Week 3 ls205
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
0 likes•553 views
205
Report
Share
Report
Share
Recommended
Marilyn Gardner Milton: Advanced Law School Chat Pt. 3
Part 3 of Marilyn Gardner Milton's series on advanced law school collaborative sessions and chats.
Recommended
Marilyn Gardner Milton: Advanced Law School Chat Pt. 3
Part 3 of Marilyn Gardner Milton's series on advanced law school collaborative sessions and chats.
Literate environment analysis_presentation_outline1
This is my presentation on my study on The Beginning Reader at the Walden University. They are a summary of what I learnt to create a Literate environment.
Adding the ESP to Multidisciplinary EAP Courses Slides
Powerpoint slides for TESOL 2010 presentation: "Adding the ESP to Multidisciplinary EAP Courses", presented by Ethel C. Swartley, University of Denver (USA)
Fiesole 2013: Author centric-thinking for Asian researchers
Nice to see Timo Hannay picking up on the same themes: http://www.publishingtechnology.com/2013/08/what-is-a-publisher-now-an-interview-with-digital-sciences-timo-hannay/
Utilizing Rubrics in Your Blackboard Course
This presentation shares background on rubrics, why they may be advantageous to an instructor, and the various ways you could use rubrics in your Blackboard course.
Gs Os El Os For Ilp 10 30 09
Workshop on Goals, Objectives and Expected Learning Outcomes for information literacy instruction
ETUG Spring 2014 - Improving Peer Review of Writing with Calibrated Peer Review
Are you looking for ways to incorporate writing in a large enrolment course? Would you like to help students think more critically about their own writing? Do you already incorporate writing assignments in your course, but would like to reduce the amount of time you spend reading and assessing student writing? If so, Calibrated Peer Review (CPR) may be the tool for you. In this session, we’ll highlight the functionality of Calibrated Peer Review using SCIE113 as a case study. As a writing intensive course in a discipline not traditionally associated with writing, SCIE113 initially faced challenges with helping students understand the significant of peer review, how to constructively review a peer’s paper and how to think critically about their own work. We’ll discuss the development, evaluation, and evolution of Calibrated Peer Review assignments in SCIE113 and share both faculty and student feedback about the tool. We’ll also share guidelines for implementation and explore how CPR is used in other disciplines and contexts.
3102020 Discussion Question Rubrichttpslmscontent.emb.docx
3/10/2020 Discussion Question Rubric
https://lmscontent.embanet.com/RC/General/MSN/Rubrics/Discussion_Question_Rubric_1.html 1/3
Discussion Question Rubric
Note: Scholarly resources are defined as evidence-based practice, peer-reviewed journals; textbook (do not rely solely on your textbook as a reference); and National Standard Guidelines. Review
assignment instructions, as this will provide any additional requirements that are not specifically listed on the rubric.
Discussion Question Rubric – 100 Points
Criteria Exemplary
Exceeds Expectations
Advanced
Meets Expectations
Intermediate
Needs Improvement
Novice
Inadequate
Total
Points
Quality of
Initial Post
Provides clear examples
supported by course
content and references.
Cites three or more
references, using at least
one new scholarly
resource that was not
provided in the course
materials.
All instruction
requirements noted.
40 points
Components are accurate and thoroughly
represented, with explanations and
application of knowledge to include
evidence-based practice, ethics, theory,
and/or role. Synthesizes course content
using course materials and scholarly
resources to support importantpoints.
Meets all requirements within the
discussion instructions.
Cites two references.
35 points
Components are accurate and mostly represented
primarily with definitions and summarization. Ideas
may be overstated, with minimal contribution to the
subject matter. Minimal application to evidence-
based practice, theory, or role development.
Synthesis of course content is present but missing
depth and/or development.
Is missing one component/requirement of the
discussion instructions.
Cites one reference, or references do not clearly
support content.
Most instruction requirements are noted.
31 points
Absent application to
evidence-based
practice, theory, or
role development.
Synthesis of course
content is superficial.
Demonstrates
incomplete
understanding of
content and/or
inadequate
preparation.
No references cited.
Missing several
instruction
requirements.
Submits post late.
27 points
40
3/10/2020 Discussion Question Rubric
https://lmscontent.embanet.com/RC/General/MSN/Rubrics/Discussion_Question_Rubric_1.html 2/3
Peer
Response
Post
Offers both supportive
and alternative viewpoints
to the discussion, using
two or more scholarly
references per peer post.
Post provides additional
value to the conversation.
All instruction
requirements noted.
40 points
Evidence of further synthesis of course
content. Provides clarification and new
information or insight related to the
content of the peer’s post.
Response is supported by course content
and a minimum of one scholarly reference
per each peer post.
All instruction requirements noted.
35 points
Lacks clarification or new information. Scholarly
reference supports the content in the peer post
without adding new information or insight.
Missing reference from one peer post.
Partially followed instructions regarding number ...
3102020 Discussion Question Rubrichttpslmscontent.emb.docx
3/10/2020 Discussion Question Rubric
https://lmscontent.embanet.com/RC/General/MSN/Rubrics/Discussion_Question_Rubric_1.html 1/3
Discussion Question Rubric
Note: Scholarly resources are defined as evidence-based practice, peer-reviewed journals; textbook (do not rely solely on your textbook as a reference); and National Standard Guidelines. Review
assignment instructions, as this will provide any additional requirements that are not specifically listed on the rubric.
Discussion Question Rubric – 100 Points
Criteria Exemplary
Exceeds Expectations
Advanced
Meets Expectations
Intermediate
Needs Improvement
Novice
Inadequate
Total
Points
Quality of
Initial Post
Provides clear examples
supported by course
content and references.
Cites three or more
references, using at least
one new scholarly
resource that was not
provided in the course
materials.
All instruction
requirements noted.
40 points
Components are accurate and thoroughly
represented, with explanations and
application of knowledge to include
evidence-based practice, ethics, theory,
and/or role. Synthesizes course content
using course materials and scholarly
resources to support importantpoints.
Meets all requirements within the
discussion instructions.
Cites two references.
35 points
Components are accurate and mostly represented
primarily with definitions and summarization. Ideas
may be overstated, with minimal contribution to the
subject matter. Minimal application to evidence-
based practice, theory, or role development.
Synthesis of course content is present but missing
depth and/or development.
Is missing one component/requirement of the
discussion instructions.
Cites one reference, or references do not clearly
support content.
Most instruction requirements are noted.
31 points
Absent application to
evidence-based
practice, theory, or
role development.
Synthesis of course
content is superficial.
Demonstrates
incomplete
understanding of
content and/or
inadequate
preparation.
No references cited.
Missing several
instruction
requirements.
Submits post late.
27 points
40
3/10/2020 Discussion Question Rubric
https://lmscontent.embanet.com/RC/General/MSN/Rubrics/Discussion_Question_Rubric_1.html 2/3
Peer
Response
Post
Offers both supportive
and alternative viewpoints
to the discussion, using
two or more scholarly
references per peer post.
Post provides additional
value to the conversation.
All instruction
requirements noted.
40 points
Evidence of further synthesis of course
content. Provides clarification and new
information or insight related to the
content of the peer’s post.
Response is supported by course content
and a minimum of one scholarly reference
per each peer post.
All instruction requirements noted.
35 points
Lacks clarification or new information. Scholarly
reference supports the content in the peer post
without adding new information or insight.
Missing reference from one peer post.
Partially followed instructions regarding number.
