Briefing Guide Sheet: Select a major aircraft accident and its associated accident investigation. Careful topic selection is essential as you will be using this case for all three of the briefings. The following is the scoring rubrics that will be used to score your briefings. The rubrics have a maximum of 25 points possible. Your score will be multiplied by a 2 by me to give you a final score out of 50 points. I will be grading on the following: -Content: You are to examine the accident from multiple sources. Provide a summary of the accident. Who, what, when, where, why, and how should all be questions you answer. Next, tie the textbook principles of accident investigation to your case. How was the accident cause determined? Which principles were used or not used? Was there an innovative technique used to solve a complex problem? This portion of your paper will be the one continuously growing and this section is worth 10 points. This entire paper should be approximately 5-7 pages in length by the time the third briefing is finished (1 = Title, 3-5 = Intro, summary, body, and conclusion, 1 = reference page). Please remember that this paper will be growing with each draft. You also have the opportunity to fix sections where you were marked down on previous drafts. -Quality: One large part of college and industry is the ability to present oneself and express their ideas through writing. This course is no different. You will be graded on grammar, spelling, formatting, and your writing quality. This section is worth 5 points. -Citations: You need to provide at least 5 sources (including the textbook) in your reference list. These should be reputable sources (NTSB, FAA, etc.). Each source is worth one point and it must be correctly cited as prescribed by the APA 6th edition format. Here is a link to help you with proper citations. Purdue OWL. -Peer Posts: Last, you must comment on 5 peer posts. These comments don’t need to be huge, but they need to have substantial and useful comments or questions. This is also the spot to offer suggestions to improve the draft. Grade Explanations 10 or 5. Excellent. Content: Student met all requirements. Provided an excellent background on the accident and effectively tied course concepts into the entire manuscript. Quality: Manuscript was easy to read, had no typos and proper formatting, and was very polished. References: Student cited sources correctly and utilized a minimum of 5 references. Peer Posts: Student constructively commented on 5 peer documents. 8 or 4. Very Good. Content: Student met most requirements. Provided a solid background on the accident and effectively tied most course concepts into the entire manuscript. Quality: Manuscript was easy to read, had few typos and proper formatting, and needs minor polishing. References: Student cited sources correctly and utilized a minimum of 4 references. Peer Posts: Student constructively commented on 4 peer documents. 6 or 3. Good. Content: Student met some of the requirements. Provided a background that lacked thoroughness in some areas. Student tied some of the course concepts into the majority of the manuscript. Quality: Manuscript could be easier to read, contained typos and some improper formatting, and needs polishing. References: Student cited sources correctly and utilized a minimum of 3 references. Peer Posts: Student constructively commented on 3 peer documents. 4 or 2. Poor. Content: Student met few of the requirements and provided little background. Student tied very few of the course concepts into the manuscript. Quality: Manuscript was difficult to read, contained multiple types and some improper formatting, and needs major revisions. References: Student cited sources correctly and utilized a minimum of 2 references. Peer Posts: Student constructively commented on 2 peer documents. 2 or 1. Very Poor. Content: Student met almost none of the requirements and provided little to no background. Student tied almost none of the course concepts into the manuscript. Quality: Manuscript was almost impossible to read, contained multiple types and improper formatting, and needs to be redone. References: Student cited sources correctly and utilized a minimum of 1 reference. Peer Posts: Student constructively commented on 1 peer document.