Module 8 ((RUBRIC)) Peer Evaluation: Analyzing and Evaluating Social Policies
phaynes
MSW513RUBRICModule8PeerEvaluation.pdf
Module 8 Peer Evaluation: Analyzing and Evaluating Social Policies Purpose The Peer Evaluation is a culmination exercise to demonstrate the student's successful application of all the knowledge acquired between Module 1 and 7. Students will use this knowledge to analyze and evaluate two Module 7 PowerPoint Presentations. Students will complete a peer evaluation review for two Module 7 PowerPoint Presentations. Students are required to provide a written peer evaluation review based on the Peer Evaluation Review Framework (Links to an external site.).
Requirements
1. The two Peer Evaluations are worth 190 points and will be graded on use of citations, use of Standard English grammar, sentence structure, and overall organization based on the required components as summarized in the directions and grading criteria/rubric.
2. Create your exercise using Microsoft Word. 3. Follow the directions and grading criteria closely. Any questions about your
assignment may be posted under the Q & A Forum. 4. APA format is required for all citations as well as the title page and reference
page. Use the required components of the review as Level 1 headings (upper and lower case, centered, boldface):
Criteria for the Content (Guidelines) Review the two Module 7 PowerPoint Presentations that you have been assigned, then complete a separate Peer Evaluation document for each of the PowerPoints. The Peer Evaluation document can be found in an embedded link at the end of this document.
See the detailed directions and grading criteria in the table below.
Directions and Grading Criteria Category Points Description
Comple Complete Peer Evaluation Framework
Review *Provides a thorough review of all 8 sections of the Peer Evaluation Framework Review*
40 • Provides a thorough review of all 8
sections of the Peer Evaluation
Framework Review.
Comprehensive justification of Peer Evaluation
Review Framework (8) sections **Advocacy Rationale, Policy Making Process, Building Policy Agenda, Fake News, Policy Key Questions and Analysis, Policy Changes, Policy Type, and Policy Reform (15 points each)*
120 • Provides a comprehensive
justification for of each section of
the Peer Evaluation Framework
Clarity of Writing 15 • Use of standard English grammar
and sentence
• No spelling errors or typographical
errors.
APA Style 15 • All information taken from another
source, even if summarized, must
be appropriately cited in problem
Statement and listed in the
references using APA format:
o Document Set up
o Title and reference pages
o Citations in the text and
references
Total 190 A quality assignment will meet or
exceed all of the above requirements.
Rubric Peer Evaluation: Analyzing and Evaluating Social Policies
Peer Evaluation: Analyzing and Evaluating Social Policies
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is
linked to a Learning
Outcome
Complete peer
evaluation framework
review
40 pts
Highest Level of
Performance
Thoroughly
reviews the two
assigned
PowerPoints and
provides
applicable Peer
Evaluation
Review.
30 pts
Very Good or
High Level of
Performance
Reviews the two
assigned
PowerPoints and
provides
appropriate review
for each item,
based on each
PowerPoint’s
content.
20 pts
Acceptable Level
of Performance
Reviews the two
assigned
PowerPoints, and
provides some
appropriate review
for some items,
based on each
PowerPoint’s
content.
0 pts
Failing Level of
Performance
There is little to no
indication that the
two assigned
PowerPoints were
reviewed, and ratings
were not appropriate
as they do not seem
to be based on each
PowerPoints content.
40 pts
Peer Evaluation: Analyzing and Evaluating Social Policies
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is
linked to a Learning
Outcome
Comprehensive
justification of Peer
Evaluation Review
Framework (8)
sections… Advocacy
Rationale, Policy
Making Process,
Building Policy
Agenda, Fake News,
Policy Key
Questions and
Analysis, Policy
Changes, Policy
Type, and Policy
Reform (15 points
each)
120 pts
Highest Level of
Performance
Provides thorough
justification for
each section; Uses
relevant course
reading citations
and concepts to
support statements
for each section.
100 pts
Very Good or
High Level of
Performance
Provides good
justification for
each section review
item; Uses course
relevant reading
citations and
concepts to support
statements for each
section.
80 pts
Acceptable Level
of Performance
Provides adequate
justification for
some sections of the
review; Uses
relevant course
reading citations
and concepts to
support some
statements for some
rating.
0 pts
Failing Level of
Performance
Fails to provide
justification for
rating scale items
for each
PowerPoint; Fails
to provide relevant
citations to support
statemen for each
rating.
120 pts
This criterion is
linked to a Learning
Outcome
Clarity of Writing 15 pts
Highest Level of
Performance
Excellent use of
standard English
showing original
thought. No
spelling or
grammar errors.
Well organized
with proper flow of
meaning.
10 pts
Very Good or High
Level of
Performance
Some evidence of
own expression and
competent use of
language. No more
than three spelling
or grammar errors.
Well organized
thoughts and
concepts.
5 pts
Acceptable Level
of Performance
Language needs
development. Four
or more spelling
and/or grammar
errors. Poorly
organized
thoughts and
concepts.
0 pts
Failing Level of
Performance
Language needs
significant
development. Five
or more spelling
and/or grammar
errors; fails to have
organized thoughts
and concepts.
15 pts
Peer Evaluation: Analyzing and Evaluating Social Policies
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is
linked to a Learning
OutcomeAPA Style 15 pts
Highest Level
of Performance
APA format is
correct with no
errors.
10 pts
Very Good or High
Level of
Performance
APA format is
mostly correct, with
no more than 1 to 2
minor errors.
5 pts
Acceptable Level of
Performance
APA formatting
contains multiple
errors and/or several
citations are missing.
0 pts
Failing Level of
Performance
APA formatting
not present and
citations are not
included.
15 pts
