Undergraduate Thesis Assessment Rubric
Department of English,Faculty of Education, University of West Bohemia
ThesisAuthor: Martin Veselý
Title: CQ EXPLORATIONINTHE US WITH FOCUSIN BUSINESS
Length: 47pp
Text Length: 45pp
Assessment Criteria Sca/e Comments
1. Introduction iswellwritten, brief, Very good interesting, andcompelling. It
motivates the work and provides a clear statement of the examined issue.
It presents and overview of the thesis.
2. Thethesis shows the author's Acceptable appropriate knowledge ofthe subject
matter through the background/review ofliterature. The author presents information from avariety of quality electronic andprint sources. Sources arerelevant, balanced and include critical readings relating tothethesis or problem. Primary sourcesare included (if appropriate).
3. Theauthor carefully analyzed the Acceptable information collected anddrew
appropriate andinventive conclusions supported by evidence. Ideas arerichly supported with accurate details that develop the main point. The author's voice isevident.
4. Thethesis displays critical thinking and Verygood avoids simplistic description or
summary of information.
5. Conclusion effectively restatesthe Acceptable argument. It summarizes the main
findings andfollows logically from the analysis presented.
6. Thetext isorganized in a logical Very good ln general the level of the English is
manner. It flows naturally and is easy quite high.
tofollow. Transitions, summaries and conclusions exist as appropriate. The author uses standard spelling, grammar, and punctuation.
7. The language useisprecise. The Very good student makesproficient use of
language inaway that isappropriate
.
•
for the discipline and/or genre inwhich the student is writing.
8. Thethesis meetsthe general Very deficient TheCzechsummary is missing. The
requirements (formatting, chapters, Works Cited listfollows no consistent
length, division into sections, etc.). stylesheet. The references are not
References are cited properly within provided properly inthe text (for
thetext and acomplete reference list instance, p. 11has a quote from
isprovided. "Livermore 2008", but there is no
reference that matches inthe
bibliography, neither is apagenumber give; another example, on p.10a hyperlink isgiven in-text as a reference).
FinalComments &Questions
This isan interesting undergraduate work that takesthe idea ofCulturallntelligence andapplies it to a dataset that the author knows intimately, i.e.,hisown experience. The work begins by describing this idea, mainly through a summary of DavidLivermore's writing. Often this isdone without muchcritical distance, for example nocriticisms ofthe theory are referred to, and on occasion chapter sections aremade up mostly of quotation and restatement ofaspectsof CQ. Also, when the author cameto analyze hisdataafter the theoretical section, a lot of the distinctions in CQ theory fell bythe wayside infavour of more general remarks onthe difference between cultures inthe given situation.
Thatthe author draws on his own experience creates some of the strengths andweaknesses ofthe work. Firstthe former. Theauthor vividly describes situations and encounters during histime working in a linecook in a restaurant in NewJersey.This workplace becomes a crucible inwhich to examine cultural interactions between Czechs,US citizens (ofunspecified ethnicity andbackground, likePhil),andMexicans.
However, this leadsto aweakness: to what degree is the author's experience indicative of broader patterns?
Thedata is not backed up by sociological studies, for instance. Moreover, no mention is made ofthe Mexicans' legalstatus: it could bethat their behavior inthe restaurant haslessto do with anyputative traits oftheir
'culture than with their position in the US.If aMexican were working inarestaurant in Guatemala, the
behavior might be verydifferent. Restricting himself to his own experience, the author makesit difficult to analysethis kind of issue.Itis difficult to generalize interculturally from sucha small data set.
Afurther issue isthat the researchgoal does not seemappropriate for aBAthesis. Hereisthe author's statement: "The ma in purpose of thisthesis isto provide the readers with aguidethat includes information applicable when working inthe United StatesofAmerica andgive general advicehow to adapt one's behaviour according to the country they are visiting and become more successful andefficient in intercultural interactions" (from the abstract). Iwould argue that academicworks atthis levelarenot supposed to provide handbooks ofthis kind. Handbooks canbeand are written onthe basis of academic research, but that issomething different.
If itseemsthat Iambeingtoo critical here, itisonly becauseIam holding the author to the high standard ofengagement and critical thinking that hedisplayed in the preceding inADGS.Itwasapleasureto havehis contributions to discussions, andI hold him inhigh regard.
A final point: asnoted above, theauthor has not attended carefully tothe formal aspectsof the thesis. Ipropose that thethesis not be accepted until these arecorrected. Then Iwould behappy to award it the grade of2 (velmi dobře).
Reviewer: doc.Justin Quinn Ph.D.
