Rubric Detail
Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.
Content
Name: PRAC_6675_Week4_Discussion_Participant_Rubric
| Excellent | Good | Fair | Poor | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Responses | Points: Points Range: 77 (77%) – 85 (85%) Responses exhibit synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings. Responses provide clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources. Responses demonstrate synthesis and understanding of Learning Objectives. Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Presenters’ prompts/questions posed in the case presentations are thoroughly addressed. Responses are effectively written in standard, edited English. Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 68 (68%) – 76 (76%) Responses exhibit critical thinking and application to practice settings. Responses provide clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by 2 or more credible sources. Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Presenters’ prompts/questions posed in the case presentations are addressed. Responses are effectively written in standard, edited English. Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 60 (60%) – 67 (67%) Responses are on topic and may have some depth. Responses may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and only one or no credible sources are cited. Responses posted in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication. Presenters’ prompts/questions posed in the case presentations are inadequately addressed. Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) – 59 (59%) Responses may not be on topic and lack depth. No credible sources are cited. Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective professional communication. Responses to colleagues’ prompts/questions are missing. Feedback: |
| Participation | Points: Points Range: 14 (14%) – 15 (15%) Meets requirements for participation by responding at least twice to each colleague who presented this week. Responses are carried out over multiple days between Days 4 and 7. Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 12 (12%) – 13 (13%) Meets requirements for participation by responding at least twice to each colleague who presented this week, over at least 2 days. Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 11 (11%) – 11 (11%) Participants respond at least twice to each colleague who presented this week, but responses may occur all in 1 day. Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) – 10 (10%) Does not meet requirements for participation by responding at least twice to each colleague who presented this week. Feedback: |
Show Descriptions Show Feedback
Responses–
Levels of Achievement: Excellent 77 (77%) – 85 (85%) Responses exhibit synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings. Responses provide clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources. Responses demonstrate synthesis and understanding of Learning Objectives. Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Presenters’ prompts/questions posed in the case presentations are thoroughly addressed. Responses are effectively written in standard, edited English. Good 68 (68%) – 76 (76%) Responses exhibit critical thinking and application to practice settings. Responses provide clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by 2 or more credible sources. Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Presenters’ prompts/questions posed in the case presentations are addressed. Responses are effectively written in standard, edited English. Fair 60 (60%) – 67 (67%) Responses are on topic and may have some depth. Responses may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and only one or no credible sources are cited. Responses posted in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication. Presenters’ prompts/questions posed in the case presentations are inadequately addressed. Poor 0 (0%) – 59 (59%) Responses may not be on topic and lack depth. No credible sources are cited. Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective professional communication. Responses to colleagues’ prompts/questions are missing. Feedback:
Participation–
Levels of Achievement: Excellent 14 (14%) – 15 (15%) Meets requirements for participation by responding at least twice to each colleague who presented this week. Responses are carried out over multiple days between Days 4 and 7. Good 12 (12%) – 13 (13%) Meets requirements for participation by responding at least twice to each colleague who presented this week, over at least 2 days. Fair 11 (11%) – 11 (11%) Participants respond at least twice to each colleague who presented this week, but responses may occur all in 1 day. Poor 0 (0%) – 10 (10%) Does not meet requirements for participation by responding at least twice to each colleague who presented this week. Feedback:
| Total Points: 100 |
|---|