DiscussionRubricOnlineJuly2022-1.pdf
Revised 7/1/2022
Discussion Rubric
CRITERIA Excellent (20) Good (13-19) Fair (8-13) Poor (1-7) Not Demonstrated (0) Content/ Comprehension -Critical thinking -Evidence -Construction
*Addresses discussion question completely *Demonstrates understanding of course content and synthesis of concepts *Offers clear point of view and details to support evidence
*Discussion question is not completely addressed but post shows understanding of course content * Point of view is somewhat unclear *Detail is appropriate, but limited
* Discussion question is addressed but post does not demonstrate depth of understanding of course content *Point of view is unclear *Detail is underdeveloped or not appropriate for post
* Discussion question is minimally addressed *Detail supporting evidence or point of view is missing
* Both the initial post and all peer responses are missing
Engagement/ Classroom Interaction -Initial post -Peer responses
* Submits at least 2 peer responses *Initial post is 2-3 paragraphs in length *Extends discussion thread by providing an evaluation of viewpoints, relating to other’s ideas and/or offering new ideas and supporting detail *Uses scholarly reference sources beyond course materials. At least one scholarly reference is listed for the initial post
*Submits at least 2 peer responses *Initial post is 2 paragraphs in length One of the following has occurred: *Peer responses are limited and do not extend the discussion thread *Only course material used as reference sources
*One of the following has occurred: *Initial post is 1 paragraph in length *Missing 1 peer response *Ideas offered in peer responses lack depth *No references are cited
*One of the following has occurred: *Missing the initial post *Missing 2 peer responses
* Both the initial post and all peer responses are missing
Mechanics -Spelling -Grammar -APA
*Writing is coherent, organized and easy to follow. *No spelling, APA or grammatical errors *Scholarly references used from a wide range of sources and are ≤ five years old
*Writing is mostly easy to follow with clear writing * No more than 1 spelling, grammatical or APA error
*Writing has some parts that are unclear *2-3 spelling or grammatical errors present *2-3 APA errors present * Only course materials used for scholarly references
*Post is poorly organized and hard to read; does not flow logically *≥ 3 spelling or grammatical errors *≥ 3 APA errors *Some references not cited OR all references ≥ 5 years old
* Both the initial post and all peer responses are missing
