due in 5 hours
attached
Final Project – Project 2 (20 points/20%) – due SATURDAY
Top of Form
|
Turnitin® |
|
|
|
|
|
Instructions |
|
|
Submit to Assignment Folder. Purpose: The purpose of this project is to reflect on, analyze, and apply tort, agency, and contract law, and their potential rights, risks, and liabilities in a business. The project requires you to identify and analyze legal issues and to make recommendations. You will also develop skills in critical thinking to create an in-depth comprehensive analysis. The project relates to the concepts covered in weeks 1-7. You should refer to assigned materials in earlier weeks of the course, including Instructor Notes. This project relates to the following course outcomes: · recommend appropriate actions in the business environment based on an understanding of sources of law, substantive legal concepts, legal process and procedures, and available remedies · analyze contractual rights, obligations, liabilities, and remedies in the business environment · analyze tort rights, obligations, liabilities, and remedies in the business environment Background: The owners of Viral Clean (Conner, Denise, Larisa, and Sam) are responsible for different component of the business. Each component has a legal implication. Please prepare a report that discusses the law for each component. For each component, the report must address the following: · Identify the component that is central to each of the four scenarios and explain the relevant area of the law. · As a general matter, explain why understanding the area of the law helps Clean. · Identify Clean’s rights and liabilities in the area of the law and make specific recommendations of how Clean can minimize its liabilities. Conner: Conner is responsible for purchasing PPE and cleaning supplies from EPI. Although Conner is a Clean owner, he also operates his own separate company. His company sells outerwear and athletic clothing online. While running his company, he had several instances where the manufacturer did not deliver the correct product to his company. He also had cases where the clothing did not meet the contract specifications. As a result, his company had shipping delays to the customers, and his company also shipped the wrong product to its customers. Conner wants to avoid this situation for Clean. However, if this should happen to Clean, Conner wants to understand Clean’s rights as a purchaser from EPI and its liabilities as a reseller to customers. Please address the law to help Conner understand Clean’s rights and liabilities. Denise: Denise is responsible for human resources, risk-avoidance, and insurance for Clean. Denise is preparing a workers’ handbook for Clean. The handbook’s relevant sections cover workers’ safety and job-related injuries to workers and Clean’s customers. Clean workers include employees and independent contractors. Please address the law to help Denise prepare the relevant sections of the workers’ handbook. Larisa: Larisa is responsible for executive talent acquisition. Clean will retain the executives using three-year employment agreements. Larisa wants to ensure that the employment agreements are valid and enforceable. Larisa does not know what is required to ensure that the employment agreements are valid and enforceable. Please address the law that will assist Larisa. Sam: Sam is responsible for government compliance and product development. Sam ensures that all PPE and cleaning solutions meet the Center for Disease Control’s guidelines. Sam also monitors the laws in the states where Clean’s PPE and cleaning solution are sold. He ensures that the states are not planning to ban any of the cleaning solution’s ingredients. Please address the law that will assist Sam when states plan to ban the cleaning solution’s ingredients. Instructions There will be 1 single report with subheadings for each Clean employee; Conner, Denise, Larisa, and Sam. Each subheading should include the following: · Identify the component that is central to each of the four scenarios and explain the relevant area of the law. · As a general matter, explain why understanding the area of the law helps Clean. · Identify Clean’s rights and liabilities in the area of the law and make specific recommendations of how Clean can minimize its liabilities. No narrative minimum is provided. Be sure to cover each component thoroughly, demonstrating your understanding and application of the law.
Format Report TO: Winnie James, Ralph Anders FROM: (your name) RE: Clean risks and liabilities
A brief introduction of the purpose of the report A. Conner (1) (2) (3) B. Denise (1) (2) (3) C. Larisa (1) (2) (3) D. Sam (1) (2) (3)
______________________ Tips for Formatting and Structuring Analysis: · Write in complete sentences in paragraph format. · Use in-text citations citing to relevant assignment materials. · Double-space; 12-point Arial or Times Roman font. · Introductory Sentence: Begin with an introductory sentence or very brief paragraph that states the purpose of this report. · Concluding Sentence: End the discussion with a concluding sentence or a very brief paragraph that summarizes your conclusion/what you discussed. · Support Arguments and Positions: Please refer to the module in Content, “How to Support Arguments and Positions.”. A References page may be added at the end of the report. Review the Project Memorandum Thoroughly read the project to ensure all required elements are present. Review the grading rubric to ensure that you gain the most points possible for this assignment. Proofread for spelling and grammatical issues. Submit the project in the Assignment Folder The assignment submitted to the Assignment Folder will be considered a student’s final product, and therefore, ready for grading by the professor. It is incumbent upon the student to verify the assignment is the correct submission. NOTE: All submitted work is to be your original work. You may not use any work from another student, the Internet or an online clearinghouse. You are expected to understand the UMGC Academic Integrity and Plagiarism Policy and know that it is your responsibility to learn about instructor and general academic expectations regarding proper citation of sources as specified in the APA Publication Manual, 7th Ed. (Students are held accountable for in-text citations and an associated reference list only) |
|
|
Due Date |
|
|
Mar 5, 2022 11:59 PM |
Rubric Name: BMGT 380 Rubric for Project 2 (20% each) – Summer 2021
Print Rubric
This table lists criteria and criteria group names in the first column. The first row lists level names and includes scores if the rubric uses a numeric scoring method. You can give feedback on each criterion by tabbing to the add feedback buttons in the table.Criteria
Equivalent to an A
Equivalent to a B
Equivalent to a C
Equivalent to a D
Equivalent to an F
Criterion Score
Critical Thinking/Reasoning
10 points
Outstanding analysis, synthesis, evaluation and application of relevant legal concepts, and application of law to facts.
