8210 wk 7 discussion

Rubric Detail

Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric's layout.

Content

Name: RSCH_8210_Week7_Discussion_Rubric

• Grid View
• List View

	Excellent	Good	Fair	Poor
Discussion Posting Content	Points: Points Range: 7.2 (36%) - 8 (40%) Discussion posting demonstrates an excellent understanding of all of the concepts and key points presented in the text(s) and Learning Resources. Posting provides significant detail (including multiple relevant examples), evidence from the readings and other scholarly sources, and discerning ideas. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 6.4 (32%) - 7.1 (35.5%) Discussion posting demonstrates a good understanding of most of the concepts and key points presented in the text(s) and Learning Resources. Posting provides moderate detail (including at least one pertinent example), evidence from the readings and other scholarly sources, and discerning ideas. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 5.6 (28%) - 6.3 (31.5%) Discussion posting demonstrates a fair understanding of the concepts and key points as presented in the text(s) and Learning Resources. Posting may be lacking or incorrect in some area, or in detail and specificity, and/or may not include sufficient pertinent examples or provide sufficient evidence from the readings. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) - 5.5 (27.5%) Discussion posting demonstrates poor or no understanding of the concepts and key points of the text(s) and Learning Resources. Posting is incorrect and/or shallow, and/or does not include any pertinent examples or provide sufficient evidence from the readings. Feedback:
Peer Feedback and Interaction	Points: Points Range: 7.2 (36%) - 8 (40%) Response posting is excellent and fully contributes to the quality of interaction by offering substantive constructive critiques, suggestions, in-depth questions, additional resources, and stimulating thoughts and/or probes that draw from the readings and other scholarly sources. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 6.4 (32%) - 7.1 (35.5%) Response posting is good and partially contributes to the quality of interaction by offering adequate constructive critiques, suggestions, in-depth questions, additional resources, and stimulating thoughts and/or probes that draw from the readings and other scholarly sources. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 5.6 (28%) - 6.3 (31.5%) Response posting is fair and partially contributes to the quality of interaction but offers insufficient constructive critiques or suggestions, shallow questions, or provides poor quality additional resources. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) - 5.5 (27.5%) Student does not interact with peers (0 points) or the response posting does not contribute to the quality of interaction by offering any constructive critiques, suggestions, questions, or additional resources. Feedback:
Writing	Points: Points Range: 3.6 (18%) - 4 (20%) Postings are well organized, use scholarly tone, contain original writing and proper paraphrasing, follow APA Style, contain very few or no writing and/or spelling errors, and are fully consistent with graduate-level writing style. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 3.2 (16%) - 3.5 (17.5%) Postings are mostly consistent with graduate-level writing style. Postings may have some small organization, scholarly tone, writing, or APA Style issues, and/or may contain a few writing and spelling errors. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 2.8 (14%) - 3.1 (15.5%) Postings are somewhat below graduate-level writing style. Postings may be lacking in organization, scholarly tone, APA Style, and/or contain many writing and/or spelling errors, or show moderate reliance on quoting versus original writing and paraphrasing. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) - 2.7 (13.5%) ostings are well below graduate-level writing style expectations for organization, scholarly tone, APA Style, and writing, or show heavy reliance on quoting. Feedback:

Show Descriptions Show Feedback

Discussion Posting Content--

Levels of Achievement: Excellent 7.2 (36%) - 8 (40%) Discussion posting demonstrates an excellent understanding of all of the concepts and key points presented in the text(s) and Learning Resources. Posting provides significant detail (including multiple relevant examples), evidence from the readings and other scholarly sources, and discerning ideas. Good 6.4 (32%) - 7.1 (35.5%) Discussion posting demonstrates a good understanding of most of the concepts and key points presented in the text(s) and Learning Resources. Posting provides moderate detail (including at least one pertinent example), evidence from the readings and other scholarly sources, and discerning ideas. Fair 5.6 (28%) - 6.3 (31.5%) Discussion posting demonstrates a fair understanding of the concepts and key points as presented in the text(s) and Learning Resources. Posting may be lacking or incorrect in some area, or in detail and specificity, and/or may not include sufficient pertinent examples or provide sufficient evidence from the readings. Poor 0 (0%) - 5.5 (27.5%) Discussion posting demonstrates poor or no understanding of the concepts and key points of the text(s) and Learning Resources. Posting is incorrect and/or shallow, and/or does not include any pertinent examples or provide sufficient evidence from the readings. Feedback:

Peer Feedback and Interaction--

Levels of Achievement: Excellent 7.2 (36%) - 8 (40%) Response posting is excellent and fully contributes to the quality of interaction by offering substantive constructive critiques, suggestions, in-depth questions, additional resources, and stimulating thoughts and/or probes that draw from the readings and other scholarly sources. Good 6.4 (32%) - 7.1 (35.5%) Response posting is good and partially contributes to the quality of interaction by offering adequate constructive critiques, suggestions, in-depth questions, additional resources, and stimulating thoughts and/or probes that draw from the readings and other scholarly sources. Fair 5.6 (28%) - 6.3 (31.5%) Response posting is fair and partially contributes to the quality of interaction but offers insufficient constructive critiques or suggestions, shallow questions, or provides poor quality additional resources. Poor 0 (0%) - 5.5 (27.5%) Student does not interact with peers (0 points) or the response posting does not contribute to the quality of interaction by offering any constructive critiques, suggestions, questions, or additional resources. Feedback:

Writing--

Levels of Achievement: Excellent 3.6 (18%) - 4 (20%) Postings are well organized, use scholarly tone, contain original writing and proper paraphrasing, follow APA Style, contain very few or no writing and/or spelling errors, and are fully consistent with graduate-level writing style. Good 3.2 (16%) - 3.5 (17.5%) Postings are mostly consistent with graduate-level writing style. Postings may have some small organization, scholarly tone, writing, or APA Style issues, and/or may contain a few writing and spelling errors. Fair 2.8 (14%) - 3.1 (15.5%) Postings are somewhat below graduate-level writing style. Postings may be lacking in organization, scholarly tone, APA Style, and/or contain many writing and/or spelling errors, or show moderate reliance on quoting versus original writing and paraphrasing. Poor 0 (0%) - 2.7 (13.5%) ostings are well below graduate-level writing style expectations for organization, scholarly tone, APA Style, and writing, or show heavy reliance on quoting. Feedback:

Total Points: 20

Name: RSCH_8210_Week7_Discussion_Rubric