|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCritical Thinking and Logical
Reasoning
Development of Ideas
|
40 to >36.0 ptsExcellentThe case study provided all basic
and complex details are considered, and the situation, problem, or diagnosis
is identified. Next, the thought process to present alternatives, solutions,
or the required information is linked to the analysis. Finally, the student
presents excellent evidence, arguments, or examples to support the
alternatives, solutions, or the required information.
36 to >32.0 ptsGoodThe case study provided the most
basic and complex details are considered, and the situation, problem, or
diagnosis is identified. Next, the thought process to present alternatives,
solutions, or the required information is linked to the analysis. Finally,
the student presents good evidence, arguments, or examples to support the
alternatives, solutions, or the required information.
32 to >28.0 ptsFairThe case study provided some basic
and complex details, identifying the situation, problem, or diagnosis. Next,
the thought process to present alternatives, solutions, or the required
information is linked to the analysis. Finally, the student presents limited
evidence, arguments, or examples to support the alternatives, solutions, or
the required information.
28 to >24.0 ptsPoorThe case study provided only minimal
details and lacked a clear identification of the situation, problem, or
diagnosis. The thought process to present alternatives, solutions, or the
required information is not linked to the analysis. Finally, the student
presents weak or no evidence, arguments, or examples to support the
alternatives, solutions, or the required information.
24 to >0 ptsUnacceptableThe assignment did not reflect the
requested outcomes, was off-topic, and/or the assignment was not submitted.
|
40 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeContent
Mastery
|
25 to >23.0 ptsExcellentThe response shows exemplary mastery
of the theoretical concepts applicable to the situation, recognizing all
basic and complex factors. Furthermore, based on the case study presented,
the response exceeds the requested information.
23 to >20.0 ptsGoodThe response shows good mastery of
the theoretical concepts applicable to the situation, recognizing the most
basic and complex factors. Based on the situation presented, the response
complies with the information requested.
20 to >18.0 ptsFairThe response shows fair mastery of
the theoretical concepts applicable to the situation, recognizing the basic
factors. However, based on the situation presented, the response minimally
complies with the information requested.
18 to >15.0 ptsPoorThe response does not show mastery
of the professional theoretical concepts applicable to the situation.
Analysis misses many factors and details. The response does not comply with
the information requested.
15 to >0 ptsUnacceptableThe assignment did not reflect the
requested outcomes, was off-topic, and/or the assignment was not submitted.
|
25 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeInformation Literacy
Quality of Resources
|
15 to >14.0 ptsExcellentSupporting information is pertinent
to the topic, up to date (depending on what is acceptable in the field), from
credible and trusted sources, and the number of sources meets the requested
amount.
14 to >12.0 ptsGoodSupporting information is pertinent
to the topic, however, 1 source is not a credible and trusted source; they
may or may not be the most recent (depending on what is acceptable in the
field). Additionally, the number of sources meets the requested amount.
12 to >11.0 ptsFairSupporting information is pertinent
to the topic, however, 2 or more sources are not credible and trusted
sources; they may or may not be the most recent (depending on what is
acceptable in the field). Additionally, the number of sources meets the
requested amount.
11 to >9.0 ptsPoorThe following criteria would apply,
supporting information is not pertinent to the topic, none of the sources are
from credible or trusted sources, or the number of sources requested was not
met.
9 to >0 ptsUnacceptableResources did not reflect the
requested outcomes, were off-topic, and/or the assignment was not submitted.
|
15 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWriting
Mechanics, Grammar, and APA
|
10 to >9.0 ptsExcellentExcellence in grammar, spelling, and
sentence structure. Sentences are not too long and are complete sentences.
9 to >8.0 ptsGoodMinimal (1 – 3) typos, spelling,
grammatical, punctuation, or translation errors.
8 to >7.0 ptsFairMultiple (4 -7) typos, spelling,
grammatical, punctuation, or translation errors.
7 to >6.0 ptsPoorSevere (8 – 10) typos, spelling,
grammatical, punctuation, or translation errors.
6 to >0 ptsUnacceptableUnacceptable (11 or more) typos,
spelling, grammatical, punctuation, or translation errors.
|
10 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFormat
Organization and Presentation of Information
|
10 to >9.0 ptsExcellentThe document has a high level of
professional appearance. Material is formatted exceptionally well, presented
in a highly organized fashion, and aligned with assignment requirements.
Includes sections and subtitles as required.
9 to >8.0 ptsGoodThe document has a good,
professional appearance. Overall, the material is formatted and presented in
an organized fashion, aligned with assignment requirements. Includes sections
and subtitles as required.
8 to >7.0 ptsFairThe presentation of information does
not appear professional or approaching proficiency. For example, the
assignment missed required sections, subtitles, or other elements.
7 to >6.0 ptsPoorThe presentation of information
lacks a clear demonstration of a professional appearance. The assignment is
missing several required sections, subtitles, or other elements.
6 to >0 ptsUnacceptableThe assignment did not reflect the
requested outcomes, was off-topic, and/or the assignment was not submitted.
|
10 pts
|
