Skip to main content

 iRubric for Sakai

iRubric: Weekly Discussion Questions rubric

iRubric: Weekly Discussion Questions rubric


edit   print   share   Copy to my rubrics   Bookmark   test run   assess...   delete   Do more...
Weekly Discussion Questions 
Weekly Discussion Questions
Wildlife Forensic entomology
Rubric Code: RXW6928
Ready to use
Public Rubric
Subject: Science  
Type: Writing  
Grade Levels: Graduate

Powered by iRubric Analysis
  Perfect (100%)

7 pts

Excellent (90%)

6.3 pts

Above Average (80%)

5.6 pts

Average (70%)

4.9 pts

Unacceptable (0%)

0 pts

Critical Analysis

Perfect (100%)

Discussion postings display an excellent understanding of the required readings and underlying concepts including correct use of terminology. Posting integrate an outside resource, or relevant research, or specific real-life application (work experience, prior coursework, etc.) to support important points. No more than 10% of the posting is a direct quotation.
Excellent (90%)

Discussion postings display an understanding of the required readings and underlying concepts including correct use of terminology.
Above Average (80%)

Discussion postings repeat and summarize basic, correct information, but do not link readings to outside references, relevant research or specific real-life application and do not consider alternative perspectives or connections between ideas.
Average (70%)

Discussion postings repeat and summarize basic, correct information, but do not link readings to outside references, relevant research or specific real-life application and do not consider alternative perspectives or connections between ideas. Postings lack depth and critical analysis of material
Unacceptable (0%)

Initial discussion postings show little or no evidence that readings or other resources were completed or understood. Postings are largely personal opinions or feelings, without supporting statement with concepts from the readings, outside resources, relevant research, or specific real-life application.
Reflection
  Perfect (100%)

4 pts

Excellent (90%)

3.6 pts

Above Average (80%)

3.2 pts

Average (70%)

2.8 pts

Unacceptable (0%)

0 pts

Reflective Thought

Perfect (100%)

Discussion postings provide evidence of strong reflective thought pertaining to both personal and professional perspectives.
Excellent (90%)

Discussion postings provide evidence of some reflective thought pertaining to personal and professional perspectives.
Above Average (80%)

Discussion postings provide some evidence of reflective thought pertaining to personal and professional perspectives.
Average (70%)

Discussion postings provide little evidence of reflective thought pertaining to personal and professional perspectives.
Unacceptable (0%)

Discussion postings provide little or no evidence of reflective thought pertaining to personal and professional perspectives.
Participation
  Perfect (100%)

6 pts

Excellent (90%)

5.4 pts

Above Average (80%)

4.8 pts

Average (70%)

4.2 pts

Unacceptable (0%)

0 pts

Participation

Perfect (100%)

Discussion postings actively stimulate and sustain further discussion by building on peers' responses including building a focused argument around a specific issue, asking a new related question, or making an oppositional statement supported by personal experience or related research. Discussion postings are distributed throughout the module (not posted all on one day or only at the beginning or only on the last day of the module.) Two or more responses to peers within 24 hours.
Excellent (90%)

Discussion postings contribute to the class'
ongoing conversations as evidenced by affirming statements or references to relevant research, or
asking related questions, or making an oppositional statement supported by any personal experience or related research. Only two responses to peers. Discussion postings respond to most postings of peers within a 48 hour period.
Above Average (80%)

Discussion postings sometimes contribute to ongoing conversations as evidenced by ...affirming statements or references to relevant research, or asking related questions, or making an oppositional statement supported by any personal experience or related research. Discussion postings respond to most postings of peers several days after the initial discussion. One or two responses to peers.
Average (70%)

Discussion postings sometimes contribute to ongoing conversations.
Discussion postings are at midpoint or later in the module or contributions are posted on the last day of the module. One response to peers.
Unacceptable (0%)

Discussion comments do not contribute to ongoing conversations or respond to peers’ postings. There is no evidence of replies to questions or comments or as new related questions or comments.
Discussion postings are at midpoint or later in the module or contributions are posted on the last day of the module
Quality
  Perfect (100%)

2 pts

Excellent (90%)

1.8 pts

Above Average (80%)

1.6 pts

Average (70%)

1.4 pts

Unacceptable (0%)

0 pts

Quality of Writing

Perfect (100%)

Written responses are free of grammatical spelling or punctuation errors. The style of writing facilitates communication.
Excellent (90%)

Written responses are largely free of grammatical, spelling or punctuation errors. The style of writing generally facilitates communication.
Above Average (80%)

Written responses include some grammatical spelling or punctuation errors that distract the reader.
Average (70%)

Written responses include several grammatical spelling or punctuation errors that distract the reader.
Unacceptable (0%)

Written responses contain numerous grammatical spelling or punctuation errors. The style of writing does not facilitate effective communication
Etiquette
  Perfect (100%)

1 pts

Excellent (90%)

0.9 pts

Above Average (80%)

0.8 pts

Average (70%)

0.7 pts

Unacceptable (0%)

0 pts

Etiquette in Dialogue with Peers

Perfect (100%)

Written interactions on the discussion board show respect and sensitivity to peers’ gender, cultural and linguistic background, sexual orientation, political and religious beliefs.
Excellent (90%)

Written interactions on the discussion board show respect and interest in the viewpoints of others
Above Average (80%)

Some of the written interactions on the discussion board show respect and interest in the viewpoints of others.
Average (70%)

Few of the written interactions on the discussion board show respect and interest in the viewpoints of others.
Unacceptable (0%)

Written interactions on the discussion board show disrespect for the viewpoints of others.




Subjects:

Types:

Discuss this rubric




Do more with this rubric:
Preview

Preview

Preview this rubric.
Edit

Edit

Modify this rubric.
Copy

Copy

Make a copy of this rubric and begin editing the copy.

Print

Print

Show a printable version of this rubric.
Categorize

Categorize

Add this rubric to multiple categories.
Bookmark

Bookmark

Bookmark this rubric for future reference.
Assess
Test run

Test run

Test this rubric or perform an ad-hoc assessment.
Grade

Grade

Build a gradebook to assess students.
Collaborate

Collaborate

Apply this rubric to any object and invite others to assess.
Share
Publish

Publish

Link, embed, and showcase your rubrics on your website.
Email

Email

Email this rubric to a friend.
Discuss

Discuss

Discuss this rubric with other members.
 

Do more with rubrics than ever imagined possible.

Only with iRubrictm.


iRubric and RCampus are Trademarks of Reazon Systems, Inc.
Copyright (C) Reazon Systems Inc. All Rights Reserved
n98