BUSN520 reflection assignment
gentle_gent
topicforumrubrics-1.docTopic Forum Directions & Rubrics
The Topic Forum is intended to provide you with an opportunity to apply the principles you are learning to specific issues. The following rubrics will provide the guidelines for expectations and evaluation of your participation. There may be specific directions regarding a Topic Forum for a particular week, however, here are the broad guidelines regarding the requirements.
· Your response (answer) to each Topic Forum should be between 400 and 500 words. On the weeks where there is only 1 Topic, 800-1000 words are expected.
The response should:
a. Recognize the significant issues the question raises
b. Incorporate the reading(s) for the week into the answer
c. Use at least 2 appropriate (largely peer-reviewed) references beyond your text to support your position
d. Demonstrate an understanding of the material by evaluating, applying, and synthesizing applying the various resources principles.
e. Exhibit your ability to write and research at an MBA level – cite sources correctly within the text and provide accurate APA style bibliography.
· You are to engage (react/respond) to at least two of your peer’s Topic Forum answers. These responses should be roughly 250 words in length, and must demonstrate an understanding of your peer’s position, as well as advance their ideas with new application, research and/or examples of how their analysis can be applied. It’s appropriate to disagree and reference your position with research/examples. Your engagement should be respectful in tone, written and cited at an MBA level using APA format.
Your Forum answers, as well as the responses, will be evaluated using the following rubrics. There are 40 points designated for your answers (20 points for each Topic), and 10 points for your engagement.
Topic Forum Response/Answers Rubric
|
|
Superior |
Strong |
Adequate |
Marginal |
Very Weak |
Overall analysis of the topic and developmentof response at an MBA level |
The forum question is discussed extensively and in-depth. Analysis of support is insightful, extensive, and specifically develops the forum question. 12 – 10 pts
|
The overall discussion of the forum question could be extended further. Analysis of support is present, but is not extensive. It could do more to connect to the forum question. 9 -7 pts
|
The forum question is discussed, but at a superficial level. Analysis of support is lacking and/or rarely connects the support to the forum question. 6 - 4 pts
|
The paper does little to discuss the answer the forum question. The support is not analyzed in terms of significance or connection to the forum question. 3-2 pts
|
No real discussion of the forum question or support throughout the paper. 1- 0 pts
|
|
MBA level research supports the response and enhances analysis |
Specific, ample, and appropriate (i.e. peer reviewed) reference material is used. Reference material is accurately used and it supports the response to the question. The material is well integrated into the body of the paper. 12 – 10 pts |
Specific, ample, and appropriate support is used, but more support would have helped to further prove the response. The material could be integrated into the paper more effectively. 9 -7 pts |
One of the required factors of support is missing (in either specificity, quality or quantity). Support is general, and insufficiently answers the question. The material is not well integrated into the paper. 6 - 4 pts
|
There is very little support in the paper, or the support is apocryphal, personal, or used from non-peer reviewed sources. The overall forum question is not ultimately answered. Inaccurate use of material may be present. 3-2 pts
|
No real support used. 1- 0 pts |
|
Appropriate and consistent voice executed through proper APA usage. |
Response is written in a voice appropriate to an academic audience. APA is used appropriately with few if any errors. 8-7 pts
|
Response largely addresses an academic audience, but may slip into an overly informal voice in places. APA is used with some mistakes. 6-5 pts
|
Response is written in an overly informal voice that is not appropriate for an academic audience. APA usage contains numerous errors. 4-3 pts
|
Response is not written in an informal or colloquial style. APA is not used, or used with significant errors. . 2-1 pts
|
Response is not written in Standard English.0 pts
|
MBA level grammar, structure and mechanics |
Response has been proofread for missing words, and major grammar and usage mistakes. There are virtually no errors (1-2 maximum). 8-7 pts
|
Response has been proofread, but may still have grammar and usage problems There are no more than 3-5 of these errors. 6-5 pts
|
Response has been proofread, but may still have grammar and usage problems. There are no more than 5-7 of these errors. 4-3 pts
|
There is very little evidence of proofreading. There are blatant and frequent errors throughout the paper. There are no more than 7-10 major errors overall. 2-1 pts
|
There is no evidence of proof reading. There are blatant and frequent errors throughout the paper. Over 10 major errors overall. 0 pts
|
|
Total Possible Points |
40-35 pts |
34-30 pts |
29-25 pts |
23-19 pts |
18-0 pts |
|
Total Points Earned |
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Forum Engagement/Response Rubric
|
|
Superior |
Strong |
Adequate |
Marginal |
Very Weak |
|
Quantity of responses aligns with expectations and are consistent with MBA level engagement with others |
Three or more responses of MBA quality5 pts |
4 pts
|
Number of or quality of responses is meets minimum only expectations. 3 pts |
2 pts |
Number of, or quality of responses is does not meet minimum expectations. 0 pts |
Development of response, analysis of peer’s work and further explanation of the concepts |
Engagement and response to others extensively, demonstrates an understanding of the concepts. Analysis of support is insightful, extensive, and further develops the forum question. Response is written in an appropriate fashion 5 pts |
Overall engagement and discussion could be extended further. Analysis of support is present, but is not extensive. It could do more to connect to the forum question. Written response lacking in some minor dimension (see criterion above) 4 pts
|
Engagement and response is at a superficial level. Analysis of support is lacking and/or rarely connects the support to the forum response. Written response lacking in significant grammar or usage criterion) 3 pts |
The engagement does little to address the forum response. The issue is not analyzed in terms of significance or connection to the forum response. Significant issues in usage. 2 pts |
Response is significantly deficient in one or more of the required dimensions. 0 pts
|
|
Total Points Earned |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Overall Comments and Feedback on Topic Forum Grade |
|
|
|
|
|