How to develop and create a Domain Model1. Primary list of obj.docx
How to develop and create a Domain Model
1. Primary list of objects:
Faculty
Students
Projects
Class
Administrator
Login Level
Department
Courses
rubric
self-assessment
peer-assessment
feedback
Reports
Average
Team
individual
Comments
2. Eliminates duplicated and unnecessary items
a. Classes vs courses
b. Feedback vs comments
c. Team vs Students
3. Create a domain model and only group classes having aggregation relationship.
4. Identify further domain objects that weren’t in the requirements
5. Building generalization relationships in the domain model.
PADM 501
Essay Rubric
Criteria
Levels of Achievement
Content
(70%)
Advanced
92-100%
Proficient
84-91%
Developing
1-83%
Not Present
Total
Research Purpose
32.5 to 35.0 Points:
The essay question is clearly identified and retains focus throughout the paper. Introduction provides sufficient background on the topic and previews major points. All necessary aspects of the assignment described in the instructions are clearly identifiable. Organization emphasizes the central theme or purpose.
Grading feedback and lessons from applicable modules/weeks are fully addressed/incorporated.
29.5 to 32.0 Points:
The essay question may require some clarification and/or greater prominence throughout the paper. Introduction may not provide adequate background on the topic and preview major points. Most necessary aspects of the assignment described in the instructions are clearly identifiable and sufficiently addressed. Organization may not sufficiently emphasize the central theme or purpose.
Grading feedback and lessons from applicable modules/weeks are generally addressed/ incorporated.
1.0 To 29.00 Points:
The research question requires significant clarification and prominence throughout the paper. Introduction may be missing or ambiguous. Some necessary aspects of the assignment described in the instructions are clearly identifiable, but others may require clarification or development. Organization may require significant improvement.
Grading feedback and lessons from applicable modules/weeks are insufficiently addressed/incorporated.
0 points
Not present
Reasoned Analysis
32.5 to 35.0 Points:
Major points are stated clearly and are supported by valid evidence and logical reasoning. Objective, reasoned analysis is employed. Opposing viewpoints are sufficiently acknowledged and critically evaluated. The conclusion logically derives from the paper’s ideas. An authoritative, persuasive, and statesmanlike voice is used (first/second person perspective avoided).
Grading feedback and lessons from applicable modules/weeks are fully addressed/incorporated.
29.5 to 32.0 Points:
Most major points are stated clearly and supported by valid evidence and logical reasoning, but some points may require clarification or greater support. Opposing viewpoints are acknowledged but may require greater evaluation. The conclusion does not fully derive from the paper’s ideas. Some improvements to objective t ...
3162020 Discussion Question Rubrichttpslmscontent.emb.docx
3/16/2020 Discussion Question Rubric
https://lmscontent.embanet.com/RC/General/MSN/Rubrics/Discussion_Question_Rubric_1.html 1/3
Discussion Question Rubric
Note: Scholarly resources are defined as evidence-based practice, peer-reviewed journals; textbook (do not rely solely on your textbook as a reference); and National Standard Guidelines. Review
assignment instructions, as this will provide any additional requirements that are not specifically listed on the rubric.
Discussion Question Rubric – 100 Points
Criteria Exemplary
Exceeds Expectations
Advanced
Meets Expectations
Intermediate
Needs Improvement
Novice
Inadequate
Total
Points
Quality of
Initial Post
Provides clear examples
supported by course
content and references.
Cites three or more
references, using at least
one new scholarly
resource that was not
provided in the course
materials.
All instruction
requirements noted.
40 points
Components are accurate and thoroughly
represented, with explanations and
application of knowledge to include
evidence-based practice, ethics, theory,
and/or role. Synthesizes course content
using course materials and scholarly
resources to support importantpoints.
Meets all requirements within the
discussion instructions.
Cites two references.
35 points
Components are accurate and mostly represented
primarily with definitions and summarization. Ideas
may be overstated, with minimal contribution to the
subject matter. Minimal application to evidence-
based practice, theory, or role development.
Synthesis of course content is present but missing
depth and/or development.
Is missing one component/requirement of the
discussion instructions.
Cites one reference, or references do not clearly
support content.
Most instruction requirements are noted.
31 points
Absent application to
evidence-based
practice, theory, or
role development.
Synthesis of course
content is superficial.
Demonstrates
incomplete
understanding of
content and/or
inadequate
preparation.
No references cited.
Missing several
instruction
requirements.
Submits post late.
27 points
40
3/16/2020 Discussion Question Rubric
https://lmscontent.embanet.com/RC/General/MSN/Rubrics/Discussion_Question_Rubric_1.html 2/3
Peer
Response
Post
Offers both supportive
and alternative viewpoints
to the discussion, using
two or more scholarly
references per peer post.
Post provides additional
value to the conversation.
All instruction
requirements noted.
40 points
Evidence of further synthesis of course
content. Provides clarification and new
information or insight related to the
content of the peer’s post.
Response is supported by course content
and a minimum of one scholarly reference
per each peer post.
All instruction requirements noted.
35 points
Lacks clarification or new information. Scholarly
reference supports the content in the peer post
without adding new information or insight.
Missing reference from one peer post.
Partially followed instructions regarding number ...
3162020 Discussion Question Rubrichttpslmscontent.emb.docx
3/16/2020 Discussion Question Rubric
https://lmscontent.embanet.com/RC/General/MSN/Rubrics/Discussion_Question_Rubric_1.html 1/3
Discussion Question Rubric
Note: Scholarly resources are defined as evidence-based practice, peer-reviewed journals; textbook (do not rely solely on your textbook as a reference); and National Standard Guidelines. Review
assignment instructions, as this will provide any additional requirements that are not specifically listed on the rubric.
Discussion Question Rubric – 100 Points
Criteria Exemplary
Exceeds Expectations
Advanced
Meets Expectations
Intermediate
Needs Improvement
Novice
Inadequate
Total
Points
Quality of
Initial Post
Provides clear examples
supported by course
content and references.
Cites three or more
references, using at least
one new scholarly
resource that was not
provided in the course
materials.
All instruction
requirements noted.
40 points
Components are accurate and thoroughly
represented, with explanations and
application of knowledge to include
evidence-based practice, ethics, theory,
and/or role. Synthesizes course content
using course materials and scholarly
resources to support importantpoints.
Meets all requirements within the
discussion instructions.
Cites two references.
35 points
Components are accurate and mostly represented
primarily with definitions and summarization. Ideas
may be overstated, with minimal contribution to the
subject matter. Minimal application to evidence-
based practice, theory, or role development.
Synthesis of course content is present but missing
depth and/or development.
Is missing one component/requirement of the
discussion instructions.
Cites one reference, or references do not clearly
support content.
Most instruction requirements are noted.
31 points
Absent application to
evidence-based
practice, theory, or
role development.
Synthesis of course
content is superficial.
Demonstrates
incomplete
understanding of
content and/or
inadequate
preparation.
No references cited.
Missing several
instruction
requirements.
Submits post late.
27 points
40
3/16/2020 Discussion Question Rubric
https://lmscontent.embanet.com/RC/General/MSN/Rubrics/Discussion_Question_Rubric_1.html 2/3
Peer
Response
Post
Offers both supportive
and alternative viewpoints
to the discussion, using
two or more scholarly
references per peer post.
Post provides additional
value to the conversation.
All instruction
requirements noted.
40 points
Evidence of further synthesis of course
content. Provides clarification and new
information or insight related to the
content of the peer’s post.
Response is supported by course content
and a minimum of one scholarly reference
per each peer post.
All instruction requirements noted.
35 points
Lacks clarification or new information. Scholarly
reference supports the content in the peer post
without adding new information or insight.
Missing reference from one peer post.
Partially followed instructions regarding number.