Accurate, thorough, and soundly reasoned, well-supported conclusions.
9.0 – 1-.0
8.5 points
Superior analysis, synthesis, evaluation and application of relevant legal concepts, and application of law to facts.
Reasonably accurate, thorough, well-reasoned and well-supported conclusions.
Could be more in-depth, more comprehensive in analysis.
8.0 – 8.9
7.5 points
Satisfactory analysis, synthesis, evaluation and application of relevant legal concepts, and application to facts.
Partially correct conclusions that lack depth, development and/or detail, and complete, specific support for conclusions.
7.0 – 7.9
6.5 points
Unsatisfactory analysis, synthesis, evaluation and application of relevant legal concepts, and application to facts.
Conclusions are underdeveloped and/or lack complete, specific support.
6.0 – 6.9
0 points
Does not meet minimum requirements for projects.
Largely unsatisfactory analysis, synthesis, evaluation and application of relevant legal concepts to facts.
Little to no logical conclusions, little to no support for conclusions.
OR does not submit assignment.
0
Score of Critical Thinking/Reasoning,/ 10
Support for Conclusions
3.5 points
Exceptionally well-supported arguments and conclusions with evidence from assigned materials and readings; may include support for some conclusions based on relevant specific examples or experience.
Ideas and conclusions go beyond the basic course materials and recognize implications and extensions of the material and concepts.
3.15 – 3.5
2.97 points
Excellent generally well-supported arguments and conclusions mostly supported by evidence from assigned materials with perhaps some conclusions based on relevant specific examples or experience.
Ideas and conclusions general demonstrate understanding of the material and concepts.
2.8 – 3.14
2.58 points
Mostly well-supported arguments and conclusions based on evidence from assigned materials.
A mix of opinion and/or unclear conclusions lacking adequate support and/or unsupported arguments and conclusions.
2.45 – 2.7
2.27 points
Arguments and conclusions are frequently illogical and unsubstantiated.
Limited use of legal concepts and assigned materials to support conclusions.
2.1 – 2.44
0 points
Does not meet minimum requirements for project.
Arguments and conclusions lack meaningful explanation or support of ideas.
OR does not submit assignment.
0 – 2.0
Score of Support for Conclusions,/ 3.5
Project Presentation
3.5 points
Shows exceptional clarity, creativity, excellent quality, completeness, skill and professionalism in presentation.
Presentation demonstrates high level of critical thinking, understanding of concepts, issues, and their application to facts.
3.15 – 3.5
2.97 points
Generally, presentation shows superior clarity, creativity, superior quality, completeness, skill and professionalism in presentation.
Presentation demonstrates superior level of critical thinking, with general understanding of concepts, issues, and their application to facts.
2.8 – 3.14
2.58 points
Presentation shows average clarity, creativity, completeness, completeness, skill and professionalism in presentation.
Presentation demonstrates some critical thinking, some general understanding of concepts, issues, and their application to facts, but needs further depth, development.
2.45 – 2.7
2.27 points
Presentation is of poor quality, lacks clarity, and/or creativity, and/or completeness, and/or skill and/or professionalism.
Presentation demonstrates little to no critical thinking, and/or understanding of concepts, issues, and their application to facts.
2.1 – 2.44
0 points
Fails to meet minimal requirements for project.
OR does not submit assignment.
0 – 2.0
Score of Project Presentation,/ 3.5
Attention to Instructions
1 point
Demonstrates exceptional understanding of requirements responding completely to each aspect of assignment, including minor aspects of the assignment such as using third person writing, required use of assigned materials, and assignment format.
.90 – 1.0
0.89 points
Demonstrates superior understanding of requirements; missed one or more minor aspects of assignment.
.80 – .89
0.79 points
Demonstrates satisfactory understanding of requirements; missed more than one key element and/or more than two minor aspects of assignment.
