Globalization Has Changed the Functioning of Local Governments

Posted: January 20th, 2023

Assignment 1
Submission Date by students:11/10/2020
Place of Submission: Students Grade Centre via blackboard.
Weight: 05 Marks
CLO: Apply critical thinking to make and defend business decisions (LO 2.4)
We expect you to answer each question as per instructions in the assignment. You will find it useful to keep the following points in mind. The assignment with be evaluated in terms of your planning, organization and the way you present your assignment. All the three section will carry equal weightage
Kindly read the instruction carefully and prepare your assignment accordingly.
1) Planning: Read the assignments carefully, go through the Units on which they are based. Make some points regarding each question and then rearrange them in a logical order.
2) Organisation: Be a little selective and analytical before drawing up a rough outline of your answer. Give adequate attention to question’s introduction and conclusion.
Make sure that:
a) The answer is logical and coherent
b) It has clear connections between sentences and paragraphs
c) The presentation is correct in your own expression and style.
3) Presentation: Once you are satisfied with your answer, you can write down the final version for submission. If you so desire, you may underline the points you wish to emphasize. Make sure that the answer is within the stipulated word limit.
Write an essay on the following topic in about 1000-1200 words.
“Globalization has changed the functioning of local governments”.
In the light of this statement, discuss the challenges faced by local governments in the age of globalization. With the help of examples, explain how local governments can raise their funds, meet future challenges and be able to convert their challenges into opportunities.
(You are required to include at least six scholarly references in your answer).
Rubric for Research Paper

 
 
Outstanding – 20pts
Good  – 15pts
Fair – 10pts
Unacceptable – 5pts

 
Outline
 
Excellent section headings, indicative of a steady “flow” to the overall paper. Topics and subtopics clearly indicated.
Professional looking.
Good section headings, indicative to a steady “flow” to the overall paper. Topics clearly indicated, could use more subtopics.
 
Fair section headings, indicative that the paper has “flow”. Topics and subtopics not clearly indicated. Unclear organization of thoughts.
 
Disorganized appearance.
Relevant topics missing or incorrect, paper has no indicative “flow”.
Not professional.

Abstract
 
Highly informative, complete and easy to understand. Appropriate vocabulary is used.
Abstract makes you want to read the paper.
Informative, complete and understandable. Appropriate vocabulary is used.
Somewhat informative and understandable.
 
Not very informative or understandable.
 

Structure
 
Thesis is clear, easy to find, and appropriate to the assignment.
Thesis is supported by the rest of the paper.
Paper contains a “roadmap” for the reader.
There is a logical “flow” to the topics/arguments. Conclusion follows clearly from the arguments presented.
Thesis is clear and appropriate.   Thesis fairly well supported.
Paper is fairly well organized.
Conclusion follows from the rest of the paper.
Thesis is fairly clear.
Inconsistent support for thesis. Paper weakly organized. Conclusion is acceptable.
Thesis unclear and/or inappropriate.
Thesis not supported.
Paper is not organized. Conclusion doesn’t follow from the rest of the paper.

Research
 
The evidence comes from a wide variety of valid sources. The bibliography is complete and reflects appropriate sources.
 
The evidence comes from the minimum valid sources. The bibliography is complete.
Valid sources are inconsistently used.  The bibliography contains minor formatting errors.
 
Multiple sources cited  incorrectly.
Bibliography missing.
 

Critical
Thinki
 
ng
Arguments are pertinent to the topic.
Arguments are logical, supported with evidence. The key arguments have been made – no major points have been left out.
Arguments are
pertinent to the topic.   Arguments are fairly logical and reasonably supported.
Most key arguments have been made.
Arguments are not consistently pertinent, logical, or supported. Few key arguments have been made.
Arguments not pertinent. Arguments rarely, if at
all, logical and supported.
Almost no key arguments have been made.