iRubric: Assessing Threat Assignment rubric

edit print share Copy to my rubrics Bookmark test run assess... delete Do more...

Assessing Threat Assignment

Students are to take a threat situation and evaluate its seriousness using the criteria developed in The Gift of Fear. Students are also to profile the threat maker and discuss how the social context exacerbated or mitigated the situation, using concepts from the sociology textbook for the term.

Rubric Code: HX889A

By kssmith

Ready to use

Private Rubric

Subject: Social Sciences

Type: Assignment

Grade Levels: Undergraduate

Criterion
	Very Good-Excellent 3 pts	Fair-Good 2 pts	Poor 1 pts
Quality of sociological analysis 25 %	Very Good-Excellent Employed one or more abstract sociological arguments or examples involving the application of theories rather than simple definitions of terms	Fair-Good Used only simple concepts and definitions; did not attempt to incorporate theoretical elements into illustrations	Poor Inaccurately applied one or more concepts and/or theories
Number of Sociological Ideas 25 %	Very Good-Excellent Five or more sociological theories or concepts included and adequately illustrated	Fair-Good Four sociological theories or concepts included and adequately illustrated	Poor Three or fewer theories or concepts included OR one or more theories or concepts poorly or inaccurately illustrated
Quality of De Becker analysis 25 %	Very Good-Excellent Effectively employed, explained, and justified the use of four or more of De Becker's techniques, such as use of PINs, evaluating JACA, linking response strategies to the nature of the threat appropriately, etc.	Fair-Good Employed only two - three techniques, or used only simple concepts and definitions; OR these methods were only moderately well justified and/or explained.	Poor Utilized only one technique, OR methods were not well justified or explained OR seemed inappropriate given the threat situation.
Development and Structure 15 %	Very Good-Excellent - Content is comprehensive, accurate, and persuasive. - Major points are stated clearly and are well supported. - Content and purpose of the writing are clear. -All theories/concepts are clearly explained or defined as needed.	Fair-Good - Content is not persuasive. - Major points are addressed, but not well supported. - Content is inconsistent with regard to purpose and clarity of thought. -One to two theories/concepts are not clearly explained or defined as needed. -Flow of logic is choppy.	Poor - Major points are not clear and /or persuasive. -Three or more theories/concepts are not clearly explained or defined. -No clear logical progression of ideas OR illogical statements or arguments are present. -Poor language usage (e.g, inappropriate word choices, syntax, etc.) interferes with understanding of content in 2 or more places.
Grammar, Vocabulary, Spelling, etc. 10 %	Very Good-Excellent - Rules of grammar and usage are followed. - Language is clear and precise; sentences display consistently strong, varied structure. -Very few or no faults with respect to spelling, punctuation, etc. (1 - 5 errors of any type)	Fair-Good - Paper contains few grammatical errors. - Vocabulary limited. -Occasional faults in spelling - Occasional problems with sentence structure (6 - 10 errors of any type)	Poor - Paper contains numerous grammatical errors. -Frequent errors in spelling - Sentence construction errors are numerous (11 or more errors of any type)

Keywords:

social sciences, written report, criminal justice

Subjects:

Types:

Discuss this rubric