Assessment criteria The assessment for this module comprises 100.docx
Assessment criteria
The assessment for this module comprises 100% individual coursework and assignment.
Overview
The Assignment requires you to submit an individual 2,000-word essay plus Appendices of 5-12 pages. Failure to use Appendices to provide relevant background and other information, workings and analysis will result in a reduced mark and may result in a fail grade.
The Assignment should contain a reference list, however there should not be a bibliography, meaning that there should not be any references in the reference list not used in the Assignment.
Diagrams, footnotes, tables and references will not be included in the word count. Diagrams, footnotes and tables will only be given reward (in the marking process) if the text of the Assignment refers to them.
Technical requirements
The Assignment must be written in essay format and be word-processed and saved in MS Word or as a pdf.
The Assignment must follow Bradford academic writing conventions for referencing. It must be substantially in the format as provided (including all headings provided, although additional sub-headings may be added).
Assignment aim
The purpose of this assignment is for you to demonstrate your understanding of business ethics and/or sustainability. Each of the assignment has a slightly different focus, however there are opportunities in each assignment to show skills in the application of ethical theories, management of ethical and sustainability issues and stakeholder engagement.
Each of the Assignment options will rely variously on material covered up to Unit 8. All passing papers will need to demonstrate skillful use of materials from Units more relevant to your chosen Assignment, along with relevant articles and research from outside the course materials. Assignments that receive better marks will demonstrate knowledge of materials from all Units and greater depth from outside course materials. .
Background research
Library and Internet sources, as well as internal organisational data should provide the foundation for material for this essay. Engaging in the weekly discussion forums will also help you to write your assignment.
Remember this is not a reflective analysis of the selected organisational issue. Relevant sources of information and literature have to be used effectively to sufficiently justify your analysis and subsequent recommendations. It is important that you read business ethics and sustainability literature including the recommended additional reading materials.
Referencing and appendices
You are asked to prepare a list of references for this assignment. There is often confusion between references and bibliographies and uncertainty over what should and what should not appear in an appendix. Note: there should be no bibliography in the Assignment, only a Reference list.
The appendices should be used to provide research and preparation to provide a basis for the marker to understand the context of your situation and your an.
Choose one of the Case Studies from Chapter 13 using the Week.docx
Choose one of the Case Studies from Chapter 13 using the
Week 6: Case Study Choice
. Please summarize the case and discuss the questions that are asked with the case study presentation. Although it is not specifically asked, make sure that you are including aspects of immobility from Chapter 25 within the answers to the questions, and drawing ABGs on your patient, relaying the results (note you will need to make up what would be considered appropriate ABG results based on this case), and what those results mean in relation to your case study.
The case study I picked is : Cystic Fibrosis
Discussion Question Rubric
Note:
Scholarly resources are defined as evidence-based practice, peer-reviewed journals; textbook (do not rely solely on your textbook as a reference); and National Standard Guidelines. Review assignment instructions, as this will provide any additional requirements that are not specifically listed on the rubric.
Discussion Question Rubric – 100 PointsCriteriaExemplary
Exceeds ExpectationsAdvanced
Meets ExpectationsIntermediate
Needs ImprovementNovice
InadequateTotal PointsQuality of Initial PostProvides clear examples supported by course content and references.
Cites three or more references, using at least one new scholarly resource that was not provided in the course materials.
All instruction requirements noted.
40 points
Components are accurate and thoroughly represented, with explanations and application of knowledge to include evidence-based practice, ethics, theory, and/or role. Synthesizes course content using course materials and scholarly resources to support importantpoints.
Meets all requirements within the discussion instructions.
Cites two references.
35 points
Components are accurate and mostly represented primarily with definitions and summarization. Ideas may be overstated, with minimal contribution to the subject matter. Minimal application to evidence-based practice, theory, or role development. Synthesis of course content is present but missing depth and/or development.
Is missing one component/requirement of the discussion instructions.
Cites one reference, or references do not clearly support content.
Most instruction requirements are noted.
31 points
Absent application to evidence-based practice, theory, or role development. Synthesis of course content is superficial.
Demonstrates incomplete understanding of content and/or inadequate preparation.
No references cited.
Missing several instruction requirements.
Submits post late.
27 points40
Peer Response PostOffers both supportive and alternative viewpoints to the discussion, using two or more scholarly references per peer post. Post provides additional value to the conversation.
All instruction requirements noted.
40 points
Evidence of further synthesis of course content. Provides clarification and new information or insight related to the content of the peer’s post.
Response is supported by course content and a m.
BUSI 310Discussion Board Grading RubricDiscussion Board Thre.docx
BUSI 310
Discussion Board Grading Rubric
Discussion Board Thread (60 points)
Points Possible
Criteria
54–60
A
Superior work in all areas - Student consistently exceeds minimal expectations in all areas regarding content, analysis, participation, timeliness, and writing style.
Specifically:
· Information is very well organized with well-constructed paragraphs
· Information clearly relates to the main topic and includes several supporting details.
· All sources are accurately documented in current APA format.
· The required scholarly sources are cited numerous times.
· Minimal to non-existent spelling, grammatical, or APA errors exist.
· The required length is exceeded.
48–53
B
Good work in most areas - Student demonstrates minor deficiencies in some areas regarding content, analysis, or writing style.
Specifically:
· Information is organized with well-constructed paragraphs.
· Information clearly relates to the main topic and includes supporting details.
· The requireds scholarly sources are cited more than once
· Limited spelling, grammatical, or APA errors exist.
· The required length is met.
42–47
C
Fair work in most areas – Student exhibits need for improvement in most areas regarding content, writing style, and/or participation.
Specifically:
· Information is organized, but paragraphs are not well constructed.
· Information clearly relates to the main topic but includes few supporting details.
· Each of the required sources are cited at least once.
· Few spelling, grammatical, or APA errors exist.
· The required length is met.
0–41
D, F
Failing – Student shows evidence of refusal or inability to meet minimum standards of undergraduate level work.
Specifically:
· The information appears to be disorganized.
· The required number of scholarly sources are not used or not accurately documented.
· Numerous spelling, grammatical, or APA errors exist.
· The required length is not met.
Total
Instructor’s Comments:
Discussion Board Replies (40 points)
Points Possible
Criteria
36–40
A
Superior work in all areas - Student consistently exceeds minimal expectations in all areas regarding content, analysis, participation, timeliness, and writing style.
Specifically:
· Information is very well organized with well-constructed paragraphs.
· Information clearly relates to the main topic and includes several supporting details.
· All sources are accurately documented in current APA format.
· The required scholarly sources are cited numerous times.
· Minimal to non-existent spelling, grammatical, or APA errors exist.
· Response to 3 threads is made by the published deadline for the assignment and meets the required length.
32–35
B
Good work in most areas - Student demonstrates minor deficiencies in some areas regarding content, analysis, or writing style.
Specifically:
· Information is organized with well-constructed paragraphs.
· Information clearly relates to the main topic and includes supporting details.
· The required ...
BUSI 310Discussion Board InstructionsDiscussion Board Forum Th.docx
BUSI 310
Discussion Board Instructions
Discussion Board Forum Threads are due in Modules/Weeks 1, 3, 5 and 7. Discussion Board Forum Replies are due in Modules/Weeks 2, 4, 6, and 8. The learning theories upon which this class is based are actualized in the threads.
To gain the most from this class, you must:
· Read both the threads of your classmates and the articles which are used to write the thread.
· Draw classmates into discussion of the topic by asking questions.
· Expect to spend some time each day reviewing all threads and replies (even those in which you are not involved).
