Education Community Care Application Assignment

11/29/25, 1:42 PM

Page 1 of 10about:srcdoc

Community Care Application: Communication and Group Dynamics -

Rubric

Identifying E!ectiveness 14 points

Criteria Description

Identifying Effectiveness

5. Target 14 points

The action plan clearly identifies three major events that caused this meeting

to be considered ineffective with a comprehensive rationale about why it was

ineffective.

4. Acceptable 11.9 points

The action plan clearly identifies three major events that caused this meeting

to be considered ineffective with a clear rationale about why it was ineffective.

3. Approaching 10.5 points

The action plan identifies three major events that caused this meeting to be

considered ineffective with a basic rationale about why it was ineffective.

2. Insufficient 9.1 points

The action plan does not identify at least three major events that caused this

meeting to be considered ineffective and the rationale is flawed.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

The action plan does not identify three major events that caused this meeting

to be considered ineffective and the rationale is not included.

Collapse All

11/29/25, 1:42 PM

Page 2 of 10about:srcdoc

Meeting Best Practices 14 points

Criteria Description

Meeting Best Practices

5. Target 14 points

The action plan thoroughly describes the meeting guidelines, methods, or

best practices that could be implemented to create a more effective meeting.

4. Acceptable 11.9 points

The action plan skillfully describes the meeting guidelines, methods, or best

practices that could be implemented to create a more effective meeting.

3. Approaching 10.5 points

The action plan provides a basic description of the meeting guidelines,

methods, or best practices that could be implemented to create a more

effective meeting.

2. Insufficient 9.1 points

The action does not clearly describe the meeting guidelines, methods, or best

practices that could be implemented to create a more effective meeting.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

The action omits information and does not describe the meeting guidelines,

methods, or best practices that could be implemented to create a more

effective meeting.

11/29/25, 1:42 PM

Page 3 of 10about:srcdoc

Communication Processes to Improve Group Dynamics and Meeting E!ectiveness

14 points

Criteria Description

Communication Processes to Improve Group Dynamics and Meeting

Effectiveness

5. Target 14 points

The action plan concisely describes communication processes that can

improve group dynamics and meeting effectiveness and demonstrates a deep

understanding of communication processes.

4. Acceptable 11.9 points

The action plan thoroughly describes communication processes that can

improve group dynamics and meeting effectiveness and demonstrates a

strong understanding of communication processes.

3. Approaching 10.5 points

The action plan includes a general description of the communication

processes with little emphasis about how to improve group dynamics and

meeting effectiveness.

2. Insufficient 9.1 points

The action plan does not clearly describe the communication process and

shows little emphasis about how to improve group dynamics and meeting

effectiveness.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

The action plan does not describe how communication processes can improve

group dynamics or meeting effectiveness.

11/29/25, 1:42 PM

Page 4 of 10about:srcdoc

Roles and Responsibilities 14 points

Criteria Description

Roles and Responsibilities

5. Target 14 points

The action plan describes how the group can be structured differently to

clarify roles and responsibilities through thought-provoking means. The action

plan describes detailed strategies that can be implemented to improve group

dynamics.

4. Acceptable 11.9 points

The action plan thoughtfully and clearly describes how the group can be

structured differently to clarify roles and responsibilities. The action plan

clearly describes strategies that can be implemented to improve group

dynamics.

3. Approaching 10.5 points

The action plan includes a general description of how the group can be

structured differently to clarify roles and responsibilities. The action plan

describes strategies that can be implemented to improve group dynamics.

2. Insufficient 9.1 points

The action plan does not clearly describe how the group can be structured

differently to clarify roles and responsibilities and is missing information. The

action plan includes few strategies that can be implemented to improve group

dynamics.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

The action plan does not describe how the group can be structured differently

to clarify roles and responsibilities and is missing information. The action plan

does not describe strategies that can be implemented to improve group

dynamics.

11/29/25, 1:42 PM

Page 5 of 10about:srcdoc

Evaluation and Application 14 points

Criteria Description

Evaluation and Application

5. Target 14 points

The action plan expertly evaluates each group using the stages of group

development discussed in the textbook. The action plan uses detailed

information from the textbook to describe how the stages can be applied and

includes citations.

