DPU Dumping Toxic Waste Case Study

This article is adapted from Catholic Ethics in Today?s World, revised edition, by Jozef D. Zalot
and Benedict Guevin, OSB [Winona, MN: Anselm Academic, 2011]. Copyright ? 2008,
2011 by Jozef D. Zalot and Benedict Guevin. Used with permission of Anselm Academic.
These principles, as well as a comprehensive explanation of the Church?s social teachings, can
be found in the Pontifical Commission for Justice and Peace, Compendium of the Social
Doctrine of the Church (Vatican City: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 2004).
Principles of Catholic Social Teaching for Business Ethics
Human Dignity
Catholicism teaches that human beings are created in the image and likeness of God and have
infinite worth. Each individual maintains an inherent dignity by virtue of the fact that he or she is
a person. Perhaps the most important implication of this principle for business ethics is that the
primary goal of any business enterprise should be the well?being of the human person, not the
pursuit of profit. This undoubtedly sounds strange in our culture, particularly to corporate
shareholders, but it is the foundation for any Catholic business ethic. Profit is necessary for a
business?s continued operation, and there is nothing intrinsically wrong with earning a profit.
However, profit is a means to an end, not an end in itself. From the perspective of CST [Catholic
Social Teaching], the moral justification for business involves the contribution it makes to
human flourishing, how it corresponds its activity with God?s plan for creation, and how it
?unfolds? God?s kingdom on earth.1 The ultimate goal of business is meeting human needs, not
the accumulation of profit. Business exists to serve people, not the other way around.2
Pope Leo XIII spoke to the importance of recognizing human dignity in business in his
encyclical On the Condition of Labor (1891). According to the pope, ?Each requires the other;
capital (understood as owners) cannot do without labor nor labor without capital.? Here the pope
recognizes a fundamental truth: in order for any business entity to succeed there needs to be
mutual cooperation between ownership and labor. Workers have an obligation to honor
agreements with owners, and owners have an obligation to respect their workers and recognize
the inherent dignity of their labor. The pope continued with a stern warning to the business
owner:
His great and principle obligation is to give to everyone that which is just . . . [and he] should
remember this?that to exercise pressure for the sake of gain upon the indigent and destitute, and
to make one?s profit out of the need of another, is condemned by all laws, human and divine.3
Leo XIII?s call for mutual respect between ownership and labor was made during the height of
the Industrial Revolution, but it is vitally important for Catholic ethics today. Corporations have
a duty to treat their employees with respect and, as the U.S. bishops claimed, every economic
decision and institution ?must be judged in light of whether it protects or undermines the dignity
of the human person.?4 Fortunately, some corporations are seeking to do just that. The restaurant
chain Chick?fil?A is probably best known for being closed on Sundays, but the company also
fosters a culture that highly benefits its employees. Employees receive fair pay, are eligible for
college scholarships, and no one has ever been laid off. As proof of the respect that it maintains
toward its employees, Chick?fil?A?s turnover rate averages forty percent, compared to the
industry average of three hundred percent.
Another example is ServiceMaster, a publicly traded, $3.5 billion corporation whose brands
include Terminex, TrueGreen?Chemlawn, and Merry?Maids. CEO Bill Pollard unabashedly
explains that the corporation?s overall objective is ?to honor God in all we do,? and one of the
primary ways it does this is through its commitment to its employees. In many businesses front?
line service workers are ignored or even demeaned, but ServiceMaster ?seeks to recognize the
image of God in every employee,? resulting in the ?recognition of the employee as an individual
worthy of dignity and respect.?5 Catholic ethics? call for corporations to uphold human dignity
does not end with employees; it extends to relationships with customers, shareholders, suppliers,
subcontractors, and any other stakeholder. Each must be treated with dignity and respect.
One visible way that American corporations can promote human dignity is by fostering just
working conditions. CST maintains that human work has an inherent dignity for three primary
reasons. First, work is the principal means by which we satisfy our material needs. The food we
eat, the clothes we wear, and the homes we live in are provided by the wages we earn from our
work. Second, work is a means to participate with God in the continual re?creation of the world.
