| Course Code | Class Code |
| HLT-665 | HLT-665-O500 | Public Health Communication and Social Media | 120.0 |
| Criteria | Percentage | Unsatisfactory (0.00%) | Less than Satisfactory (65.00%) | Satisfactory (75.00%) | Good (85.00%) | Excellent (100.00%) | Comments | Points Earned |
| Content | 70.0% |
| Overview of Using Social Media for Public Health Communication | 20.0% | Overview of the benefits/advantages and challenges/risks of using social media for public health communication is either not present or not evident to the reader. | Overview is insufficiently developed and/or vague. A brief description of benefits and challenges is present but is not clear or is missing key elements. | Overview is present and sufficient. Adequately describes the benefits and challenges of using social media for public health communication. | A clear overview and description of benefits and challenges of using social media for public health communication is present, forecasting development of paper. | Overview is clear and comprehensive. An expert analysis of the benefits/advantages and challenges/risks of using social media for public health communication is provided. |
| Information Shared by Organization on Social Media | 15.0% | Description of the organization followed and the type of information shared on social media is not present or evident. | Description of the organization followed and the type of information shared on social media is insufficiently developed and/or vague. Some key elements are missing. | Description of the organization followed and type of information shared on social media is sufficient and adequate. All elements are present, but may lack some analysis or depth. | Description of the organization followed and type of information shared on social media is well-developed and comprehensive. | Excellent description of the organization followed and type of information shared on social media. Clear examples are included. It is evident the student followed the organization for several weeks. |
| Organizational Engagement Using Social Media | 15.0% | Conclusion is either not present or not evident to the reader. | Conclusion is insufficiently developed and/or vague and lacks any discernible purpose. | Conclusion is present and some decision makers are identified, but justification and support are lacking. | Conclusion is clear and identifies key decision makers who would need this information. Rationale is sufficient and relevant to the assignment criteria. | Conclusion is comprehensive and clearly articulated. A strong description and justification for the decision makers who would need the information from the HIA are incorporated. |
| Suggested Improvements for Using Social Media for Public Health Communication | 20.0% | No suggestions were provided or are not made evident. | Few suggestions were outlined to support the assignment. | The suggestions stated are adequate and standard in relevance and/or quality, but lacking in sufficient rationale and/or justification. | Suggestions for improvement are clearly described and rationale is evident. Recommendations are relevant to the issues stated in the assignment criteria. | Recommendations to improve the use of social media for public health communication are well-described and include justification and purpose. Student addresses all of the issues stated in the assignment criteria. |
| Organization and Effectiveness | 20.0% |
| Thesis Development and Purpose | 7.0% | Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim. | Thesis and/or main claim are insufficiently developed and/or vague; purpose is not clear. | Thesis and/or main claim are apparent and appropriate to purpose. | Thesis and/or main claim are clear and forecast the development of the paper. It is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose. | Thesis and/or main claim are comprehensive. The essence of the paper is contained within the thesis. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear. |
| Argument Logic and Construction | 8.0% | Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources. | Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility. | Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument supports the purpose logically, but not thoroughly. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis. | Argument shows logical progression. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative. | Clear and convincing argument presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative. |
| Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) | 5.0% | Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are used. | Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice, sentence structure, and/or word choice are present. | Some mechanical errors or typos are present but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used. | Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used. | Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English. |
| Format | 10.0% |
| Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) | 5.0% | Template is not used appropriately, or documentation format is rarely followed correctly. | Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent. | Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present. | Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style. | All format elements are correct. |
| Research Citations (In-text citations for paraphrasing and direct quotes, and reference page listing and formatting, as appropriate to assignment and style) | 5.0% | No reference page is included. No citations are used. | Reference page is present. Citations are used inconsistently or are insufficient. One source is used. | Reference page lists sources used in the paper. Sources are documented appropriately, although some errors may be present. Two sources are used. | Reference page is inclusive of all cited sources. Documentation is appropriate and citation style is usually correct. Two or three sources are used. | In-text citations and a reference page are complete and correct. The documentation of cited sources is free of error. Three or more sources are used. |
| Total Weightage | 100% |