· The research and writing done for each forum is to prepare you to research and write upper-level research papers in current APA format. Each posting, whether threads or replies, must be written without grammar or spelling errors and must utilize proper APA in-text and reference citations.
· This is a formal writing assignment, so use 3rd person throughout the forum threads and replies.
Discussion Board Forum Threads:
The requirements listed below are the minimum requirements. Completing only the minimum amount of work cannot earn higher than a "C" for an assignment.
1. Review the key terms listed at the end of the Chapter you are working on. You will select one of the key terms. No duplication of articles or concepts is allowed. Each student must cover a different concept. You may reserve a topic beginning at 12 a.m. (ET) on Monday of the odd-numbered modules/weeks (1, 3, 5, and 7). Topics reserved prior to then will be deleted.
2. Conduct a search of Liberty University’s Online Library resources to find 3 peer-reviewed articles that are no more than 3 years old and closely relate to the concept. These articles must be found through the Liberty University Library; no general internet search is allowed. No duplication of articles or concepts is allowed. Each student must cover a different concept. Note: Blogs, education sites, commercial sites, Wikipedia, About.com, editorials, and book reviews are just a few of the types of materials that not acceptable for this exercise. You must look for articles from reputable peer-reviewed magazines and journals.
3. After reading the articles, select the 1 article that you wish to discuss. Your thread must include the information listed below in the following format and be posted directly in the discussion board:
· Definition: a brief definition of the key term followed by the APA reference for the term; this does not count in the word requirement;
· Summary: Choose 1 of the articles and summarize it in your own words. This must be about 125 word minimum. Be sure to note the article's author as well as his/her credentials and the reason his/her opinions, research, or findings should be respected regarding the key term.
· Discussion: Using a minimum of 400 words, write a brief discussion in your own words of how the article relates to the selected key term. A discussion is not rehashing what was already stated in the ar ...
More Related Content
What's hot
Literate environment analysis_presentation_outline1
This is my presentation on my study on The Beginning Reader at the Walden University. They are a summary of what I learnt to create a Literate environment.
Adding the ESP to Multidisciplinary EAP Courses Slides
Powerpoint slides for TESOL 2010 presentation: "Adding the ESP to Multidisciplinary EAP Courses", presented by Ethel C. Swartley, University of Denver (USA)
Fiesole 2013: Author centric-thinking for Asian researchers
Nice to see Timo Hannay picking up on the same themes: http://www.publishingtechnology.com/2013/08/what-is-a-publisher-now-an-interview-with-digital-sciences-timo-hannay/
Utilizing Rubrics in Your Blackboard Course
This presentation shares background on rubrics, why they may be advantageous to an instructor, and the various ways you could use rubrics in your Blackboard course.
Gs Os El Os For Ilp 10 30 09
Workshop on Goals, Objectives and Expected Learning Outcomes for information literacy instruction
ETUG Spring 2014 - Improving Peer Review of Writing with Calibrated Peer Review
Are you looking for ways to incorporate writing in a large enrolment course? Would you like to help students think more critically about their own writing? Do you already incorporate writing assignments in your course, but would like to reduce the amount of time you spend reading and assessing student writing? If so, Calibrated Peer Review (CPR) may be the tool for you. In this session, we’ll highlight the functionality of Calibrated Peer Review using SCIE113 as a case study. As a writing intensive course in a discipline not traditionally associated with writing, SCIE113 initially faced challenges with helping students understand the significant of peer review, how to constructively review a peer’s paper and how to think critically about their own work. We’ll discuss the development, evaluation, and evolution of Calibrated Peer Review assignments in SCIE113 and share both faculty and student feedback about the tool. We’ll also share guidelines for implementation and explore how CPR is used in other disciplines and contexts.
What's hot (12)
Literate environment analysis_presentation_outline1
Literate environment analysis_presentation_outline1
Adding the ESP to Multidisciplinary EAP Courses Slides
Adding the ESP to Multidisciplinary EAP Courses Slides
Fiesole 2013: Author centric-thinking for Asian researchers
Fiesole 2013: Author centric-thinking for Asian researchers
ETUG Spring 2014 - Improving Peer Review of Writing with Calibrated Peer Review
ETUG Spring 2014 - Improving Peer Review of Writing with Calibrated Peer Review
Similar to Week 3 ls205
3102020 Discussion Question Rubrichttpslmscontent.emb.docx
3/10/2020 Discussion Question Rubric
https://lmscontent.embanet.com/RC/General/MSN/Rubrics/Discussion_Question_Rubric_1.html 1/3
Discussion Question Rubric
Note: Scholarly resources are defined as evidence-based practice, peer-reviewed journals; textbook (do not rely solely on your textbook as a reference); and National Standard Guidelines. Review
assignment instructions, as this will provide any additional requirements that are not specifically listed on the rubric.
Discussion Question Rubric – 100 Points
Criteria Exemplary
Exceeds Expectations
Advanced
Meets Expectations
Intermediate
Needs Improvement
Novice
Inadequate
Total
Points
Quality of
Initial Post
Provides clear examples
supported by course
content and references.
Cites three or more
references, using at least
one new scholarly
resource that was not
provided in the course
materials.
All instruction
requirements noted.
40 points
Components are accurate and thoroughly
represented, with explanations and
application of knowledge to include
evidence-based practice, ethics, theory,
and/or role. Synthesizes course content
using course materials and scholarly
resources to support importantpoints.
Meets all requirements within the
discussion instructions.
Cites two references.
35 points
Components are accurate and mostly represented
primarily with definitions and summarization. Ideas
may be overstated, with minimal contribution to the
subject matter. Minimal application to evidence-
based practice, theory, or role development.
Synthesis of course content is present but missing
depth and/or development.
Is missing one component/requirement of the
discussion instructions.
Cites one reference, or references do not clearly
support content.
Most instruction requirements are noted.
31 points
Absent application to
evidence-based
practice, theory, or
role development.
Synthesis of course
content is superficial.
Demonstrates
incomplete
understanding of
content and/or
inadequate
preparation.
No references cited.
Missing several
instruction
requirements.
Submits post late.
27 points
40
3/10/2020 Discussion Question Rubric
https://lmscontent.embanet.com/RC/General/MSN/Rubrics/Discussion_Question_Rubric_1.html 2/3
Peer
Response
Post
Offers both supportive
and alternative viewpoints
to the discussion, using
two or more scholarly
references per peer post.
Post provides additional
value to the conversation.
All instruction
requirements noted.
40 points
Evidence of further synthesis of course
content. Provides clarification and new
information or insight related to the
content of the peer’s post.
Response is supported by course content
and a minimum of one scholarly reference
per each peer post.
All instruction requirements noted.
35 points
Lacks clarification or new information. Scholarly
reference supports the content in the peer post
without adding new information or insight.
Missing reference from one peer post.
Partially followed instructions regarding number ...
3102020 Discussion Question Rubrichttpslmscontent.emb.docx
3/10/2020 Discussion Question Rubric
https://lmscontent.embanet.com/RC/General/MSN/Rubrics/Discussion_Question_Rubric_1.html 1/3
Discussion Question Rubric
Note: Scholarly resources are defined as evidence-based practice, peer-reviewed journals; textbook (do not rely solely on your textbook as a reference); and National Standard Guidelines. Review
assignment instructions, as this will provide any additional requirements that are not specifically listed on the rubric.
Discussion Question Rubric – 100 Points
Criteria Exemplary
Exceeds Expectations
Advanced
Meets Expectations
Intermediate
Needs Improvement
Novice
Inadequate
Total
Points
Quality of
Initial Post
Provides clear examples
supported by course
content and references.