4. Acceptable 11.9 points

The action plan succinctly evaluates each group using the stages of group

development discussed in the textbook. The action plan uses information

from the textbook to describe how the stages can be applied and includes

citations.

3. Approaching 10.5 points

The action plan includes some evaluation of each group using the stages of

group development discussed in the textbook. The action plan uses

information from the textbook to describe how the stages can be applied.

2. Insufficient 9.1 points

The action plan is unclear and uses little evaluation of each group using the

stages of group development discussed in the textbook. The action plan

incorporates little information from the textbook about how the stages can be

applied.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

The action plan is unclear and does not evaluate each group using the stages

of group development discussed in the textbook. The action plan does not

incorporate information from the textbook about how the stages can be

applied.

11/29/25, 1:42 PM

Page 6 of 10about:srcdoc

Thesis, Position, or Purpose 7 points

Criteria Description

Communicates reason for writing and demonstrates awareness of audience.

5. Target 7 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is clearly communicated throughout and

clearly directed to a specific audience.

4. Acceptable 5.95 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is adequately presented. An awareness of the

appropriate audience is demonstrated.

3. Approaching 5.25 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is discernable in most aspects but is

occasionally weak or unclear. There is limited awareness of the appropriate

audience.

2. Insufficient 4.55 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is unfocused or confused. There is very little

awareness of the intended audience.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is not discernible. No awareness of the

appropriate audience is evident.

11/29/25, 1:42 PM

Page 7 of 10about:srcdoc

Development, Structure, and Conclusion 8 points

Criteria Description

Advances position or purpose throughout writing; conclusion aligns to and

evolves from development.

5. Target 8 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is logically advanced throughout. The

progression of ideas is coherent and unified. A clear and logical conclusion

aligns to the development of the purpose.

4. Acceptable 6.8 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is advanced in most aspects. Ideas clearly

build on each other. Conclusion aligns to the development of the purpose.

3. Approaching 6 points

Limited advancement of thesis, position, or purpose is discernable. There are

inconsistencies in organization or the relationship of ideas. Conclusion is

simplistic and not fully aligned to the development of the purpose.

2. Insufficient 5.2 points

Writing lacks logical progression of the thesis, position, or purpose. Some

organization is attempted, but ideas are disconnected. Conclusion is unclear

and not supported by the overall development of the purpose.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

No advancement of the thesis, position, or purpose is evident. Connections

between paragraphs are missing or inappropriate. No conclusion is offered.

11/29/25, 1:42 PM

Page 8 of 10about:srcdoc

Evidence 5 points

Criteria Description

Selects and integrates evidence to support and advance position/purpose;

considers other perspectives.

5. Target 5 points

Specific and appropriate evidence is included. Relevant perspectives of others

are clearly considered.

4. Acceptable 4.25 points

Relevant evidence that includes other perspectives is used.

3. Approaching 3.75 points

Evidence is used but is insufficient or of limited relevance. Simplistic

explanation or integration of other perspectives is present.

2. Insufficient 3.25 points

Evidence is limited or irrelevant. The interpretation of other perspectives is

superficial or incorrect.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Evidence to support the thesis, position, or purpose is absent. The writing

relies entirely on the perspective of the writer.

11/29/25, 1:42 PM

Page 9 of 10about:srcdoc

Mechanics of Writing 5 points

Criteria Description

Includes spelling, capitalization, punctuation, grammar, language use, sentence

structure, etc.

5. Target 5 points

No mechanical errors are present. Appropriate language choice and sentence

structure are used throughout.

4. Acceptable 4.25 points

Few mechanical errors are present. Suitable language choice and sentence

structure are used.

3. Approaching 3.75 points

Occasional mechanical errors are present. Language choice is generally

appropriate. Varied sentence structure is attempted.

2. Insufficient 3.25 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors are present. Inconsistencies in

language choice or sentence structure are recurrent.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Errors in grammar or syntax are pervasive and impede meaning. Incorrect

language choice or sentence structure errors are found throughout.

