Posted: May 11th, 2022

DQ#11NRNP essay

ubric Detail
Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.
Content
Name: NRNP_6670_Week11_Discussion_Rubric
• Grid View
• List View
Outstanding Performance Excellent Performance Competent Performance Proficient Performance Room for Improvement
Main Posting: Response to the discusion question is reflecive with critical analysis and synthesis representive of knowledg gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources. Points Range: 44 (44%) – 44 (44%)
* Thoroughly responds to the discusion question(s) *is reflecive with critical analysis and synthesis representive of knowledg gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources. * supported by at least 3 current, credible sources Points Range: 40 (40%) – 43 (43%)
* Responds to the discusion question(s) *is reflecive with critical analysis and synthesis representive of knowledg gained from the course readings for the module. * 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth * supported by at least 3 credible references Points Range: 35 (35%) – 39 (39%)
* Responds to most of the discusion question(s) *is somewhat reflecive with critical analysis and synthesis representive of knowledg gained from the course readings for the module. * 50% of post has exceptional depth and breadth * supported by at least 3 credible references Points Range: 31 (31%) – 34 (34%)
* Responds to some of the discusion question(s) * one to two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addresed *is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis *somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. * post is cited with fewer than 2 credible references Points Range: 0 (0%) – 30 (30%)
* Does not respond to the discusion question(s) * lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria *lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis *does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. * contains only 1 or no credible references
Main Posting: Writing Points Range: 6 (6%) – 6 (6%)
* Written clearly and concisely * Contains no grammatical or spelling errors * Fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style Points Range: 5.5 (5.5%) – 5.5 (5.5%)
* Written clearly and concisely * May contain one or no grammatical or spelling error * Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
* Written concisely * May contain one to two grammatical or spelling error * Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style Points Range: 4 (4%) – 5 (5%)
*Writtten somewhat concisely * May contain more than two2 spelling or grammatical errors * Contains some APA formatting erros Points Range: 0 (0%) – 4 (4%)
* Not written clearly or concisely * Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors * Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style
Main Posting: Timely and full participation Points Range: 10 (10%) – 10 (10%)
* meets requirements for timely and full participation * posts main discussion by due date Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Points Range: 0 (0%) – 6 (6%)
* does not meet requirement for full participation
First Reponse
Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources. Points Range: 9 (9%) – 9 (9%)
* response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings * responds to questions posed by faculty * the use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives Points Range: 8.5 (8.5%) – 8.5 (8.5%)
* response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings Points Range: 7.5 (7.5%) – 8 (8%)
* response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting Points Range: 6.5 (6.5%) – 7 (7%)
* response is on topic, may have some depth Points Range: 0 (0%) – 6 (6%)
* reponse may not be on topic, lacks depth
First Reponse: Writing Points Range: 6 (6%) – 6 (6%)
* Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues * Response to faculty questions are fully answered if posed * Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources * Response is effectively written in Standard Edited English Points Range: 5.5 (5.5%) – 5.5 (5.5%)
* Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues * Response to faculty questions are answered if posed * Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources * Response is effectively written in Standard Edited English Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
* Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues * Response to faculty questions are mostly answered if posed * Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources * Response is written in Standard Edited English Points Range: 4.5 (4.5%) – 4.5 (4.5%)
* Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication * Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered if posed * Few or no credible sources are cited Points Range: 0 (0%) – 4 (4%)
* Responses posted in the discussion lack effective * Response to faculty questions are missing * No credible sources are cited
First Reponse: Timely and full participation Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
* meets requirements for timely and full participation * posts by due date Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
* does not meet requirement for full participation
Second Reponse: Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources. Points Range: 9 (9%) – 9 (9%)
* response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings * responds to questions posed by faculty * the use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives Points Range: 8.5 (8.5%) – 8.5 (8.5%)
* response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings Points Range: 7.5 (7.5%) – 8 (8%)
* response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting Points Range: 6.5 (6.5%) – 7 (7%)
* response is on topic, may have some depth Points Range: 0 (0%) – 6 (6%)
* reponse may not be on topic, lacks depth
Second Reponse: Writing Points Range: 6 (6%) – 6 (6%)
* Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues * Response to faculty questions are fully answered if posed * Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources * Response is effectively written in Standard Edited English Points Range: 5.5 (5.5%) – 5.5 (5.5%)
* Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues * Response to faculty questions are answered if posed * Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources * Response is effectively written in Standard Edited English Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
* Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues * Response to faculty questions are mostly answered if posed * Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources * Response is written in Standard Edited English Points Range: 4.5 (4.5%) – 4.5 (4.5%)
* Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication * Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered if posed * Few or no credible sources are cited Points Range: 0 (0%) – 4 (4%)
* Responses posted in the discussion lack effective * Response to faculty questions are missing * No credible sources are cited
Second Reponse: Timely and full participation Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
* meets requirements for timely and full participation * posts by due date Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
* does not meet requirement for full participation
Total Points: 100
Name: NRNP_6670_Week11_Discussion_Rubric

Check Price Discount

Study Notes & Homework Samples: Virtual Memory Limits »Typical Small Housing Estate: Flat Roof