.70 – .79
0.69 points
Fails to show a firm understanding of requirements; missed more than two key elements and/or numerous minor aspects of assignment.
.60 – .69
0 points
Fails to demonstrate understanding of assignment requirements; does not meet minimum requirements for project.
OR does not submit assignment.
0
Score of Attention to Instructions,/ 1
Writing Mechanics
1 point
Strictly adheres to standard usage rules of written English, including but not limited to capitalization, punctuation, run-on sentences, missing or extra words, stylistic errors, spelling and grammatical errors. No errors found. No contractions or jargon used.
.90 – 1.0
0.89 points
Generally adheres, at superior level, to standard usage rules of written English and writing mechanics, including capitalization, punctuation, and spelling. One or more errors and/or some contractions and/or jargon used.
.80 – .89
0.79 points
Generally satisfactorily adheres to standard usage rules of written English and writing mechanics, including capitalization, punctuation, and spelling. Four or more errors and contractions and/or jargon used.
.70 – .79
0.69 points
Minimally adheres to standard usage rules of written English, including capitalization, punctuation, and spelling. Six or more errors and numerous contractions and/or examples of jargon used.
.60 – .69
0 points
Does not adhere to standard usage rules of written English; largely incomprehensible; errors are too numerous to count.
OR does not submit assignment.
0
Score of Writing Mechanics,/ 1
Adherence to APA style (7th ed.)
1 point
No APA style or usage errors or omissions in intext citations.
Proper citation of source material used throughout project.
Reference list follows proper APA format.
.90 – 1.0
0.89 points
Attempts intext citations and Reference list with 1-2 APA intext citation errors and/or omissions of citations where warranted.
Reference list reflects minor format errors.
.80 – .89
0.79 points
Attempts intext citations with 3 or more citation errors and/or omissions of citations where warranted.
Reference list included but reflects 3 or more errors.
70 – .79
0.69 points
Attempts intext citations and Reference list with 4-5 or more citation errors and/or omissions of citations where warranted.
Reference list incomplete or complete but reflects 4-5 or more errors.
.60 – .69
0 points
No attempt at APA style; or attempts either intext citations or Reference list but omits the other.
Errors too numerous to count.
OR does not submit assignment.
0
Score of Adherence to APA style (7th ed.),/ 1
Rubric Total ScoreTotal
Score of BMGT 380 Rubric for Project 2 (20% each) – Summer 2021,/ 20Criterion score has been overridden
Overall Score
Overall Score
Equivalent to an A18 points minimum
SEquivalent to a B16 points minimum
Equivalent to a C14 points minimum
Equivalent to aD12 points minimum
Equivalent to an F0 points minimum
Rubric Name: BMGT 380 Rubric for Project 2 (100%=20 points) – Spring 2022
Print Rubric
This table lists criteria and criteria group names in the first column. The first row lists level names and includes scores if the rubric uses a numeric scoring method. You can give feedback on each criterion by tabbing to the add feedback buttons in the table.Criteria
Outstanding
Above Standards
Meets Standards
Approached Standards
Does Not Meet Standards
Criterion Score
Critical Thinking/Reasoning
50 points
Outstanding analysis, synthesis, evaluation and application of relevant legal concepts, and application of law to facts.
Accurate, thorough, and soundly reasoned, well-supported conclusions.
Range:45 – 50%
44 points
Superior analysis, synthesis, evaluation and application of relevant legal concepts, and application of law to facts.
Reasonably accurate, thorough, well-reasoned and well-supported conclusions.
Could be more in-depth, more comprehensive in analysis.
Range: 40 – 44%
39 points
Satisfactory analysis, synthesis, evaluation and application of relevant legal concepts, and application to facts.
Partially correct conclusions that lack depth, development and/or detail, and complete, specific support for conclusions.
Range:35 – 39%
34 points
Unsatisfactory analysis, synthesis, evaluation and application of relevant legal concepts, and application to facts.
Conclusions are underdeveloped and/or lack complete, specific support.
Range:30 – 34%
0 points
Does not meet minimum requirements for projects.
Largely unsatisfactory analysis, synthesis, evaluation and application of relevant legal concepts to facts.
Little to no logical conclusions, little to no support for conclusions.
OR does not submit assignment.
Range: 0 – 29%
Score of Critical Thinking/Reasoning,/ 50
Support for Conclusions
20 points
Exceptionally well-supported arguments and conclusions with evidence from assigned materials and readings; may include support for some conclusions based on relevant specific examples or experience.
Ideas and conclusions go beyond the basic course materials and recognize implications and extensions of the material and concepts.
Range: 18 – 20%
17.5 points
Excellent generally well-supported arguments and conclusions mostly supported by evidence from assigned materials with perhaps some conclusions based on relevant specific examples or experience.
Ideas and conclusions general demonstrate understanding of the material and concepts.