Cites three or more
references, using at least
one new scholarly
resource that was not
provided in the course
materials.
All instruction
requirements noted.
40 points
Components are accurate and thoroughly
represented, with explanations and
application of knowledge to include
evidence-based practice, ethics, theory,
and/or role. Synthesizes course content
using course materials and scholarly
resources to support importantpoints.
Meets all requirements within the
discussion instructions.
Cites two references.
35 points
Components are accurate and mostly represented
primarily with definitions and summarization. Ideas
may be overstated, with minimal contribution to the
subject matter. Minimal application to evidence-
based practice, theory, or role development.
Synthesis of course content is present but missing
depth and/or development.
Is missing one component/requirement of the
discussion instructions.
Cites one reference, or references do not clearly
support content.
Most instruction requirements are noted.
31 points
Absent application to
evidence-based
practice, theory, or
role development.
Synthesis of course
content is superficial.
Demonstrates
incomplete
understanding of
content and/or
inadequate
preparation.
No references cited.
Missing several
instruction
requirements.
Submits post late.
27 points
40
3/10/2020 Discussion Question Rubric
https://lmscontent.embanet.com/RC/General/MSN/Rubrics/Discussion_Question_Rubric_1.html 2/3
Peer
Response
Post
Offers both supportive
and alternative viewpoints
to the discussion, using
two or more scholarly
references per peer post.
Post provides additional
value to the conversation.
All instruction
requirements noted.
40 points
Evidence of further synthesis of course
content. Provides clarification and new
information or insight related to the
content of the peer’s post.
Response is supported by course content
and a minimum of one scholarly reference
per each peer post.
All instruction requirements noted.
35 points
Lacks clarification or new information. Scholarly
reference supports the content in the peer post
without adding new information or insight.
Missing reference from one peer post.
Partially followed instructions regarding number.
How to develop and create a Domain Model1. Primary list of obj.docx
How to develop and create a Domain Model
1. Primary list of objects:
Faculty
Students
Projects
Class
Administrator
Login Level
Department
Courses
rubric
self-assessment
peer-assessment
feedback
Reports
Average
Team
individual
Comments
2. Eliminates duplicated and unnecessary items
a. Classes vs courses
b. Feedback vs comments
c. Team vs Students
3. Create a domain model and only group classes having aggregation relationship.
4. Identify further domain objects that weren’t in the requirements
5. Building generalization relationships in the domain model.
PADM 501
Essay Rubric
Criteria
Levels of Achievement
Content
(70%)
Advanced
92-100%
Proficient
84-91%
Developing
1-83%
Not Present
Total
Research Purpose
32.5 to 35.0 Points:
The essay question is clearly identified and retains focus throughout the paper. Introduction provides sufficient background on the topic and previews major points. All necessary aspects of the assignment described in the instructions are clearly identifiable. Organization emphasizes the central theme or purpose.
Grading feedback and lessons from applicable modules/weeks are fully addressed/incorporated.
29.5 to 32.0 Points:
The essay question may require some clarification and/or greater prominence throughout the paper. Introduction may not provide adequate background on the topic and preview major points. Most necessary aspects of the assignment described in the instructions are clearly identifiable and sufficiently addressed. Organization may not sufficiently emphasize the central theme or purpose.
Grading feedback and lessons from applicable modules/weeks are generally addressed/ incorporated.
1.0 To 29.00 Points:
The research question requires significant clarification and prominence throughout the paper. Introduction may be missing or ambiguous. Some necessary aspects of the assignment described in the instructions are clearly identifiable, but others may require clarification or development. Organization may require significant improvement.
Grading feedback and lessons from applicable modules/weeks are insufficiently addressed/incorporated.
0 points
Not present
Reasoned Analysis
32.5 to 35.0 Points:
Major points are stated clearly and are supported by valid evidence and logical reasoning. Objective, reasoned analysis is employed. Opposing viewpoints are sufficiently acknowledged and critically evaluated. The conclusion logically derives from the paper’s ideas. An authoritative, persuasive, and statesmanlike voice is used (first/second person perspective avoided).
Grading feedback and lessons from applicable modules/weeks are fully addressed/incorporated.
29.5 to 32.0 Points:
Most major points are stated clearly and supported by valid evidence and logical reasoning, but some points may require clarification or greater support. Opposing viewpoints are acknowledged but may require greater evaluation. The conclusion does not fully derive from the paper’s ideas. Some improvements to objective t ...
3162020 Discussion Question Rubrichttpslmscontent.emb.docx
3/16/2020 Discussion Question Rubric
https://lmscontent.embanet.com/RC/General/MSN/Rubrics/Discussion_Question_Rubric_1.html 1/3
Discussion Question Rubric
Note: Scholarly resources are defined as evidence-based practice, peer-reviewed journals; textbook (do not rely solely on your textbook as a reference); and National Standard Guidelines. Review
assignment instructions, as this will provide any additional requirements that are not specifically listed on the rubric.
Discussion Question Rubric – 100 Points
Criteria Exemplary
Exceeds Expectations
Advanced
Meets Expectations
Intermediate
Needs Improvement
Novice
Inadequate
Total
Points
Quality of
Initial Post
Provides clear examples
supported by course
content and references.
Cites three or more
references, using at least
one new scholarly
resource that was not
provided in the course
materials.
All instruction
requirements noted.
40 points
Components are accurate and thoroughly
represented, with explanations and
application of knowledge to include
evidence-based practice, ethics, theory,
and/or role. Synthesizes course content
using course materials and scholarly
resources to support importantpoints.
Meets all requirements within the
discussion instructions.
Cites two references.
35 points
Components are accurate and mostly represented
primarily with definitions and summarization. Ideas
may be overstated, with minimal contribution to the
subject matter. Minimal application to evidence-
based practice, theory, or role development.
Synthesis of course content is present but missing
depth and/or development.
Is missing one component/requirement of the
discussion instructions.
Cites one reference, or references do not clearly
support content.
Most instruction requirements are noted.
31 points
Absent application to
evidence-based
practice, theory, or
role development.
Synthesis of course
content is superficial.
Demonstrates
incomplete
understanding of
content and/or
inadequate
preparation.
No references cited.
Missing several
instruction
requirements.
Submits post late.
27 points
40
3/16/2020 Discussion Question Rubric
https://lmscontent.embanet.com/RC/General/MSN/Rubrics/Discussion_Question_Rubric_1.html 2/3
Peer
Response
Post
Offers both supportive
and alternative viewpoints
to the discussion, using
two or more scholarly
references per peer post.
Post provides additional
value to the conversation.
All instruction
requirements noted.
40 points
Evidence of further synthesis of course
content. Provides clarification and new
information or insight related to the
content of the peer’s post.
Response is supported by course content
and a minimum of one scholarly reference
per each peer post.
All instruction requirements noted.
35 points
Lacks clarification or new information. Scholarly
reference supports the content in the peer post
without adding new information or insight.
Missing reference from one peer post.
Partially followed instructions regarding number ...
3162020 Discussion Question Rubrichttpslmscontent.emb.docx
3/16/2020 Discussion Question Rubric
https://lmscontent.embanet.com/RC/General/MSN/Rubrics/Discussion_Question_Rubric_1.html 1/3
Discussion Question Rubric
Note: Scholarly resources are defined as evidence-based practice, peer-reviewed journals; textbook (do not rely solely on your textbook as a reference); and National Standard Guidelines. Review
assignment instructions, as this will provide any additional requirements that are not specifically listed on the rubric.
Discussion Question Rubric – 100 Points
Criteria Exemplary
Exceeds Expectations
Advanced
Meets Expectations
Intermediate
Needs Improvement
Novice
Inadequate
Total
Points
Quality of
Initial Post
Provides clear examples
supported by course
content and references.
