Discussion Rubric Criteria Ratings Points Identification Of

Discussionrubriccriteriaratingspointsidentification Of Main Issues P

Discussion Rubric Criteria Ratings Points Identification of Main Issues, Problems, and Concepts Distinguished - 5 points Identify and demonstrate a sophisticated understanding of the issues, problems, and concepts. Excellent - 4 points Identifies and demonstrate an accomplished understanding of most of issues, problems, and concepts. Fair - 2 points Identifies and demonstrate an acceptable understanding of most of issues, problems, and concepts. Poor - 1 point Identifies and demonstrate an unacceptable understanding of most of issues, problems, and concepts. 5 points Use of Citations, Writing Mechanics and APA Formatting Guidelines Distinguished - 3 points Effectively uses the literature and other resources to inform their work. Exceptional use of citations and extended referencing. High level of APA precision and free of grammar and spelling errors. Excellent - 2 points Effectively uses the literature and other resources to inform their work. Moderate use of citations and extended referencing. Moderate level of APA precision and free of grammar and spelling errors. Fair - 1 point Ineffectively uses the literature and other resources to inform their work. Moderate use of citations and extended referencing. APA style and writing mechanics need more precision and attention to detail. Poor - 0 points Ineffectively uses the literature and other resources to inform their work. An unacceptable use of citations and extended referencing. APA style and writing mechanics need serious attention.

Sample Paper For Above instruction

Understanding and analyzing the main issues, problems, and concepts within a specific field or topic is fundamental for effective academic and professional discourse. This paper explores the criteria for evaluating discussion contributions, particularly focusing on the identification of key issues and the accurate use of citations, APA formatting, and writing mechanics.

Introduction

Effective participation in academic discussions requires a clear demonstration of understanding of critical issues and an ability to accurately cite and reference supporting literature. The rubric outlined emphasizes two primary dimensions: the depth of understanding of major issues and the quality of citations and adherence to APA style. Evaluating these components critically informs us about the level of scholarly engagement and writing skill present in student work.

Understanding of Main Issues and Concepts

The first component, the identification of main issues, necessitates a sophisticated grasp of the core problems and concepts. A distinguished performance in this area involves demonstrating a comprehensive and nuanced understanding. This includes not only recognizing the issues but also analyzing how they interrelate and influence the broader context. For example, in a discussion on leadership, identifying issues might involve recognizing organizational dynamics, individual behaviors, and structural challenges, and demonstrating how these elements interact.

A proficient level, considered 'excellent,' shows the ability to identify most critical issues with clarity, indicating a strong understanding, though perhaps lacking some depth or nuance present in a distinguished response. Conversely, fair and poor performances reflect increasing levels of superficiality, with poor comprehension indicating a lack of depth or accuracy in understanding the issues discussed.

Use of Citations and APA Formatting

The second component emphasizes the importance of effectively integrating literature and adhering to APA formatting guidelines. An exceptional paper demonstrates mastery through precise citations, comprehensive referencing, and flawless application of APA style, including correct in-text citations and reference list formatting. Such a paper also exhibits impeccable grammar, spelling, and overall writing mechanics.

Moderate use of citations and some attention to formatting characterize 'excellent' work, while 'fair' responses show limited citation use and some lapses in APA precision. Poor adherence results in unacceptably formatted references and citations, indicating insufficient engagement with scholarly sources and poor writing mechanics.

Conclusion

The criteria outlined serve as vital benchmarks for assessing the quality of discussion contributions in academic contexts. High-quality work demonstrates a profound understanding of core issues complemented by meticulous citation practices and strict adherence to APA standards. Recognizing these elements guides educators and students toward enhancing scholarly communication skills essential for academic success.

References

  • American Psychological Association. (2020). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (7th ed.).
  • Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives. Handbook I: The cognitive domain. David McKay Company.
  • Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage publications.
  • Graff, G., & Birkenstein, C. (2018). They say / I say: The moves that matter in academic writing (Fourth edition). Norton.
  • Johnson, S. (2015). Effective communication in academic settings. Journal of Higher Education, 44(3), 345-359.
  • Purdue Online Writing Lab. (2021). APA style guide. https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/research_and_citation/apa_style/apa_formatting_and_style_guide/general_format.html
  • Smith, J. (2019). The essentials of academic writing. Educational Research Quarterly, 42(2), 15-23.
  • Swales, J. M., & Feak, C. B. (2012). Academic writing for graduate students: Essential tasks and skills. University of Michigan Press.
  • Walden University. (2020). APA style guidelines. https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/references
  • Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods. Sage publications.

Related Assignments