Exemplary

Proficient

Progressing

Emerging

Element (1): Responsiveness: Did the student respond to the main question of the week?

9 points (28%)

Posts exceed requirements of the Discussion instructions (e.g., respond to the question being asked; go beyond what is required [i.e., incorporates additional readings outside of the assigned Learning Resources, and/or shares relevant professional experiences]; are substantive, reflective, and refers to Learning Resources demonstrating that the student has considered the information in Learning Resources and colleague postings).

9 points

Posts are responsive to and meet the requirements of the Discussion instructions. Posts respond to the question being asked in a substantive, reflective way and refer to Learning Resources demonstrating that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning Resources and colleague postings.

7–8 points

Posts are somewhat responsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. Posts are not substantive and rely more on anecdotal evidence (i.e., largely comprised of student opinion); and/or does not adequately demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered Learning Resources and colleague postings.

4–6 points

Posts are unresponsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions; miss the point of the question by providing responses that are not substantive and/or solely anecdotal (i.e., comprised of only student opinion); and do not demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered Learning Resources and colleague postings.

0–3 points

Element (2): Critical Thinking, Analysis, and Synthesis: Is the student able to make meaning of the information?

9 points (28%)

Posts demonstrate the student’s ability to apply, reflect, AND synthesize concepts and issues presented in the weekly Learning Objectives. Student has integrated and mastered the general principles, ideas, and skills presented. Reflections include clear and direct correlation to authentic examples or are drawn from professional experience; insights demonstrate significant changes in awareness, self-understanding, and knowledge.

9 points

Posts demonstrate the student’s ability to apply, reflect OR synthesize concepts and issues presented in the weekly Learning Objectives. The student has integrated many of the general principles, ideas, and skills presented. Reflections include clear and direct correlation to authentic examples or are drawn from professional experience, share insights that demonstrate a change in awareness, self- understanding, and knowledge.

7–8 points

Posts demonstrate minimal ability to apply, reflect, or synthesize concepts and issues presented in the weekly Learning Objectives. The student has not fully integrated the general principles, ideas, and skills presented. There are little to no salient reflections, examples, or insights/experiences provided.

4–6 points

Posts demonstrate a lack of ability to apply, reflect, or synthesize concepts and issues presented in the weekly Learning Objectives. The student has not integrated the general principles, ideas, and skills presented. There are no reflections, examples, or insights/experiences provided.

0–3 points

Element (3): Professionalism of Writing: Does the student meet graduate level writing expectations?

5 points (16%)

Posts meet graduate-level writing expectations (e.g., are clear, concise, and use appropriate language; make few errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; provide information about sources when paraphrasing or referring to it; use a preponderance of original language and directly quote only when necessary or appropriate). Postings are courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

5 points

Posts meet most graduate-level writing expectations (e.g., are clear; make only a few errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; provide adequate information about a source when paraphrasing or referring to it; use original language wherever possible and directly quote only when necessary and/or appropriate). Postings are courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

4 points

Posts partially meet graduate-level writing expectation (e.g., use language that is unclear/inappropriate; make more than occasional errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; provide inadequate information about a source when paraphrasing or referring to it; under-use original language and over-use direct quotes). Postings are at times less than courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

2–3 points

Posts do not meet graduate-level writing expectations (e.g., use unclear/inappropriate language; make many errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; do not provide information about a source when paraphrasing or referring to it; directly quote from original source materials or consistently paraphrase rather than use original language; or are discourteous and disrespectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints).

0–1 points

Element (4):

Responses to Peers: Did the student respond to peer posts and contribute professionally?

9 points (28%)

Responds to two or more peers in a manner that significantly contributes to the Discussion.

9 points

Responds to one or more peers in a manner that significantly contributes to the Discussion.

7–8 points

Responds to one or more peers in a manner that minimally contributes to the Discussion.

4–6 points

Does not respond to any peer posts.

0–3 points

32 points

100%

25–28 points

78–88%

14–21 points

44–66%

0–10 points

0–31%

pur-new-sol

Related Questions