\nRubric Name: Participation Rubric (20%)
\nCriteria Outstanding Superior Good Substandard
\nEvidence of critical
\nthinking (analysis,
\nsynthesis, evaluation
\nand reflection) of class
\nreading material and
\ndiscussion
\n1.25 points
\nanalysis, synthesis,
\nevaluation and
\nreflection is strongly
\npresent across all
\nposts; rich in content
\nfull of thought, insight,
\nand analysis
\n(1.05 – 1.25)
\n0.96 points
\nanalysis, synthesis,
\nevaluation and
\nreflection is present in
\nmost posts – substantial
\ninformation thought,
\ninsight, and analysis
\nhas taken place
\n(0.88 – 1.04)
\n0.81 points
\nattempts analysis,
\nsynthesis, evaluation,
\nand reflection but not
\nstrongly evident or only
\npartially evident –
\ngenerally competent
\ninformation is thin and
\ncommonplace
\n(0.75 – 0.87)
\n0.37 points
\nanalysis, synthesis,
\nevaluation, and
\nreflection is poorly
\ndemonstrated or does
\nnot exist; rudimentary
\nand superficial; no
\nanalysis or insight is
\ndisplayed
\n(0 – 0.74)
\nResponses to
\nclassmates and
\ninstructor reflect a
\nsubstantive
\nunderstanding of
\ncourse material
\n1.25 points
\nresponses to
\ninstructor\/classmates
\nare complete and
\nmeaningful as required;
\nresponses are relevant
\nand advance the level
\nand depth of the
\ndiscussion consistently
\nusing course material
\nin the responses
\n(1.05 – 1.25)
\n0.96 points
\nresponses to
\ninstructor\/classmates
\nare complete and
\nmeaningful as required;
\nresponses are relevant
\nand advance the level
\nand depth of the
\ndiscussion occasionally
\nusing the course
\nmaterial in the
\nresponses
\n(0.88 – 1.04)
\n0.81 points
\nresponds to
\ninstructor\/classmates
\nmeet requirements but
\neither a) responses lack
\nsome detail to explain
\nanswer; b) responses
\ndo not add to the
\nconversation; c)
\nstudent does not use
\ncourse material; d)
\nstudent does not
\nrespond to as many
\npeers as required or e)
\nlacks consistency in
\nresponding to others
\n(0.75 – 0.87)
\n0.37 points
\nfails to respond to
\nclassmate and\/or
\ninstructor as required;
\nresponses are
\nsuperficial (I agree
\nstatements, restating
\nwhat other student
\nstated; response that
\nevaluates the quality of
\na student’s post adding
\nno substantial
\ncomment)
\n(0 – 0.74)
\nRelevance of
\nparticipation to topic
\nunder discussion
\n1.25 points
\ncontributions are
\nrelevant and
\ndemonstrates
\noutstanding
\nunderstanding of
\nmaterial; uses various
\ncourse
\nmaterial\/resources in
\nresponding, and
\nconsistently and
\naccurately ties to
\nactivity
\n(1.05 – 1.25)
\n0.96 points
\ncontributions are
\nrelevant and mostly
\ndemonstrates a good
\nunderstanding of
\nmaterial; uses some
\ncourse
\nmaterial\/resources in
\nresponding and
\nattempts to ties to
\nactivity
\n(0.88 – 1.04)
\n0.81 points
\ncontributions are
\nsomewhat relevant and
\ndemonstrates some
\nunderstanding of the
\nmaterial; rarely uses
\ncourse
\nmaterial\/resources in
\nresponses and
\noccasionally ties to
\nactivity
\n(0.75 – 0.87)
\n0.37 points
\ncontributions are off
\ntopic, distracting; does
\nnot use relevant course
\nmaterial\/resources in
\nresponses
\n(0 – 0.74)
\nWriting mechanics and
\nAPA usage
\n1.25 points
\nconsistently uses
\ngrammatically correct
\n0.96 points
\nfew grammatical or
\nspelling errors are
\n0.81 points
\nerrors in spelling and
\ngrammar evident;
\n0.37 points
\npoor spelling and
\ngrammar in most posts;
\nposts with no
\nmisspellings and no
\nAPA style errors
\n(1.05 – 1.25)
\nnoted in posts\/
\nattempts in-text
\ncitations and reference
\nlist but errors are
\npresent
\n(0.88 – 1.04)
\nattempts in-text
\ncitations or reference
\nlist but omits the other;
\nparaphrases or uses
\nsource material without
\nconsistently
\nciting\/referencing
\n(0.75 – 0.87)
\nno evidence of
\nproofreading; no
\nattempt at APA
\n(0 – 0.74)
\nOverall Score
\nOutstanding
\n4.2 or more
\nSuperior
\n3.84 or more
\nGood
\n2.1 or more
\nSubstandard
\n0 or mo<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Rubric Name: Participation Rubric (20%) Criteria Outstanding Superior Good Substandard Evidence of critical thinking (analysis, synthesis, evaluation and reflection) of class reading material and discussion 1.25 points analysis, synthesis, evaluation and reflection is strongly present across all posts; rich in Read More …<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3777","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.benedictsol.com\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3777","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.benedictsol.com\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.benedictsol.com\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.benedictsol.com\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.benedictsol.com\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3777"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.benedictsol.com\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3777\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.benedictsol.com\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3777"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.benedictsol.com\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3777"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.benedictsol.com\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3777"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}