Catholicism teaches that God endows each person with particular talents, which he or she must
use to improve the condition of human life. Third, CST maintains the dignity of work because
individuals ?become who they are,? in part, through their work activity. As a society, we tend to
emphasize the objective nature of work: how much we produce, how much we sell, how many
hours we bill. However, our work also affects who we are as persons. This is the subjective
aspect of work, the aspect that Pope Saint John Paul II highlighted in his encyclical On Human
Work (1981):
[The human] is a person, that is to say, a subjective being capable of acting in a planned and
rational way, capable of deciding about himself, and with a tendency to self?realization. As a
person, man is therefore the subject of work. As a person he works . . . [and] these actions must
all serve to realize his humanity.6
The pope continued by claiming that as work intimately involves the individual?s self?worth,
self?expression, and self?fulfillment, the value of human work ultimately rests with the person
who performs it. Human work maintains an inherent dignity and must never be viewed as a
commodity that can be bought and sold.
This understanding of work?s inherent dignity has a number of important implications for
American corporations. First, it means that corporations have a moral obligation to pay
employees a just or living wage, one that is sufficient to meet the basic needs of the employee?s
family and to allow for future investment. Our nation?s current federal minimum wage is hardly
sufficient to allow an individual, much less a family, to live a dignified life. Determining a just
wage involves many factors including the nature of the job, the firm?s capabilities, the local cost
of living, the fairness of wage negotiations, and the going rate of pay within the industry itself.7
Corporations must be aware of what a living wage is in their local area and pay salaries
commensurate with it. Corporations also need to reevaluate their levels of executive
compensation. No one begrudges an executive for earning a salary greater than that of a line
production worker, but the discrepancies we see today raise serious questions of justice. The
AFL?CIO reports that in 1980 corporate CEOs earned 42 times the salary of an average worker.
By 1990 this ratio increased to 107 times, and by 2008 it had jumped to 319 times.8 In terms of
real numbers, the average 2008 compensation for a Standard and Poor?s 500 CEO was $10.9
million, while the median U.S. household income was $52,029.9 The issue of executive pay has
taken on greater public scrutiny in recent years as taxpayers demand to know why banks and
investment firms that received billions of dollars in TARP (Troubled Asset Relief Program)
funds had paid?and continue to pay?tens of millions of dollars in salary and bonuses to the
executives who led their firms into crisis. For example, JP Morgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon
earned $28.8 million in 2007, yet less than a year later his company accepted $25 billion in
taxpayer bailouts. Goldman Sachs received $10 billion in TARP funds during 2008, yet a year
earlier its CEO, Lloyd Blankfein, was compensated a whopping $53.9 million. In an effort to
appease the public, some Wall Street firms are now offering bonuses in the form of corporate
stock, not cash. Dimon was awarded a bonus of $16 million in restricted stock and options for
2009, and Blankfein received $9 million that same year, also in restricted stock. The advantage
of this to their firms is that the restricted stock cannot be traded, nor the options exercised, for a
set period of time. Thus, executives have a greater incentive to pursue the long?term good of
their firms, not simply short?term profit. Nevertheless, critics point out that Dimon, Blankfein,
and numerous others received these bonuses less than eighteen months after their respective
companies were bailed out by the American taxpayer.
Wages and wage?related issues are critical concerns, but they do not exhaust a corporation?s
ethical obligations concerning the dignity of labor. CST maintains that corporations should offer
employees health care and disability benefits as well as a retirement or pension program. To
increase the employees? stake in the company?s success, corporations should, when possible,
establish stock purchase or profit?sharing programs. Corporations could also show greater
respect for families by offering greater cafeteria benefits plans and by allowing for flexible
hours, parental leave, and work from? home programs. In addition, CST demands that
corporations establish fair hiring and promotion policies that do not discriminate on the basis of
gender, race, age, ethnicity, sexual orientation, or religious belief. They must establish clear
policies of employee governance and procedures for employee grievance. They must also refuse
to do business with companies that knowingly violate human rights, such as those that employ
child or slave labor, or that fail to address dangerous working conditions.