Cites three or more
references, using at least
one new scholarly
resource that was not
provided in the course
materials.
All instruction
requirements noted.
40 points
Components are accurate and thoroughly
represented, with explanations and
application of knowledge to include
evidence-based practice, ethics, theory,
and/or role. Synthesizes course content
using course materials and scholarly
resources to support importantpoints.
Meets all requirements within the
discussion instructions.
Cites two references.
35 points
Components are accurate and mostly represented
primarily with definitions and summarization. Ideas
may be overstated, with minimal contribution to the
subject matter. Minimal application to evidence-
based practice, theory, or role development.
Synthesis of course content is present but missing
depth and/or development.
Is missing one component/requirement of the
discussion instructions.
Cites one reference, or references do not clearly
support content.
Most instruction requirements are noted.
31 points
Absent application to
evidence-based
practice, theory, or
role development.
Synthesis of course
content is superficial.
Demonstrates
incomplete
understanding of
content and/or
inadequate
preparation.
No references cited.
Missing several
instruction
requirements.
Submits post late.
27 points
40
3/16/2020 Discussion Question Rubric
https://lmscontent.embanet.com/RC/General/MSN/Rubrics/Discussion_Question_Rubric_1.html 2/3
Peer
Response
Post
Offers both supportive
and alternative viewpoints
to the discussion, using
two or more scholarly
references per peer post.
Post provides additional
value to the conversation.
All instruction
requirements noted.
40 points
Evidence of further synthesis of course
content. Provides clarification and new
information or insight related to the
content of the peer’s post.
Response is supported by course content
and a minimum of one scholarly reference
per each peer post.
All instruction requirements noted.
35 points
Lacks clarification or new information. Scholarly
reference supports the content in the peer post
without adding new information or insight.
Missing reference from one peer post.
Partially followed instructions regarding number.
Assessment criteria The assessment for this module comprises 100.docx
Assessment criteria
The assessment for this module comprises 100% individual coursework and assignment.
Overview
The Assignment requires you to submit an individual 2,000-word essay plus Appendices of 5-12 pages. Failure to use Appendices to provide relevant background and other information, workings and analysis will result in a reduced mark and may result in a fail grade.
The Assignment should contain a reference list, however there should not be a bibliography, meaning that there should not be any references in the reference list not used in the Assignment.
Diagrams, footnotes, tables and references will not be included in the word count. Diagrams, footnotes and tables will only be given reward (in the marking process) if the text of the Assignment refers to them.
Technical requirements
The Assignment must be written in essay format and be word-processed and saved in MS Word or as a pdf.
The Assignment must follow Bradford academic writing conventions for referencing. It must be substantially in the format as provided (including all headings provided, although additional sub-headings may be added).
Assignment aim
The purpose of this assignment is for you to demonstrate your understanding of business ethics and/or sustainability. Each of the assignment has a slightly different focus, however there are opportunities in each assignment to show skills in the application of ethical theories, management of ethical and sustainability issues and stakeholder engagement.
Each of the Assignment options will rely variously on material covered up to Unit 8. All passing papers will need to demonstrate skillful use of materials from Units more relevant to your chosen Assignment, along with relevant articles and research from outside the course materials. Assignments that receive better marks will demonstrate knowledge of materials from all Units and greater depth from outside course materials. .
Background research
Library and Internet sources, as well as internal organisational data should provide the foundation for material for this essay. Engaging in the weekly discussion forums will also help you to write your assignment.
Remember this is not a reflective analysis of the selected organisational issue. Relevant sources of information and literature have to be used effectively to sufficiently justify your analysis and subsequent recommendations. It is important that you read business ethics and sustainability literature including the recommended additional reading materials.
Referencing and appendices
You are asked to prepare a list of references for this assignment. There is often confusion between references and bibliographies and uncertainty over what should and what should not appear in an appendix. Note: there should be no bibliography in the Assignment, only a Reference list.
The appendices should be used to provide research and preparation to provide a basis for the marker to understand the context of your situation and your an.
Choose one of the Case Studies from Chapter 13 using the Week.docx
Choose one of the Case Studies from Chapter 13 using the
Week 6: Case Study Choice
. Please summarize the case and discuss the questions that are asked with the case study presentation. Although it is not specifically asked, make sure that you are including aspects of immobility from Chapter 25 within the answers to the questions, and drawing ABGs on your patient, relaying the results (note you will need to make up what would be considered appropriate ABG results based on this case), and what those results mean in relation to your case study.
The case study I picked is : Cystic Fibrosis
Discussion Question Rubric
Note:
Scholarly resources are defined as evidence-based practice, peer-reviewed journals; textbook (do not rely solely on your textbook as a reference); and National Standard Guidelines. Review assignment instructions, as this will provide any additional requirements that are not specifically listed on the rubric.
Discussion Question Rubric – 100 PointsCriteriaExemplary
Exceeds ExpectationsAdvanced
Meets ExpectationsIntermediate
Needs ImprovementNovice
InadequateTotal PointsQuality of Initial PostProvides clear examples supported by course content and references.
Cites three or more references, using at least one new scholarly resource that was not provided in the course materials.
All instruction requirements noted.
40 points
Components are accurate and thoroughly represented, with explanations and application of knowledge to include evidence-based practice, ethics, theory, and/or role. Synthesizes course content using course materials and scholarly resources to support importantpoints.
Meets all requirements within the discussion instructions.
Cites two references.
35 points
Components are accurate and mostly represented primarily with definitions and summarization. Ideas may be overstated, with minimal contribution to the subject matter. Minimal application to evidence-based practice, theory, or role development. Synthesis of course content is present but missing depth and/or development.
Is missing one component/requirement of the discussion instructions.
Cites one reference, or references do not clearly support content.
Most instruction requirements are noted.
31 points
Absent application to evidence-based practice, theory, or role development. Synthesis of course content is superficial.
Demonstrates incomplete understanding of content and/or inadequate preparation.
No references cited.
Missing several instruction requirements.
Submits post late.
27 points40
Peer Response PostOffers both supportive and alternative viewpoints to the discussion, using two or more scholarly references per peer post. Post provides additional value to the conversation.
All instruction requirements noted.
40 points
Evidence of further synthesis of course content. Provides clarification and new information or insight related to the content of the peer’s post.
Response is supported by course content and a m.
BUSI 310Discussion Board Grading RubricDiscussion Board Thre.docx
BUSI 310
Discussion Board Grading Rubric
Discussion Board Thread (60 points)
Points Possible
Criteria
54–60
A
Superior work in all areas - Student consistently exceeds minimal expectations in all areas regarding content, analysis, participation, timeliness, and writing style.
Specifically:
· Information is very well organized with well-constructed paragraphs
· Information clearly relates to the main topic and includes several supporting details.
· All sources are accurately documented in current APA format.
· The required scholarly sources are cited numerous times.
· Minimal to non-existent spelling, grammatical, or APA errors exist.
· The required length is exceeded.
48–53
B
Good work in most areas - Student demonstrates minor deficiencies in some areas regarding content, analysis, or writing style.
Specifically:
· Information is organized with well-constructed paragraphs.
· Information clearly relates to the main topic and includes supporting details.
· The requireds scholarly sources are cited more than once
· Limited spelling, grammatical, or APA errors exist.
· The required length is met.
42–47
C
Fair work in most areas – Student exhibits need for improvement in most areas regarding content, writing style, and/or participation.
Specifically:
· Information is organized, but paragraphs are not well constructed.
· Information clearly relates to the main topic but includes few supporting details.
