If you order your assignment right now, you will be eligible for a great discount.

Good afternoon, i will be attaching the rubric for the discussion, plese check

Good afternoon, i will be attaching the rubric for the discussion, plese check every aspect ,
less than 5 percent of plagiarism
4 references
Criteria
Does Not Meet (0%)
Approaches (60%)
Meets 80%
Exceeds (100%)
Total
Initial
Post relevance to the topic of discussion, applicability, and
insight. (20%)
0
The student does not
provide coverage of discussion topic (s); the student does not
address the requirements of the
weekly discussion. Provide redundant information. The
posting does not apply to the course concepts or no example
provided from the material explored during the weekly reading or from
other relevant examples from the clinical practice.
The student does not
show applied knowledge and
understanding of the discussion topic. The student’s initial thread response does not reflect critical thinking.
12
The student provides
partial coverage of discussion topic (s), does not provide clarity
on the key concepts; the student does not address all of the requirements of the weekly discussion.
Provide redundant information. The posting does not apply to the
course concepts or no example provided from the material explored
during the weekly reading or from other relevant examples from the clinical
practice. The student shows some applied
knowledge and understanding of the discussion topic.
The student’s initial thread response does
not reflect critical thinking. The discussion topic is
vaguely covered and does not adequately demonstrate an accurate understanding
of concepts.
16
The student provides
complete coverage of discussion topic (s), provide clarity on the key
concepts, demonstrated in the information presented; the student
addresses all of the requirements of
the weekly discussion question with adequate attention
to details with some redundancy. The posting applies course concepts without examples learned from the
material provided during the weekly reading or other relevant examples from
the clinical practice. The student is
still showing applied knowledge and understanding of the
topic. Also, the posting offers original and thoughtful insight, synthesis,
or observation that demonstrates an understanding of the concepts and ideas
pertaining to the discussion topic (no use of example). The student’s initial
thread response reflects
critical thinking and contains thought, insight, and
analysis.
20
The student provides
in-depth coverage of discussion topic (s), outstanding clarity, and
explanation of concepts demonstrated in the information presented; approaches
the weekly discussion with depth and breadth, without redundancy, using clear
and focused details. The posting directly addresses key issues, questions, or
problems related to the topic of discussion. The posting applies course
concepts with examples learned from the material provided during the weekly
reading or other relevant examples from the clinical practice; the student is
showing applied knowledge and understanding of the topic. Also,
the posting offers
original and thoughtful insight, synthesis, or observation that demonstrates a
strong understanding of the concepts and ideas pertaining to the
discussion topic (use of examples). The student’s initial thread response is rich
in critical thinking and full of thought, insight, and analysis; the argument
is clear and concise.
Quality
of Written Communication
Appropriateness
of audience and words choice is specific, purposeful, dynamic, and varied. Grammar,
spelling, punctuation.
(20%)
0
The student uses a
style and voice inappropriate or does not address the given audience,
purpose, etc. Word choice is excessively redundant, clichéd, and unspecific.
Inconsistent grammar, spelling, punctuation, and paragraphing (More than five
grammatical errors). Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede
communication of meaning.
12
The student uses a
style and voice that is somewhat appropriate to given audience and purpose.
Word choice is often unspecific, generic, redundant, and clichéd. Repetitive
mechanical errors distract the reader (More than two grammatical errors).
Inconsistencies in language, sentence structure, and/or word choice are
present.
16
The student uses a style and voice that are
appropriate to the given audience and purpose. Word choice is specific and
purposeful and somewhat varied throughout. Minimal mechanical or
typographical errors are present but are not overly distracting to the reader
(Less than two grammatical errors). Correct sentence structure and
audience-appropriate language are used.
20
The student uses a
style and voice that are not only appropriate to the given audience and
purpose, but that also shows originality and creativity. Word choice is
specific, purposeful, dynamic, and varied. Free of mechanical and typographical
errors. A variety of sentence structures are used. The student is clearly in
command of standard, written, academic English.
Inclusion
of the student outcomes explored in the discussion as well as the
role-specific competencies as applicable. (10%)
0
The student does not
explain how the Student Learning Outcomes were explored or related to the
weekly discussion topic.
6
The student does not
explain how the Student Learning Outcomes were explored or related to the weekly
discussion topic. The student only provides a list of the applicable Student
Learning Outcome.
8
The student does not
explain how the Student Learning Outcomes were explored or related to the
weekly discussion topic.
10
The student provides
an explanation of how the applicable Student Learning Outcomes were explored
or related to the weekly discussion topic.
Rigor, currency, and relevance of the scholarly references.
(20%)
0
The student does not
provide any supporting scholarly references that are current or relevant to
the weekly discussion topic.
12
The student provides
supporting scholarly references that are not current but relevant to
the weekly discussion topic. The student provides only one scholarly
reference.
16
The student provides
supporting scholarly references that are not current or but relevant
to the weekly discussion topic. The student provides at least two
scholarly references.
20
The student provides robust support from
credible, current (less than five years old), and relevant scholarly
references (at least two). The supporting evidence meets or exceeds the
minimum number of required scholarly references.
Peer
& Professor Responses. Number of responses,
quality
of response posts.
(20%)
0
The student did not
make an effort to participate in the learning discussion board. The student
did not meet the answer post requirements, and the posts, if submitted, are
reflecting a lack of engagement or providing a vague answer to the weekly
topic. The student does not answer
the professor’s feedback/question.
12
The student does not
provide substantive interaction relevant to the weekly topic or provide vague
responses. The answer provided by the student does not build on the
discussion question and ideas of others, utilizing course content with
appropriate citation/references. The student does not motivate and encourage
the group. The student does not respond to two peers. The student does not answer the professor’s
feedback/question.
16
The student provides
substantive interaction relevant to the weekly topic. The answer provided by
the student builds on the discussion question and ideas of others, utilizing
course content with appropriate citation/references. The student provides
frequent attempts to motivate and encourage the group. The student responds
to at least two peers. The student does not answer the professor’s feedback/question.
20
The student provides
substantive interaction relevant to the weekly topic. The answer provided by
the student builds on the discussion question and ideas of others, utilizing
course content with appropriate citation/references. The student provides
frequent attempts to motivate and encourage the group. The student responds
to at least two peers and answers the professor’s feedback/question.
Timeliness
of the initial post and the answers to the peers. (10%)
0
The student was late
for the initial post and the answer to peers, or absence of submissions.
6
The student posted
the initial tread on time by 11:59 PM on Wednesday, or the student submits
the initial thread late and submits the answers to peers on time.
8
The student posted
the initial tread on time by 11:59 PM on Wednesday and one answer to a peer
by Saturday 11:59 PM.
10
The student posted
the initial thread and both answers to peers on time (Initial post by
Wednesday 1159 PM and two replies to peers by Saturday 11:59 PM).

Default image
admin
Articles: 229371

Quick Quote

QUICK QUOTE