In light of economic globalization, CST obligates corporations to examine the practice of
outsourcing. Many companies today contract their manufacturing and product supply operations,
as well as their customer call centers, to developing nations in Latin America and Asia. There
may be nothing inherently wrong with shifting production or support facilities overseas, but
ethical questions do surround the reasons for doing so. Do companies relocate to foreign nations
or contract with foreign producers because they honestly seek to offer the people of these nations
a better standard of living, or are they doing it simply to take advantage of lower labor costs and
thus increase their own profits? Does the perceived benefit of competitive pricing justify the low
wages and disregard for worker rights that all too often occur in producer nations? And what
about those left behind in the corporation?s home country, those whose jobs were outsourced?10
One final way that CST seeks to uphold the dignity of labor is through its support of labor
unions. Since even before Pope Leo XIII?s On the Condition of Labor (1891), the Catholic
Church has upheld the right of every worker to join a union if he or she chooses, as well as the
duty of management to recognize and respect this right. Leo XIII, again writing within the
context of the Industrial Revolution, praised the founding of labor associations that sought to
protect the rights of workers and promote their well?being. According to the pope, workers
maintain a ?natural right? to join these associations, and they cannot be prevented by anyone
from becoming members of them.11 As pope, Saint John Paul II addressed this ?right to
association? in On Human Work (1981) when he claimed that labor unions constitute an
?indispensable element of the social life? of today?s industrialized world. Unions act as a
?mouthpiece for social justice? because they uphold workers? rights vis???vis those who own
and control the means of production. In this sense, active union membership actually
demonstrates a ?prudent concern for the common good.?12 The U.S. Catholic bishops echoed
both Leo XIII and Saint John Paul II by reiterating in Economic Justice for All (1986) that the
Church ?fully supports? the right of workers to join a union, and it vigorously opposes any effort
at union busting or otherwise denying workers their right to association. The bishops also
claimed that workers may legitimately resort to calling a strike when this is the only means of
justice available to them.13
Although the Catholic Church historically has supported the rights of workers, as well as the
labor movement as a whole, this support is not without limits. CST maintains that union
members have important moral duties as well. Workers must use their collective power for the
common good of society as a whole (including workers in developing nations), and not simply
for their own individual good or the good of the union itself. When union members exercise their
right to strike, they must do so only for ?extreme? reasons, must never resort to violence, and
must never abuse or subsume this right under some ?external? political motivation. Finally,
union managers have a responsibility to exercise proper stewardship of union recourses and to
uphold the good name of the entire union movement.14
Community
The next two principles are closely interrelated. The principle of community teaches that we
humans are one family and that we need one another. Physically, we are interdependent as far as
meeting our basic material needs, and socially we develop and fulfill ourselves only in
relationship with one another. Thus, the principle underscores the fact that we are not the isolated
individualists that our culture tells us we are. The principle of community has a theological basis
as well. Jesus taught his followers to love God with their whole heart, mind, soul, and strength,
and to love their neighbors as themselves (see Mark 12:30?31). God offers the perfect model of
this teaching through the Trinity. Christians profess belief in God as Father, Son, and Holy
Spirit; the ?community? that exists within God models how Christians are called to live in
communion with one another.15
Common Good
The principle of community leads directly to the principle of the common good. This principle
teaches that because all people live, work, and fulfill themselves in community with one another,
they must look not only to fulfill their individual good but to build a society that benefits all
people. The Second Vatican Council defines the common good as ?the sum of those conditions
of social life which allow social groups and their individual members relatively thorough and
ready access to their fulfillment.?16 Stated differently, the common good is a social order where
all individuals have the opportunity to meet their basic needs, interact with others, and ultimately
fulfill themselves as human persons. More recently, Pope Benedict XVI echoed this teaching
when he stated the following:
[The common good] is the good of ?all of us,? made up of individuals, families and intermediate
groups who together constitute society. It is a good that is sought not for its own sake, but for the
people who belong to the social community and who can only really and effectively pursue their
good within it.17
It is important to note that the common good is not, as some have charged, another term for
socialism. The principle simply means that society has the moral obligation to provide the
conditions through which its members can develop themselves to their fullest potential. By
developing themselves to their fullest potential, individuals contribute to the overall good of
society. Consequently, CST maintains that the common good is not opposed to the individual
good. The two are, in fact, complementary.
Participation
Building directly off the principles of community and the common good are the principles of
participation and subsidiarity. The principle of participation states that at all levels of society
people have the right to participate in the decision?making process concerning issues that affect
them directly. An excellent example of this is the Revolutionary War slogan, ?No taxation
without representation,? which points to the injustice of forcing people to obey laws they had no
voice in enacting. Participation is vitally important because it is the community?s primary means
of self?determination. By participating in political and other processes, the community decides
for itself who will govern, how it will provide necessary services, and how its resources will be
allocated. Self?determination is most often exercised through voting.