11/29/25, 1:42 PM

Page 10 of 10about:srcdoc

Format/Documentation 5 points

Criteria Description

Uses appropriate style, such as APA, MLA, etc., for college, subject, and level;

documents sources using citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc.,

appropriate to assignment and discipline.

5. Target 5 points

No errors in formatting or documentation are present.

4. Acceptable 4.25 points

Appropriate format and documentation are used with only minor errors.

3. Approaching 3.75 points

Appropriate format and documentation are used, although there are some

obvious errors.

2. Insufficient 3.25 points

Appropriate format is attempted, but some elements are missing. Frequent

errors in documentation of sources are evident.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Appropriate format is not used. No documentation of sources is provided.

Total 100 points

© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

COMMUNITY CARE Scenario

Type of Care Provided

Scenario

Care provided in this capacity is done through clinics such as 24-hour urgent care centers and minute clinics provided through local pharmacies or community locations. These facilities increase access to care at affordable rates and in convenient locations.

It was time for the team meeting. This was the fourth time the team at the community clinic was meet- ing to try and come to consensus regarding a problem that arose with a patient. The personalities of the group made the meetings interesting. John was a bit of a bully. Connie had a unique way of looking at things and did not seem to be in harmony with the rest of the group. Lucia was easily intimidated, and it seemed that John was aware of this and took advantage of her feelings. Sally was the social butterfly of the group and wanted to keep everyone happy. Walt typically slipped into the meeting and spent the time browsing his Facebook account. The others would come in, sit down, and only speak when asked a direct question. The boss was frustrated that the team had yet to come up with a consensus.

Just before the meeting began, Lucia began feeling anxious when John came in. She had been working on an alternative plan, had developed handouts, and was ready to make a suggestion at this meeting. Seeing John, she began to have second thoughts about bringing up her idea since the last time John had shot her down. She was hoping that the boss would see that she was interested in helping the group and that he might consider her for a promotion that was soon to be determined. Sally came in and checked in with each of the group members to see how they and their families were doing, what every- one’s plans were for the weekend, and other “nurturing” type questions.

The meeting began. John stood up and said, “We all know the reason we are meeting. Some people in this group just cannot see the big picture. There needs to be compromise in order for us to move for- ward. We all know who these people are and I hope they can come on board so we can be out of here by noon.” The boss, appearing a bit irritated at this outburst, said, “John, that is not the purpose of this meeting. We need to determine the best solution for our patient.” John immediately countered that this was the fourth meeting, yet the problem continued. Connie proposed that maybe someone had a sug- gestion as to how the problem could be solved. John said something barely audible under his breath, but no suggestions came forth.

Sally pointed out that today was Teresa’s birthday and that everyone should sing happy birthday for her. John stood up saying, “You are kidding, right?” and walked to the back of the room. They all sang to Teresa and then a round table discussion began so everyone could share their ideas. When it came to Lucia, she slid her handouts under her laptop and said that she had nothing to add as all her ideas had already been mentioned.

The meeting came to an end without a solution. The boss was visibly upset as he threw his papers down on the table and gave the group an ultimatum, “Have a solution on my desk in 24 hours or we will be discussing solutions to our lack of consensus.”

11/29/25, 1:42 PM

Page 1 of 10about:srcdoc

Community Care Application: Communication and Group Dynamics -

Rubric

Identifying E!ectiveness 14 points

Criteria Description

Identifying Effectiveness

5. Target 14 points

The action plan clearly identifies three major events that caused this meeting

to be considered ineffective with a comprehensive rationale about why it was

ineffective.

4. Acceptable 11.9 points

The action plan clearly identifies three major events that caused this meeting

to be considered ineffective with a clear rationale about why it was ineffective.

3. Approaching 10.5 points

The action plan identifies three major events that caused this meeting to be

considered ineffective with a basic rationale about why it was ineffective.

