Journal Assignment paper – Week 7

Posted: January 20th, 2023

GLST 200-LUO
 
Journal Assignment – Week 7
Submitted to Blackboard by 11:59pm ET on Monday (last day of Module/Week 7 (75 points)
 
This journal entry requires you to synthesize information from our readings and video lectures in order to articulate a biblical basis for global engagement and to analyze general aspects of culture and society as it relates to global engagement. In your entry this week you must address following:
 

Based on what you have learned thus far, identify and explain the characteristics of a cross-culturalworker.
Discuss the role of the cross-cultural worker in empowering local believers and supporting local churches or church planting movements. Focus your answer on Western missionaries working in contexts outside of the UnitedStates.

 
Your entry should follow the rubric and meet the following requirements:
 

Journal entry should total at least 450 words but no more than 750 (note that the questions/prompt themselves do not count towards your wordcount).
The assignment should be completed in Times New Roman, 12-point font, and double spaced.
DO NOT PLAGIARIZE! You should submit your entry as a reflection of what you have learned, NOT a word for word copy of our readings or any othersource.
Support your thoughts/statements with course materials as needed. Use Turabian style footnotes.
Submit your assignment via Blackboard by 11:59pm ET on Monday of week 7 (the last day of themodule/week).

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.