Microscopy
abeakzo
Gen-EdDiscussionRubric1.docxDiscussion Rubric
|
Criteria |
Rating |
Pts |
|||
|
Initial Post Content |
8 pts Outstanding Addresses ALL aspects of the initial discussion question(s). |
6 pts Very Good Addresses MOST aspects of the initial discussion question(s).
|
4 pts Competent Addresses SOME aspects of the initial discussion question(s).
|
0 pts Poor Minimally addresses the initial discussion question(s).
|
8 |
|
Initial Post Sources |
2 pts Outstanding The initial post is enriched with insights from assigned readings/online lessons and includes at least one outside scholarly source. |
1 pts Very Good The initial post is enriched with insights by either assigned readings/online lessons, or at least one outside scholarly source, but not both. |
0 pts Poor The initial post does not provide evidence of assigned readings, online lessons, or at least one outside scholarly source. |
2 |
|
|
Follow-up Post |
8 pts Outstanding Follow-up to another student or instructor furthers the dialogue by adding depth and information to the discussion. Directly engages with the original post.
|
6 pts Very Good Follow-up to another student or instructor furthers the dialogue by adding some depth and information to the discussion. |
4 pts Competent Follow-up to another student or instructor does not further the dialogue significantly; adds little depth to the discussion.
|
0 pts Poor Does not respond to another student or instructor. This point value will also be given if follow-up to another student or instructor is a low effort post that does not add any new information on the theme with the discussion. |
8 |
|
Professional Communication |
4 pts Outstanding Presents information in an organized manner (minimal errors in English grammar, spelling, syntax, and punctuation). Respect and professionalism are demonstrated.
|
3 pts Very Good Presents information in an organized manner (Significant errors in English grammar, spelling, syntax, and punctuation that impact the ability of the reader to understand what is being said). Respect and professionalism are demonstrated.
|
2 pts Competent Presents information using understandable language but is somewhat disorganized (Significant errors in English grammar, spelling, syntax, and punctuation that impact the ability of the reader to understand what is being said). Respect and professionalism are demonstrated.
|
0 pts Poor Inappropriate, disrespectful, or inflammatory language is used. Respect, care, and/or professionalism are not demonstrated.
|
4 |
|
APA Formatting of Sources
|
2 pts Outstanding The initial post includes in-text citations, and a complete reference list of all sources used at the end of the discussion, with minor errors in APA formatting in the in-text citations, reference list, or both. |
1 pts Competent The initial post includes in-text citations, and a complete reference list of all sources used at the end of the discussion, with significant errors in APA formatting in the in-text citations, reference list, or both. |
0 pts Poor There is no evidence of citations and/or references within the initial discussion post. |
2 |
|
|
Frequency of Responses
|
1 pts Outstanding Posts in the discussion on two different days.
|
0 pts Poor Posts fewer than two different days OR does not participate at all.
|
1 |
||
|
Total Points |
|
25 |
