iRubric: Asynchronous Discussion Activity rubric

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

Asynchronous Discussion Activity

The criteria found in this rubric will be used to assess the quality of a learner's asynchronous discussion postings and responses to the postings and comments of peers during a course. NOTE: Initial postings are comments based on the discussion prompt posted by the clinical educator Responses to others are replies to peers' initial and subsequent postings. The facilitator may also post subsequent comments/questions

Rubric Code: MXAW264

By cplunkett71

Ready to use

Public Rubric

Subject: English

Type: (Other)

Grade Levels: 9-12, Graduate, Post Graduate

Asynchronous Team Discussion
	Poor 1 pts	Fair 2 pts	Good 3 pts	Exemplary 4 pts
Participation	Poor Discussion postings do not contribute to ongoing conversations or respond to peers' postings. There is no evidence of replies to questions. ================= Discussion postings are at midpoint or later in the week/module or contributions are only posted on the last day of the module.	Fair 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.	Good 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. ================ Discussion postings respond to most postings of peers within a 48 hour period.	Exemplary Discussion postings actively stimulate and sustain further discussion by building on peers' responses including — building a focused argument around a specific issue or — asking a new related question or — making an oppositional statement supported by personal experience or related research. =================== Discussion postings are distributed throughout the week/module (not posted all on one day or only at the beginning or only on the last day of the
Attitude & Etiquette	Poor Written interactions on the discussion board show disrespect for the viewpoints of others.	Fair Some of the written interactions on the discussion board show respect and interest in the viewpoints of others.	Good Written interactions on the discussion board show respect and interest in the viewpoints of others.	Exemplary Written interactions on the discussion board show respect, interest, and sensitivity to peers' gender, cultural and linguistic background.
Quality of Posts	Poor Postings are irrelevant or contain incorrect information.	Fair Postings often repeat or summarize what others have said without adding new discussion information. The information in postings is superficial.	Good Postings show an understanding of the readings and adds to the discussion. Old information is linked to new information in the course.	Exemplary Postings show well developed insights into content (i.e. analysis, synthesis, integration of new information). Information external to the course is integrated into discussions. Posts usually stimulate responses and reflection from peers.
Timeliness of Posts	Poor Postings do not occur during the designated week.	Fair Postings occur but only sometimes during the designated week.	Good Postings occur consistently during the designated week.	Exemplary Postings always occur during the designated weeks.
Collaboration	Poor Collaborative postings respond to the posts of others less than twice/weak. Responses are shallow or occasionally inappropriate/rude.	Fair Collaborative postings are shallow in contribution and often offer only agree/disagree statements.	Good Collaborative postings substantially add to the group discussion. The learner is thoughtful and courteous to others and occasionally links conversations to other past conversations and ideas.	Exemplary Collaborative postings extend the meaning of conversations. Learner often links conversations to others posts or ideas in the discussion board. The learner takes the initiative to facilitate discussion amongst the group (i.e. prompts others in the group to respond)
Clarity	Poor Posts are consistently organized and are concise. There are very few spelling or grammar errors.	Fair Posts are mostly organized and concise. There are few spelling or grammar errors.	Good Ideas are mostly clear but disorganized. Spelling and grammar errors sometimes limit the understanding of postings.	Exemplary Posts are long, unorganized, and difficult to understand (frequently longer than 1-2 paragraphs). There are frequent spelling and grammar mistakes.
Professional Engagement	Poor Posts on how the content in the posting will inform future educational practice or growth does not exist.	Fair Posts are mainly factual in content with little comment as to how this information will inform the learner’s practice or change their views.	Good Posts go beyond factual information to discuss how this information has influenced their attitude or behavior on a subject. Postings reflect growth and engagement in the subject.	Exemplary Posts show great insights into personal growth. Learners comment on how what they have learned may change their future practice.

Subjects:

Types:

Discuss this rubric