2. Insufficient 9.1 points

The action plan does not identify at least three major events that caused this

meeting to be considered ineffective and the rationale is flawed.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

The action plan does not identify three major events that caused this meeting

to be considered ineffective and the rationale is not included.

Collapse All

11/29/25, 1:42 PM

Page 2 of 10about:srcdoc

Meeting Best Practices 14 points

Criteria Description

Meeting Best Practices

5. Target 14 points

The action plan thoroughly describes the meeting guidelines, methods, or

best practices that could be implemented to create a more effective meeting.

4. Acceptable 11.9 points

The action plan skillfully describes the meeting guidelines, methods, or best

practices that could be implemented to create a more effective meeting.

3. Approaching 10.5 points

The action plan provides a basic description of the meeting guidelines,

methods, or best practices that could be implemented to create a more

effective meeting.

2. Insufficient 9.1 points

The action does not clearly describe the meeting guidelines, methods, or best

practices that could be implemented to create a more effective meeting.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

The action omits information and does not describe the meeting guidelines,

methods, or best practices that could be implemented to create a more

effective meeting.

11/29/25, 1:42 PM

Page 3 of 10about:srcdoc

Communication Processes to Improve Group Dynamics and Meeting E!ectiveness

14 points

Criteria Description

Communication Processes to Improve Group Dynamics and Meeting

Effectiveness

5. Target 14 points

The action plan concisely describes communication processes that can

improve group dynamics and meeting effectiveness and demonstrates a deep

understanding of communication processes.

4. Acceptable 11.9 points

The action plan thoroughly describes communication processes that can

improve group dynamics and meeting effectiveness and demonstrates a

strong understanding of communication processes.

3. Approaching 10.5 points

The action plan includes a general description of the communication

processes with little emphasis about how to improve group dynamics and

meeting effectiveness.

2. Insufficient 9.1 points

The action plan does not clearly describe the communication process and

shows little emphasis about how to improve group dynamics and meeting

effectiveness.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

The action plan does not describe how communication processes can improve

group dynamics or meeting effectiveness.

11/29/25, 1:42 PM

Page 4 of 10about:srcdoc

Roles and Responsibilities 14 points

Criteria Description

Roles and Responsibilities

5. Target 14 points

The action plan describes how the group can be structured differently to

clarify roles and responsibilities through thought-provoking means. The action

plan describes detailed strategies that can be implemented to improve group

dynamics.

4. Acceptable 11.9 points

The action plan thoughtfully and clearly describes how the group can be

structured differently to clarify roles and responsibilities. The action plan

clearly describes strategies that can be implemented to improve group

dynamics.

3. Approaching 10.5 points

The action plan includes a general description of how the group can be

structured differently to clarify roles and responsibilities. The action plan

describes strategies that can be implemented to improve group dynamics.

2. Insufficient 9.1 points

The action plan does not clearly describe how the group can be structured

differently to clarify roles and responsibilities and is missing information. The

action plan includes few strategies that can be implemented to improve group

dynamics.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

The action plan does not describe how the group can be structured differently

to clarify roles and responsibilities and is missing information. The action plan

does not describe strategies that can be implemented to improve group

dynamics.

11/29/25, 1:42 PM

Page 5 of 10about:srcdoc

Evaluation and Application 14 points

Criteria Description

Evaluation and Application

5. Target 14 points

The action plan expertly evaluates each group using the stages of group

development discussed in the textbook. The action plan uses detailed

information from the textbook to describe how the stages can be applied and

includes citations.

4. Acceptable 11.9 points

The action plan succinctly evaluates each group using the stages of group

development discussed in the textbook. The action plan uses information

from the textbook to describe how the stages can be applied and includes

citations.

3. Approaching 10.5 points

The action plan includes some evaluation of each group using the stages of

group development discussed in the textbook. The action plan uses

information from the textbook to describe how the stages can be applied.

2. Insufficient 9.1 points

The action plan is unclear and uses little evaluation of each group using the

stages of group development discussed in the textbook. The action plan

incorporates little information from the textbook about how the stages can be

applied.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

The action plan is unclear and does not evaluate each group using the stages

of group development discussed in the textbook. The action plan does not

incorporate information from the textbook about how the stages can be

applied.