Range:16 – 17.5%
15.5 points
Mostly well-supported arguments and conclusions based on evidence from assigned materials.
A mix of opinion and/or unclear conclusions lacking adequate support and/or unsupported arguments and conclusions.
Range:14 – 15.5%
13.5 points
Arguments and conclusions are frequently illogical and unsubstantiated.
Limited use of legal concepts and assigned materials to support conclusions.
Range:12 – 13.5%
0 points
Does not meet minimum requirements for project.
Arguments and conclusions lack meaningful explanation or support of ideas.
OR does not submit assignment.
Range:0 -11.5%
Score of Support for Conclusions,/ 20
Project Presentation
15 points
Shows exceptional clarity, creativity, excellent quality, completeness, skill and professionalism in presentation.
Presentation demonstrates high level of critical thinking, understanding of concepts, issues, and their application to facts.
Range:13.5 – 15%
13 points
Generally, presentation shows superior clarity, creativity, superior quality, completeness, skill and professionalism in presentation.
Presentation demonstrates superior level of critical thinking, with general understanding of concepts, issues, and their application to facts.
Range:12.0 – 13.0%
11.5 points
Presentation shows average clarity, creativity, completeness, completeness, skill and professionalism in presentation.
Presentation demonstrates some critical thinking, some general understanding of concepts, issues, and their application to facts, but needs further depth, development.
Range:10.5 – 11.5%
10 points
Presentation is of poor quality, lacks clarity, and/or creativity, and/or completeness, and/or skill and/or professionalism.
Presentation demonstrates little to no critical thinking, and/or understanding of concepts, issues, and their application to facts.
Range:9.0 – 10.0%
0 points
Fails to meet minimal requirements for project.
OR does not submit assignment.
Range: 0 – 8.%
Score of Project Presentation,/ 15
Attention to Instructions
5 points
Demonstrates exceptional understanding of requirements responding completely to each aspect of assignment, including minor aspects of the assignment such as using third person writing, required use of assigned materials, and assignment format.
Range:4.5 – 5.0%
4.4 points
Demonstrates superior understanding of requirements; missed one or more minor aspects of assignment.
Range:4.0 – 4.4%
3.9 points
Demonstrates satisfactory understanding of requirements; missed more than one key element and/or more than two minor aspects of assignment.
Range:3.5 – 3.9%
3.4 points
Fails to show a firm understanding of requirements; missed more than two key elements and/or numerous minor aspects of assignment.
Range: 3.0 – 3.4%
0 points
Fails to demonstrate understanding of assignment requirements; does not meet minimum requirements for project.
OR does not submit assignment.
Range:0 – 2.9%
Score of Attention to Instructions,/ 5
Writing Mechanics
5 points
Strictly adheres to standard usage rules of written English, including but not limited to capitalization, punctuation, run-on sentences, missing or extra words, stylistic errors, spelling and grammatical errors. No errors found. No contractions or jargon used.
Range:4.5 – 5%
4.4 points
Generally adheres, at superior level, to standard usage rules of written English and writing mechanics, including capitalization, punctuation, and spelling. One or more errors and/or some contractions and/or jargon used.
Range:4.0-4.4%
3.9 points
Generally satisfactorily adheres to standard usage rules of written English and writing mechanics, including capitalization, punctuation, and spelling. Four or more errors and contractions and/or jargon used.
Range:3.5 – 3.9%
3.4 points
Minimally adheres to standard usage rules of written English, including capitalization, punctuation, and spelling. Six or more errors and numerous contractions and/or examples of jargon used.
Range:3.0 – 3.4%
0 points
Does not adhere to standard usage rules of written English; largely incomprehensible; errors are too numerous to count.
OR does not submit assignment.
Range:0 – 2.9%
Score of Writing Mechanics,/ 5
Adherence to APA style (7th ed.)
5 points
No APA style or usage errors or omissions in intext citations.
Proper citation of source material used throughout project.
Reference list follows proper APA format.
Range: 4.5 – 5%
4.4 points
Attempts intext citations and Reference list with 1-2 APA intext citation errors and/or omissions of citations where warranted.
Reference list reflects minor format errors.
Range:4.0 – 4.4%
3.9 points
Attempts intext citations with 3 or more citation errors and/or omissions of citations where warranted.
Reference list included but reflects 3 or more errors.
Range:3.5 – 3.9%
3.4 points
Attempts intext citations and Reference list with 4-5 or more citation errors and/or omissions of citations where warranted.
Reference list incomplete or complete but reflects 4-5 or more errors.
Range: 3.0 -3.4%
0 points
No attempt at APA style; or attempts either intext citations or Reference list but omits the other.
Errors too numerous to count.
OR does not submit assignment.
Range:0 – 2.9%
Score of Adherence to APA style (7th ed.),/ 5