· Each of the required sources are cited at least once.
· Few spelling, grammatical, or APA errors exist.
· The required length is met.
0–41
D, F
Failing – Student shows evidence of refusal or inability to meet minimum standards of undergraduate level work.
Specifically:
· The information appears to be disorganized.
· The required number of scholarly sources are not used or not accurately documented.
· Numerous spelling, grammatical, or APA errors exist.
· The required length is not met.
Total
Instructor’s Comments:
Discussion Board Replies (40 points)
Points Possible
Criteria
36–40
A
Superior work in all areas - Student consistently exceeds minimal expectations in all areas regarding content, analysis, participation, timeliness, and writing style.
Specifically:
· Information is very well organized with well-constructed paragraphs.
· Information clearly relates to the main topic and includes several supporting details.
· All sources are accurately documented in current APA format.
· The required scholarly sources are cited numerous times.
· Minimal to non-existent spelling, grammatical, or APA errors exist.
· Response to 3 threads is made by the published deadline for the assignment and meets the required length.
32–35
B
Good work in most areas - Student demonstrates minor deficiencies in some areas regarding content, analysis, or writing style.
Specifically:
· Information is organized with well-constructed paragraphs.
· Information clearly relates to the main topic and includes supporting details.
· The required ...
BUSI 310Discussion Board InstructionsDiscussion Board Forum Th.docx
BUSI 310
Discussion Board Instructions
Discussion Board Forum Threads are due in Modules/Weeks 1, 3, 5 and 7. Discussion Board Forum Replies are due in Modules/Weeks 2, 4, 6, and 8. The learning theories upon which this class is based are actualized in the threads.
To gain the most from this class, you must:
· Read both the threads of your classmates and the articles which are used to write the thread.
· Draw classmates into discussion of the topic by asking questions.
· Expect to spend some time each day reviewing all threads and replies (even those in which you are not involved).
· The research and writing done for each forum is to prepare you to research and write upper-level research papers in current APA format. Each posting, whether threads or replies, must be written without grammar or spelling errors and must utilize proper APA in-text and reference citations.
· This is a formal writing assignment, so use 3rd person throughout the forum threads and replies.
Discussion Board Forum Threads:
The requirements listed below are the minimum requirements. Completing only the minimum amount of work cannot earn higher than a "C" for an assignment.
1. Review the key terms listed at the end of the Chapter you are working on. You will select one of the key terms. No duplication of articles or concepts is allowed. Each student must cover a different concept. You may reserve a topic beginning at 12 a.m. (ET) on Monday of the odd-numbered modules/weeks (1, 3, 5, and 7). Topics reserved prior to then will be deleted.
2. Conduct a search of Liberty University’s Online Library resources to find 3 peer-reviewed articles that are no more than 3 years old and closely relate to the concept. These articles must be found through the Liberty University Library; no general internet search is allowed. No duplication of articles or concepts is allowed. Each student must cover a different concept. Note: Blogs, education sites, commercial sites, Wikipedia, About.com, editorials, and book reviews are just a few of the types of materials that not acceptable for this exercise. You must look for articles from reputable peer-reviewed magazines and journals.
3. After reading the articles, select the 1 article that you wish to discuss. Your thread must include the information listed below in the following format and be posted directly in the discussion board:
· Definition: a brief definition of the key term followed by the APA reference for the term; this does not count in the word requirement;
· Summary: Choose 1 of the articles and summarize it in your own words. This must be about 125 word minimum. Be sure to note the article's author as well as his/her credentials and the reason his/her opinions, research, or findings should be respected regarding the key term.
· Discussion: Using a minimum of 400 words, write a brief discussion in your own words of how the article relates to the selected key term. A discussion is not rehashing what was already stated in the ar ...
Discussion Question Rubric – 100 PointsCriteriaExemplaryExce.docx
Discussion Question Rubric – 100 Points
Criteria
Exemplary
Exceeds Expectations
Advanced
Meets Expectations
Intermediate
Needs Improvement
Novice
Inadequate
Total Points
Quality of Initial Post
Provides clear examples supported by course content and references.
Cites three or more references, using at least one new scholarly resource that was not provided in the course materials.
All instruction requirements noted.
40 points
Components are accurate and thoroughly represented, with explanations and application of knowledge to include evidence-based practice, ethics, theory, and/or role. Synthesizes course content using course materials and scholarly resources to support important points.
Meets all requirements within the discussion instructions.
Cites two references.
35 points
Components are accurate and mostly represented primarily with definitions and summarization. Ideas may be overstated, with minimal contribution to the subject matter. Minimal application to evidence-based practice, theory, or role development. Synthesis of course content is present but missing depth and/or development.
Is missing one component/requirement of the discussion instructions.
Cites one reference, or references do not clearly support content.
Most instruction requirements are noted.
31 points
Absent application to evidence-based practice, theory, or role development. Synthesis of course content is superficial.
Demonstrates incomplete understanding of content and/or inadequate preparation.
No references cited.
Missing several instruction requirements.
Submits post late.
27 points
40
Peer Response Post
Offers both supportive and alternative viewpoints to the discussion, using two or more scholarly references per peer post. Post provides additional value to the conversation.
All instruction requirements noted.
40 points
Evidence of further synthesis of course content. Provides clarification and new information or insight related to the content of the peer’s post.
Response is supported by course content and a minimum of one scholarly reference per each peer post (minimum of two).
All instruction requirements noted.
35 points
Lacks clarification or new information. Scholarly reference supports the content in the peer post without adding new information or insight.
Missing reference from one peer post.
Partially followed instructions regarding number of reply posts.
Most instruction requirements are noted.
31 points
Post is primarily a summation of peer’s post without further synthesis of course content.
Demonstrates incomplete understanding of content and/or inadequate preparation.
Did not follow instructions regarding number of reply posts.
Missing reference from both peer posts.
Missing several instruction requirements.
Submits post late.
27 points
40
Frequency of Distribution
Initial post and two peer posts made on three separate days.
All instruction requirements noted.
10 points
Initial post and two peer posts made on two separat ...
IND301 Cornerstone Discussion Rubric Criteria A+ (100) .docx
IND301 Cornerstone Discussion Rubric
Criteria A+ (100) A (95) B (85) C (75) D (65) F (55) F (0)
Possible Points: 20 20 19 17 15 13 11 0
Discussion Expectations:
Initial posts and replies
fulfill the specified
discussion requirements,
advance the discussion,
and utilize effective
discussion techniques.
(Refer to the directions for
this discussion and the
“Discussion Expectations”
in your course)
Insightful and
unique posts fulfill
all required
components,
advance the
discussion by
artfully
incorporating all
the appropriate
discussion
techniques to
exceed all
expectations.
Posts fulfill all
required
components,
substantially
advance the
discussion by
incorporating all the
appropriate
discussion
techniques to meet
or exceed all
expectations.
Posts fulfill all
required
components,
consistently move
the discussion
forward, and use
many of the
techniques
specified in the
discussion.
Posts lack some
required
components
sometimes move
the discussion
forward by using
some of the
techniques
specified in the
discussion
expectations.
Posts lack
many
required
components
and move the
discussion
forward by
struggling to
use one or
two simpler
techniques
specified in
the
discussion
expectations.
Posts are
inappropriate
or unrelated to
the required
expectations,
and do not
move the
discussion
forward by
using any of the
techniques
specified in the
discussion
expectations.
No submission.
Possible Points: 20 20 19 17 15 13 11 0
Knowledge and Use of
Course Materials: Initial
posts and responses
demonstrate
understanding of and/or
application of the assigned
reading or viewing
material.
