evidence (avoid non-academic material) to support your position 
  3. Using your research, develop your argument using logic-based structure for each main point
  4. Ensure that your main points support your conclusion. Provide appropriate examples that support your main points.
  5. Defend your conclusion by indicating potential objections and your rebuttal to those objections.

Written Papers – Papers are to be no more than 2000 word (not including references). APA 6th edition formatting style is required. Font – Times New Roman 12-point, 1-inch margins – top bottom left and right, double-spaced and pages numbered. At least 5 academic research sources must be cited to support your theory, position, and conclusion.  Your references should be sourced from the UNLV database of academic journals. Please do not use magazines, newspapers, internet, or TV, sources because these sources are subject to false and misleading assertions. Your paper should be outlined in 5 sections:

  1. Abstract
  2. Theoretical Foundations
  3. Position
  4. Conclusion

The first page will be a title page formatted based on APA 6th edition standards to include the title, GROUP NUMBER, course section, and date. No group member names are to be listed on the title page. All members of the group will be awarded the same grade for the paper unless the leader suggests otherwise.

Ethical Argument Rubric

 

Insufficiently Developed 60%

Adequately Developed 80%

Substantially Developed 100%

Theory 25%

Identifies and appropriately uses ethical theory to support position on the ethical question.

Does not identify or apply a clear ethical theory.

 

Does not accurately link the theory to the ethical question.

Identifies an ethical theory and applies it to the basic ethical question.

 

Identifies only the basics of the theory.

Identifies and correctly applies clear and appropriate theory that addresses subsidiary, embedded, or implicit aspects of the ethical question.

 

Identifies not only the basics theory, but digs deeper to display in-depth knowledge of theory.

Position 15%

Identifies and argues the GROUP’S position as it relates to the question.

Fails to clarify the established or presented position relative to the group perspective and position.

Identifies and presents a position on the question and uses limited information.

Identifies and argues the group position passionately, drawing support from academic research.

Main Points 15%

Uses logic-based structure for each main point

Less than three ideas/main points are explained and/or they are poorly developed. Logic is incoherent. Examples are inappropriate.

Three or more main points relate to the conclusion. Logic is coherent, yet under-developed. Examples are adequate.

Well-developed main points/topic sentences that relate directly to the conclusion. Supporting examples are concrete and detailed. Main points are developed with clear logic, drawing support from academic research.

Conclusion 20%

Identifies and assesses the key assumptions.

The conclusion merely repeats information provided in the paper. Objections are not appropriate. The rebuttal is missing or poorly developed. 

 

The conclusion is clear and is somewhat supported by main points. 

Objections are offered, but not well-reasoned.

The rebuttal adequate, but not strong.

The conclusion is strongly stated and well supported by main points.

Potential objections are well-reasoned and clearly articulated. A strong rebuttal to objections is detailed. 

 

APA Format 10%

Between 6 and 10 instances of style errors

5 or fewer instances of style errors

Model document of APA 6th edition: Correct punctuation, citation, tables, figures, format of each reference, capitalization, use of italics, abbreviations, headings, quotations, numbers/stats, etc.

 

 

Sample Articles - These articles are examples of the kind of academic support you will need to find. Group CANNOT cite these articles in group papers.

Lateka Grays Hospitality Librarian

Lateka Grays, Hospitality Librarian's picture
Lateka Grays, Hospitality Librarian
Contact:
UNLV Libraries
Lied Library
4505 S. Maryland Parkway
Box 457014
Las Vegas, NV 89154-7014
lateka.grays@unlv.edu
Hours: Mon-Fri
702.895.2137
Website Skype Contact: latekag
© University of Nevada Las Vegas
**