Systematically and critically compare two major theoretical positions on personality related to their explanation of human motivation

Systematically and critically compare two major theoretical positions on personality related to their explanation of human motivation

2000 words

Grading Criteria
% Quality Description of Criteria for Reference
Lexicon
90-100
SUPREME
Supreme performance demonstrates: Optimal critical capacity; highly original thought and expression; profound and sophisticated mastery of subject matter or activity; incisive analysis; the ability to connect, synthesise and evaluate an extremely broad range of material, texts and ideas in an innovative manner; adds significantly to the understanding of the subject.
80-89
EXCEPTIONAL
Exceptional performance demonstrates: outstanding critical capacity; significant originality of thought and expression; comprehensive and sophisticated command of subject matter or activity; incisive analysis; the capacity to connect, synthesise and evaluate a wide range of material, texts and ideas in a penetrating and significantly insightful manner; provides significant new perspective on the subject matter.
70-79
EXCELLENT
Excellent performance demonstrates: highly developed critical capacity; originality of thought and expression; comprehensive command of subject matter or activity; strong analytical skills; the capacity to connect, synthesise and evaluate a wide range of material, texts and ideas in a lucid and cogent manner; provides original perspective on subject matter.
60-69
VERY GOOD
A very good performance demonstrates: developed critical capacity; some originality of thought and expression; good command of subject matter or activity; strong analytical skills; the capacity to organise and evaluate a wide range of material, texts and ideas in a convincing and fluent manner showing capability of extended learning at higher levels.
50-59
GOOD
A good performance demonstrates: some critical awareness; logical thought and expression; competent grasp of subject matter or activity; apparent undeveloped analytical skills; organisation and evaluation of material, texts and ideas insufficiently supported by reference and characterised by omissions and minor errors.
40-49 ACCEPTABLE An acceptable performance demonstrates: little critical awareness; hesitant and uncertain thought and expression; basic grasp of subject matter or activity but compromised by limited and unclear focus; purely descriptive; poor organisation and evaluation of material, texts and ideas; characterised by important omissions, some major errors and presence of some irrelevant material. Some evidence of the subject matter often poorly expressed with only minor evidence of scholarly study or references
35-39
INSUFFICIENT
An insufficient performance demonstrates: hesitant and uncertain thought and poorly organised expression; insufficient grasp of question or activity; some knowledge of subject matter but compromised by inaccuracies, omissions and major errors;. lack of organisation and random presentation; preponderance of irrelevant material.
25-34 POOR
A poor performance demonstrates: Unclear thought and inappropriate and disorderly expression; little grasp of question or task; misunderstanding of subject matter or activity; no organisation; high preponderance of major irrelevancies.
15-24 UNACCEPTABLE An unacceptable performance demonstrates: Unstructured arguments with no support or premise often with evidence of cursory knowledge of the subject matter and obvious irrelevancies
10-14 IRRELEVANT
Use of repetition and/or material not relevant to the rubric
0-9 IRRELEVANT
Rewriting of question, unintelligible writing, inappropriate commentary, not addressing question in any way