Subsidiarity
The principle of subsidiarity states that as much as possible, public policy decisions should be
made on the local level. The basis of this principle is that the people who have the best
knowledge of what needs to be done in a particular location are those who actually live there. For
example, in order to address the issue of rising crime rates in Cincinnati, the policy makers
should be people who actually reside in Cincinnati. National or international bodies should not
interfere with a local situation if the local community can handle it on its own. Higher authorities
can step in if the local community cannot adequately address the situation, but these higher
authorities cannot change or nullify the decisions of a local community without a compelling
reason.18
Preferential Option for the Poor
The sixth principle of CST is preferential option for the poor. The rationale for this principle is
that as Jesus championed the cause of the poor (both materially and spiritually), so also his
followers are called to do the same. The Second Vatican Council made this point clear in the
opening line of its Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World (Gaudium et Spes,
1965):The joys and hopes, the grief and anguish of the people of our time, especially those who
are poor or afflicted, are the joys and hopes, the grief and anguish of the followers of Christ as
well.19 This insight developed into a fuller recognition of the Church?s vocation to stand with the
poor, as well as its duty to evaluate economic, political, and social activity from the perspective
of society?s most vulnerable. The U.S. bishops underscored this insight twenty years later in
Economic Justice for All by claiming that the poor ?have the single most urgent economic claim
on a nation.? They further argued that economic policy decisions must be judged on what they
do ?for the poor, to the poor, and what they enable the poor to do for themselves.? For the
bishops, the ?fundamental moral criterion? of any economic policy is that it be done ?at the
service of all people, especially the poor.?20
Stewardship
The seventh CST principle is stewardship. As we saw with the early Church fathers, the Catholic
Church has traditionally upheld the right of individuals to own property. Reasons for this include
that private property serves as a means to meet basic needs (food, clothing, shelter, etc.) and that
people are more diligent with their own property than with property commonly held. However,
the Church also teaches that one must view property as a means to self?fulfillment, not as an end
in itself. That is, one must not allow the pursuit of material wealth to become the primary driving
force of one?s life. Money is important, but only to the extent that it provides the means to live a
genuinely fulfilling life. People are not to orient their lives toward ?gaining more.? This
understanding of private property gives rise to the principle of stewardship. Many people equate
stewardship with caretaking, but it means much more than that. Caretaking means watching over
something for another during the other?s absence. Stewardship is much more involved because it
means accepting full responsibility for that which is in your care. If a situation arises where an
important decision has to be made, the steward has full responsibility to act and, in turn, will be
held accountable for the decision that he or she makes. This understanding of stewardship has
profound implications for how one lives.
As Christianity views the earth and everything in it as gifts from God, it maintains that one has a
moral obligation to use these gifts responsibly. One way to do this is by donating property for the
benefit of others during times of great need. We saw an excellent example of this in the hours
following the 9?11 attacks as store owners in lower Manhattan gave away food and drink to those
who needed them. Seeing others in need, all Christians are called to do the same. Stewardship
also has important environmental implications. Genesis, chapter1, asserts that God has given
humanity dominion over the earth. God has made people stewards of the created order and has
given them the privilege of using the world?s resources to improve human life. However, along
with this privilege comes responsibility. The Church teaches that people are called to recognize
the created order as a good in itself and then act accordingly. This means that they must use
resources prudently by cutting waste and over?consumption and that they must not harm the
environment unnecessarily through pollution or other means.
Solidarity
Finally, the principles of human dignity, community, common good, participation, subsidiarity,
option for the poor, and stewardship all culminate in the principle of solidarity. What exactly is
solidarity? In the aftermath of a natural disaster, we see on television images of people who are
suffering, and our immediate response is one of compassion. As implied by its etymology,
compassion entails a response of ?feeling with? the other and a spontaneous desire to let the
other know that he or she is not alone. Now certainly solidarity involves compassion, but it is
much more than that. Solidarity involves the conscious decision to form community with the one
for whom we have compassion, the one who is suffering. Solidarity takes place when we
recognize another?s need and then commit ourselves to action with the intent of either making
some positive change in the suffering person?s life, or assuring that this person?s situation will
improve in the long run. Solidarity also involves a sense of mutuality, a two?way relationship
with both sides giving and receiving. Those who offer assistance begin to realize that their giving
actually fosters their own growth. Those who receive assistance discover that their plight can
serve to open people?s eyes to the suffering of so many others around the world.21 The crucial
point to keep in mind is that solidarity means being in relationship with others. It does not mean
feeling sorry for the other or acting charitably out of a sense of pity. Solidarity entails the
recognition that we are one human family. It means that we are responsible for the well?being of
others and we cannot turn our backs on one another or become isolationists in the face of global
difficulties. The late Pope Saint John Paul II expressed these exact points in his own definition of
solidarity:
[Solidarity] then is not a feeling of vague compassion or shallow distress at the misfortunes of so
many people, both near and far. On the contrary, it is a firm and persevering determination to
commit oneself to the common good; that is to say to the good of all and of each individual,
because we are all really responsible for all.22
Endnotes
James Wishloff, ?Catholic Social Thought and Max Stackhouse et al. (Grand Rapids, MI:
Eerdmans, 1995), 912.
