Objectives Unacceptable Emerging F Through D Range Satisfact

Objectivesunacceptableemerging F Through D Rangesatisfactory C Rang

Objectives Unacceptable Emerging (F through D Range) Satisfactory (C Range) Above Average (B Range) Exemplary (A Range) Score Quality of Initial Posting 0 Points No initial posting to evaluate 1 to 27 Points The information provided is inaccurate, not focused on the assignment’s topic, and/or does not answer the question(s) fully. Response demonstrates incomplete understanding of the topic and/or inadequate preparation. 28 to 31 Points The information provided is accurate, giving a basic understanding of the topic(s) covered. A basic understanding is when you are able to describe the terms and concepts covered. Despite this basic understanding, initial posting may not include complete development of all aspects of the assignment. 32 to 35 Points The information provided is accurate, displaying a good understanding of the topic(s) covered. A good understanding is when you are able to explain the terms and topics covered. Initial posting demonstrates sincere reflection and addresses most aspects of the assignment, although all concepts may not be fully developed. 36 to 40 Points The information provided is accurate, providing an in-depth, well thought-out understanding of the topic(s) covered. An in-depth understanding provides an analysis of the information, synthesizing what is learned from the course/assigned readings. _ out of 40 Participation in Discussion 0 Points No responses to other classmates in this discussion forum 1 to 13 Points May include one or more of the following: Comments to only one other student's post. Comments are not substantive, such as just one line or saying, “Good job†or “I agree. *Comments are off topic. 14 to 15 Points Comments to two or more classmates’ initial posts but only on one day of the week. Comments are substantive, meaning they reflect and expand on what the other student wrote. 16 to 17 Points Comments to two or more classmates’ initial posts on more than one day. Comments are substantive, meaning they reflect and expand on what the other student w rote. 18 to 20 Points Comments to two or more classmates’ initial posts and to the instructor's comment (if applicable) on two or more days. Responses demonstrate an analysis of peers’ comments, building on previous posts. Comments extend and deepen meaningful conversation and may include a follow-up question. _ out of 20 Writing Mechanics (Spelling, Grammar, APA) and Information Literacy 0 Points No postings for which to evaluate language and grammar 1 to 13 Points Numerous issues in any of the following: grammar, mechanics, spelling, use of slang, and incomplete or missing APA citations and references. If required for the assignment, did not use course, text, and/or outside readings (where relevant) to support work. 14 to 15 Points Some spelling, grammatical, and/or structural errors. Some errors in APA formatting (citations and references). If required for the assignment, utilizes sources to support work for initial post but not comments to other students. Sources include course/text readings but outside sources (when relevant) include non-academic/authoritative, such as Wikis and .com resources. 16 to 17 Points Minor errors in grammar, mechanics, or spelling in the initial posting. Minor errors in APA formatting (citations and references). If required for the assignment, utilizes sources to support work for both the initial post and some of the comments to other students. Sources include course and text readings as well as outside sources (when relevant) that are academic and authoritative (e.g., journal articles, other text books, .gov web sites, professional organization web sites). 18 to 20 Points Minor to no errors in grammar, mechanics, or spelling in both the initial post and comments to others. APA formatting is correct. If required for the assignment, utilizes sources to support work for both the initial post and the comments to other students. Sources include course and text readings as well as outside sources (when relevant) that are academic and authoritative (e.g., journal articles, other text books, .gov web sites, professional organization web sites). _ out of 20

Paper For Above instruction

The assignment prompt provides an evaluation rubric for a discussion post and total participation, focusing on four main criteria: quality of initial posting, participation in discussion, writing mechanics and information literacy, and overall score. The rubric categorizes performance levels from unacceptable (F) to exemplary (A), with detailed descriptors for each level.

In assessing the quality of an initial posting, the rubric emphasizes the accuracy, focus, depth, and synthesis of understanding related to the assignment's topic. An unacceptable contribution (0 points) involves no initial post, while a basic understanding (28-31 points) reflects accuracy and a general grasp of concepts but lacks comprehensive development. A good understanding (32-35 points) demonstrates clarity, reflection, and addressing most aspects, whereas an exemplary post (36-40 points) exhibits depth, critical analysis, and integration of course readings.

Participation in discussion is similarly graded on the number and substantive quality of responses to peers. Starting from no responses (0 points), students are expected to comment substantively on multiple peers' posts across more than one day. Responses should extend the conversation through analysis, reflection, and formulation of follow-up questions, with higher points awarded for more meaningful engagement (up to 20 points).

Writing mechanics and information literacy are also critical components. Performance ranges from numerous issues (1-13 points), including grammar, spelling, APA formatting, and lack of supporting sources, to minimal errors and correct APA use (18-20 points). The highest scores require the consistent use of credible sources, proper citation, and polished writing free of mechanical errors.

The overall rubric ensures comprehensive evaluation of written contributions, emphasizing clarity, depth, engagement, and scholarly rigor, which are essential for academic success and meaningful participation in discussion-based learning environments.

References

  • Author, A. A. (Year). Title of the book or article. Journal Name, Volume(Issue), pages. https://doi.org/xx.xxx/yyyy
  • Author, B. B. (Year). Title of the web resource. Website Name. URL
  • Author, C. C. (Year). Title of the report or publication. Publishing Organization. URL
  • Author, D. D. (Year). Title of the journal article. Journal of Educational Research, 45(2), 123-134.
  • Author, E. E. (Year). Title of the authoritative web page. Organization or Website. URL
  • Author, F. F. (Year). Title of the thesis or dissertation. University Name. URL
  • Author, G. G. (Year). Book Title. Publisher.
  • Author, H. H. (Year). Article title. Magazine Name, Volume(Issue), pages.
  • Author, I. I. (Year). Research article. Academic Journal, Volume(Issue), pages. https://doi.org/xx.xxx/yyyy
  • Author, J. J. (Year). Title of the report. Government Agency. URL

Related Assignments