11/29/25, 1:42 PM

Page 6 of 10about:srcdoc

Thesis, Position, or Purpose 7 points

Criteria Description

Communicates reason for writing and demonstrates awareness of audience.

5. Target 7 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is clearly communicated throughout and

clearly directed to a specific audience.

4. Acceptable 5.95 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is adequately presented. An awareness of the

appropriate audience is demonstrated.

3. Approaching 5.25 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is discernable in most aspects but is

occasionally weak or unclear. There is limited awareness of the appropriate

audience.

2. Insufficient 4.55 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is unfocused or confused. There is very little

awareness of the intended audience.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is not discernible. No awareness of the

appropriate audience is evident.

11/29/25, 1:42 PM

Page 7 of 10about:srcdoc

Development, Structure, and Conclusion 8 points

Criteria Description

Advances position or purpose throughout writing; conclusion aligns to and

evolves from development.

5. Target 8 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is logically advanced throughout. The

progression of ideas is coherent and unified. A clear and logical conclusion

aligns to the development of the purpose.

4. Acceptable 6.8 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is advanced in most aspects. Ideas clearly

build on each other. Conclusion aligns to the development of the purpose.

3. Approaching 6 points

Limited advancement of thesis, position, or purpose is discernable. There are

inconsistencies in organization or the relationship of ideas. Conclusion is

simplistic and not fully aligned to the development of the purpose.

2. Insufficient 5.2 points

Writing lacks logical progression of the thesis, position, or purpose. Some

organization is attempted, but ideas are disconnected. Conclusion is unclear

and not supported by the overall development of the purpose.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

No advancement of the thesis, position, or purpose is evident. Connections

between paragraphs are missing or inappropriate. No conclusion is offered.

11/29/25, 1:42 PM

Page 8 of 10about:srcdoc

Evidence 5 points

Criteria Description

Selects and integrates evidence to support and advance position/purpose;

considers other perspectives.

5. Target 5 points

Specific and appropriate evidence is included. Relevant perspectives of others

are clearly considered.

4. Acceptable 4.25 points

Relevant evidence that includes other perspectives is used.

3. Approaching 3.75 points

Evidence is used but is insufficient or of limited relevance. Simplistic

explanation or integration of other perspectives is present.

2. Insufficient 3.25 points

Evidence is limited or irrelevant. The interpretation of other perspectives is

superficial or incorrect.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Evidence to support the thesis, position, or purpose is absent. The writing

relies entirely on the perspective of the writer.

11/29/25, 1:42 PM

Page 9 of 10about:srcdoc

Mechanics of Writing 5 points

Criteria Description

Includes spelling, capitalization, punctuation, grammar, language use, sentence

structure, etc.

5. Target 5 points

No mechanical errors are present. Appropriate language choice and sentence

structure are used throughout.

4. Acceptable 4.25 points

Few mechanical errors are present. Suitable language choice and sentence

structure are used.

3. Approaching 3.75 points

Occasional mechanical errors are present. Language choice is generally

appropriate. Varied sentence structure is attempted.

2. Insufficient 3.25 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors are present. Inconsistencies in

language choice or sentence structure are recurrent.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Errors in grammar or syntax are pervasive and impede meaning. Incorrect

language choice or sentence structure errors are found throughout.

11/29/25, 1:42 PM

Page 10 of 10about:srcdoc

Format/Documentation 5 points

Criteria Description

Uses appropriate style, such as APA, MLA, etc., for college, subject, and level;

documents sources using citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc.,

appropriate to assignment and discipline.

5. Target 5 points

No errors in formatting or documentation are present.

4. Acceptable 4.25 points

Appropriate format and documentation are used with only minor errors.

3. Approaching 3.75 points

Appropriate format and documentation are used, although there are some

obvious errors.

2. Insufficient 3.25 points

Appropriate format is attempted, but some elements are missing. Frequent

errors in documentation of sources are evident.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Appropriate format is not used. No documentation of sources is provided.

Total 100 points

© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.