1.
See also Benedict XVI, Charity in Truth, number 21.
2.
USCCB, Economic Justice for All, number 13.
Leo XIII, On the Condition of Labor, in O?Brien and Shannon, eds., Catholic Social Thought,
numbers 15?17.
3.
4.
USCCB, Economic Justice for All, number 13.
5.
Lake Lambert III, Spirituality, Inc: Religion in the American Workplace (New York: New
York University Press, 2009), 58?59, 64.
Saint John Paul II, On Human Work, in O?Brien and Shannon, eds., Catholic Social Thought,
number 6. See also Economic Justice for All, numbers 72 and 97.
6.
7.
Manuel Velasquez, Business Ethics: Concepts and Cases, 5th ed. (Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Prentice Hall, 2002), 457?58. See also Economic Justice for All, number 73 and numbers 194?
95.
8.
See the AFL?CIO Web site at www.aflcio.org/corporatewatch/paywatch/. We should note that
this ratio is actually less than it was in 2000, due in large measure to the recession that began in
2007.
9.
Median household income information is taken from the U.S. Census Bureau at
quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/0000.html.
10.
Pope Benedict XVI warned that although there may be rational reasons for it, outsourcing has
prompted a new form of competition among developing nations, one that threatens worker rights
and undermines the viability of traditional social security systems. See Benedict XVI, Charity in
Truth, number 25.
Leo XIII, On the Condition of Labor, in O?Brien and Shannon, eds., Catholic Social Thought,
numbers 48, 51.
11.
Saint John Paul II, On Human Work, in O?Brien and Shannon, eds., Catholic Social Thought,
number 20.
12.
13.
USCCB, Economic Justice for All, number 104.
14.
USCCB, Economic Justice for All, number 106. See also Benedict XVI, Charity in Truth,
number 64.
15.
See Benedict XVI, Charity in Truth (Vatican City: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 2009), numbers
53?54.
16.
Vatican II, Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World, in Catholic Social
Thought: The Documentary Heritage, ed. David O?Brien and Thomas Shannon (Maryknoll, NY:
Orbis, 1995), number 26.1.
17.
Benedict XVI, Charity in Truth, number 7.
18.
Pope Benedict XVI discusses the importance of subsidiarity with the global economic order in
Charity in Truth, number 57.
19.
Vatican II, Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World, number 1.
20.
USCCB, Economic Justice for All: Tenth Anniversary Edition (Washington, DC: USCCB,
1997), numbers 24, 86, 88.
Marie Giblin, ?What Catholics Should Know about Solidarity,? Catholic Update (June 2007):
1?4.
21.
22.
Saint John Paul II, On Social Concern, in Catholic Social Thought, number 38.
Case Study Rubric
Critical
Thinking and
Ethical
Analysis
Application
of Evidence,
Assigned
Readings,
and Course
Objectives
Mechanics ?
Grammar,
Editing, and
Citations
Exceeds Expectations
Accurately defines and
applies ethical frameworks
to a situation and considers
the full implications of the
theories
Meets Most Expectations
Effectively defines and
applies ethical frameworks
to a situation and considers
some implications of the
theories
Below Most Expectations
Ineffectively defines and
applies ethical frameworks
to a situation and considers
a few implications of the
theories
Analyzes all complex,
multilayered (gray) issues
and cross?relationships
from a variety of religious
and philosophical views
Analyzes some complex,
multilayered (gray) issues
and cross?relationships
from several religious and
philosophical views
Analyzes basic, obvious
issues with few to no cross?
