RubricDetail6200.html

Rubric Detail

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

Content

Name: SOCW_6200_Week3_Discussion_Rubric

Grid View

List View

 
Excellent

Good

Fair

Poor

Responsiveness to Directions

Points:

Points Range:
9.45 (27%) – 10.5 (30%)

Discussion posting fully addresses all instruction prompts, including responding to the required number of peer posts.

Feedback:

Points:

Points Range:
8.4 (24%) – 9.44 (26.97%)

Discussion posting addresses most of the instruction prompts, including responding to the required number of peer posts. However, one or more prompts may have been insufficiently addressed.

Feedback:

Points:

Points Range:
7.35 (21%) – 8.39 (23.97%)

Discussion posting addresses some of the instructions prompts, but may have missed several prompts, did not sufficiently address the majority of prompts, and/or made less than the required number of response posts.

Feedback:

Points:

Points Range:
0 (0%) – 7.34 (20.97%)

Discussion posting does not address the majority of instruction prompts, insufficiently addresses all instruction prompts, and/or made less than the required number of response posts.

Feedback:

Discussion Posting Content

Points:

Points Range:
9.45 (27%) – 10.5 (30%)

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:
8.4 (24%) – 9.44 (26.97%)

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:
7.35 (21%) – 8.39 (23.97%)

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%) – 7.34 (20.97%)

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:
7.88 (22.5%) – 8.75 (25%)

The feedback postings and responses to questions are excellent and fully contribute to the quality of interaction by offering constructive critique, suggestions, in-depth questions, additional resources, and stimulating thoughts and/or probes.

Feedback:

Points:

Points Range:
7 (20%) – 7.87 (22.48%)

The feedback postings and responses to questions are good but may not fully contribute to the quality of interaction by offering constructive critique, suggestions, in-depth questions, additional resources, and stimulating thoughts and/or probes.

Feedback:

Points:

Points Range:
6.12 (17.5%) – 6.99 (19.98%)

The feedback postings and responses to questions only partially contribute to the quality of interaction by offering insufficient constructive critique or suggestions, shallow questions, or providing poor quality additional resources.

Feedback:

Points:

Points Range:
0 (0%) – 6.12 (17.47%)

Student does not interact with peers (0 points) or the feedback postings and responses to questions do not contribute to the quality of interaction by offering any constructive critique, suggestions, questions, or additional resources.

Feedback:

Writing

Points:

Points Range:
4.72 (13.5%) – 5.25 (15%)

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:
4.2 (12%) – 4.72 (13.48%)

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:
3.67 (10.5%) – 4.19 (11.98%)

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 vs. original writing and paraphrasing.

Feedback:

Points:

Points Range:
0 (0%) – 3.67 (10.48%)

Postings 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

Responsiveness to Directions–

Levels of Achievement:

Excellent
9.45 (27%) – 10.5 (30%)

Discussion posting fully addresses all instruction prompts, including responding to the required number of peer posts.

Good
8.4 (24%) – 9.44 (26.97%)

Discussion posting addresses most of the instruction prompts, including responding to the required number of peer posts. However, one or more prompts may have been insufficiently addressed.

Fair
7.35 (21%) – 8.39 (23.97%)

Discussion posting addresses some of the instructions prompts, but may have missed several prompts, did not sufficiently address the majority of prompts, and/or made less than the required number of response posts.

Poor
0 (0%) – 7.34 (20.97%)

Discussion posting does not address the majority of instruction prompts, insufficiently addresses all instruction prompts, and/or made less than the required number of response posts.

Feedback:

Discussion Posting Content–

Levels of Achievement:

Excellent
9.45 (27%) – 10.5 (30%)

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
8.4 (24%) – 9.44 (26.97%)

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
7.35 (21%) – 8.39 (23.97%)

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%) – 7.34 (20.97%)

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
7.88 (22.5%) – 8.75 (25%)

The feedback postings and responses to questions are excellent and fully contribute to the quality of interaction by offering constructive critique, suggestions, in-depth questions, additional resources, and stimulating thoughts and/or probes.

Good
7 (20%) – 7.87 (22.48%)

The feedback postings and responses to questions are good but may not fully contribute to the quality of interaction by offering constructive critique, suggestions, in-depth questions, additional resources, and stimulating thoughts and/or probes.

Fair
6.12 (17.5%) – 6.99 (19.98%)

The feedback postings and responses to questions only partially contribute to the quality of interaction by offering insufficient constructive critique or suggestions, shallow questions, or providing poor quality additional resources.

Poor
0 (0%) – 6.12 (17.47%)

Student does not interact with peers (0 points) or the feedback postings and responses to questions do not contribute to the quality of interaction by offering any constructive critique, suggestions, questions, or additional resources.

Feedback:

Writing–

Levels of Achievement:

Excellent
4.72 (13.5%) – 5.25 (15%)

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
4.2 (12%) – 4.72 (13.48%)

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
3.67 (10.5%) – 4.19 (11.98%)

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 vs. original writing and paraphrasing.

Poor
0 (0%) – 3.67 (10.48%)

Postings are well below graduate level writing style expectations for organization, scholarly tone, APA style, and writing, or show heavy reliance on quoting.

Feedback:

Name: SOCW_6200_Week3_Discussion_Rubric