relationships from one or
two religious and
philosophical views
Demonstrates detailed
understanding of the
material
Evaluation and responses
are insightful and thought?
provoking
Demonstrates basic
understanding of the
material
Evaluation and responses
are adequate and practical
Demonstrates little to no
understanding of the
material
Evaluation and responses
are uninspiring or non?
existent
Clearly synthesizes
applicable evidence with
many examples to justify
and support a position
Makes clear, specific
connections between the
readings and the topic
Often synthesizes
applicable evidence with
some examples to justify
and support a position
Makes some detailed
connections between the
readings and the topic
Restates instead of
synthesizes evidence with
few examples to justify and
support a position
Makes mostly general
connections between the
readings and the topic
Effectively integrates
course objectives with the
topic
Attempts to integrate
course objectives with the
topic
Often fails to integrate
course objectives with the
topic
Original, thoughtful, and
perceptive hypothesis,
sound argument, well
defended conclusion
More summary than
analysis of the hypothesis,
reasonable argument,
adequately defended
conclusion
Little or no analysis of the
hypothesis, weak argument,
inadequately defended
conclusion
Good use of language,
word choice, and structure,
flow provides clarity
Uneven use of language,
word choice, and structure,
flow adds minor confusion
Poor use of language, word
choice, and structure, flow
impedes understanding
All direct quotations and
references to others? ideas
are cited, all citations are
completely and properly
formatted
All direct quotations and
references to others? ideas
are cited, some citations
are incomplete or
incorrectly formatted
Missing citations or
plagiarism NOTE: Entire
assignment receives a 0
grade despite other
strengths
Meets due dates and
length requirements
Fails to meet due dates or
length requirements
Did not submit assignment
= 0 grade
(Konigsburg) ? 1
Case Study Rubric
Critical
Thinking and
Ethical
Analysis
Application
of Evidence,
Assigned
Readings,
and Course
Objectives
Mechanics ?
Grammar,
Editing, and
Citations
Exceeds Expectations
Accurately defines and
applies ethical frameworks
to a situation and considers
the full implications of the
theories
Meets Most Expectations
Effectively defines and
applies ethical frameworks
to a situation and considers
some implications of the
theories
Below Most Expectations
Ineffectively defines and
applies ethical frameworks
to a situation and considers
a few implications of the
theories
Analyzes all complex,
multilayered (gray) issues
and cross?relationships
from a variety of religious
and philosophical views
Analyzes some complex,
multilayered (gray) issues
and cross?relationships
from several religious and
philosophical views
Analyzes basic, obvious
issues with few to no cross?
relationships from one or
two religious and
philosophical views
Demonstrates detailed
understanding of the
material
Evaluation and responses
are insightful and thought?
provoking
Demonstrates basic
understanding of the
material
Evaluation and responses
are adequate and practical
Demonstrates little to no
understanding of the
material
Evaluation and responses
are uninspiring or non?
existent
Clearly synthesizes
applicable evidence with
many examples to justify
and support a position
Makes clear, specific
connections between the
readings and the topic
Often synthesizes
applicable evidence with
some examples to justify
and support a position
Makes some detailed
connections between the
readings and the topic
Restates instead of
synthesizes evidence with
few examples to justify and
support a position
Makes mostly general
connections between the
readings and the topic
Effectively integrates
course objectives with the
topic
Attempts to integrate
course objectives with the
topic
Often fails to integrate
course objectives with the
topic
Original, thoughtful, and
perceptive hypothesis,
sound argument, well
defended conclusion
More summary than
analysis of the hypothesis,
reasonable argument,
adequately defended
conclusion
Little or no analysis of the
hypothesis, weak argument,
inadequately defended
conclusion
Good use of language,
word choice, and structure,
flow provides clarity
Uneven use of language,
word choice, and structure,
flow adds minor confusion
Poor use of language, word
choice, and structure, flow
impedes understanding
All direct quotations and
references to others? ideas
are cited, all citations are
completely and properly
formatted
All direct quotations and
references to others? ideas
are cited, some citations
are incomplete or
incorrectly formatted
Missing citations or
plagiarism NOTE: Entire
assignment receives a 0
grade despite other
strengths
Meets due dates and
length requirements
Fails to meet due dates or
length requirements
Did not submit assignment
= 0 grade
(Konigsburg) ? 1

Purchase answer to see full
attachment