Initial posts and
responses
demonstrate an
exceptional
understanding
and superior
application of all
the important
assigned
material.
Initial posts and
responses
demonstrate a
thorough
understanding of
and/or superior
application of the
assigned material.
Initial posts and
responses
demonstrate a
solid understanding
of and/or effective
application of the
assigned material.
Initial posts and
responses
demonstrate
some confusion
about the
assigned
material and/or
less effective
application of
the assigned
material.
Initial posts
and
responses
demonstrate
confusion
about the
assigned
material
and/or poor
application of
the assigned
material.
Initial posts and
responses do
not use the
assigned
material and/or
evidence.
No submission.
Possible Points: 10 10 9.5 8.5 7.5 6.5 5.5 0
Use of Sources and
References: Appropriate
The posts use the
most
The posts always
use the most
The posts use
appropriate and
The posts
occasionally but
The posts
rarely
The posts fail to
demonstrate
No submission
and relevant source
material supports the
student's ideas. Citation is
accurate, according to
format specifications.
appropriate,
rele.
ICSA Annual Conference: Day 1, 11.30am
ICSA Annual Conference: Day 1, 11.30am
Breakout session slides
BUSI 240 DB repliesContent 28 PointsAdvanced 90-100Profic
BUSI 240 DB replies
Content 28 Points
Advanced 90-100%
Proficient 60-89%
Developing 1-59%
Not present
Replies Content - 28 points
25-28 points
Three or four replies. Each reply focuses on a meaningful point made in another student’s thread. Each reply provides substantive additional thoughts regarding the thread with a supported explanation of why the student agrees or disagrees with the idea presented in the thread. Each reply is clear and coherent.
17-24 points
Three replies. Most replies focus on a meaningful point made in another student’s thread. Most replies provide substantive additional thoughts regarding the thread and an explanation of why the student likes or dislikes the idea presented in the thread. Most replies are clear and coherent.
1-16 points
One to two replies. Replies could be more substantive regarding the thread. Replies lack clarity and coherence.
0 points
No responses, or the responses provided are not substantive and do not address the information presented by the thread. The three replies were not submitted together (in the same week).
Structure 12 Points
Advanced
Proficient
Developing
Not present
Replies: Grammar and Spelling, APA formatting - 7 Points
6-7 points
Spelling and grammar are correct. Sentences are complete, clear, and concise.
Paragraphs contain appropriately varied sentence structures. Where applicable, references are cited in current APA format.
4-5 points
Writer makes 1–2 errors in grammar, spelling, or mechanics that distract the reader from the content. Paragraphs contain some varied sentence structures. Where applicable, references are cited with some APA formatting.
1-3 points
Spelling and grammar errors distract. Writer makes 3–4 errors in grammar, spelling. Sentences are incomplete or unclear. Paragraphs are poorly formed. Where applicable, references are minimally or not cited in current APA format.
0 points
Writer makes more than 4 errors in grammar, spelling, or mechanics that distract the reader from the content. The three replies were not submitted together (in the same week).
Replies:
Word Count -
5 Points
4-5 points
At least 3 replies are present, and a minimum word count of 200 words is met or exceeded for each.
3 points
At least 2 replies are present, and a minimum of 200 words met.
1-2 points
1 or 2 substantive responses to fellow classmates, but one or both of the submissions do not meet the required word count.
0 points
Not present. The three replies were not submitted together (in the same week).
Feedback:
BUSI 240
Discussion Board Forum Instructions
The learning theories upon which this course is based are actualized in the Discussion Board Forums. At the beginning of Module/Week 2 & Module/Week 5, you will choose a key term to research. You will be required to write a thread of at least 400 words on the topic, complete with page references and specifics to document the response, and submit it to the corresponding Discussion Board Forum. Proper English and ...
GOVT 200Worldview Analysis Essay Grading RubricCriteriaPoi.docx
GOVT 200
Worldview Analysis Essay Grading Rubric
Criteria
Points Possible
Points Earned
Criteria #1
0 to 35 points
Content: An appropriate topic is chosen per the instructions, and specifics are provided on the topic to allow for meaningful analysis.
Criteria #2
0 to 45 points
Content: Key components of “process philosophy” are applied to the chosen topic, and in turn the topic itself is analyzed in light of how government and society have applied process philosophy principles and assumptions in approaching the topic in question.
Criteria #3
0 to 25 points
Reading/Study: At least 2 references are used.
Criteria #4
0 to 25 points
Reading/Study: Concepts are applied in an intelligent and systematic way.
Criteria #5
0 to 20 points
Reading/Study: References are cited following the Course Style Guidelines document for format.
Criteria #6
0 to 10 points
Length: Contains 2–3 full pages, is double-spaced, and has 1-inch margins.
Criteria #7
0 to 15 points
Style: The paper follows the Course Style Guidelines document for formatting. The paper is without spelling and grammar errors. The writing is cogent. The language is concise and precise.
Total
/175
Instructor’s Comments:
...
Similar to Week 3 ls205 (20)
3102020 Discussion Question Rubrichttpslmscontent.emb.docx
3102020 Discussion Question Rubrichttpslmscontent.emb.docx
3102020 Discussion Question Rubrichttpslmscontent.emb.docx
3102020 Discussion Question Rubrichttpslmscontent.emb.docx
How to develop and create a Domain Model1. Primary list of obj.docx
How to develop and create a Domain Model1. Primary list of obj.docx
3162020 Discussion Question Rubrichttpslmscontent.emb.docx
3162020 Discussion Question Rubrichttpslmscontent.emb.docx
3162020 Discussion Question Rubrichttpslmscontent.emb.docx
3162020 Discussion Question Rubrichttpslmscontent.emb.docx
RCE2601 Examination presentation 8 August 2022 at 10h00.pdf
RCE2601 Examination presentation 8 August 2022 at 10h00.pdf
Assessment criteria The assessment for this module comprises 100.docx
Assessment criteria The assessment for this module comprises 100.docx
Choose one of the Case Studies from Chapter 13 using the Week.docx
Choose one of the Case Studies from Chapter 13 using the Week.docx
BUSI 310Discussion Board Grading RubricDiscussion Board Thre.docx
BUSI 310Discussion Board Grading RubricDiscussion Board Thre.docx
BUSI 310Discussion Board InstructionsDiscussion Board Forum Th.docx
BUSI 310Discussion Board InstructionsDiscussion Board Forum Th.docx
Discussion Question Rubric – 100 PointsCriteriaExemplaryExce.docx
Discussion Question Rubric – 100 PointsCriteriaExemplaryExce.docx
IND301 Cornerstone Discussion Rubric Criteria A+ (100) .docx
IND301 Cornerstone Discussion Rubric Criteria A+ (100) .docx
BUSI 240 DB repliesContent 28 PointsAdvanced 90-100Profic
BUSI 240 DB repliesContent 28 PointsAdvanced 90-100Profic
GOVT 200Worldview Analysis Essay Grading RubricCriteriaPoi.docx
GOVT 200Worldview Analysis Essay Grading RubricCriteriaPoi.docx
More from Beulah Heights University
More from Beulah Heights University (20)
Recently uploaded
The Challenger.pdf DNHS Official Publication
Read| The latest issue of The Challenger is here! We are thrilled to announce that our school paper has qualified for the NATIONAL SCHOOLS PRESS CONFERENCE (NSPC) 2024. Thank you for your unwavering support and trust. Dive into the stories that made us stand out!
June 3, 2024 Anti-Semitism Letter Sent to MIT President Kornbluth and MIT Cor...
Letter from the Congress of the United States regarding Anti-Semitism sent June 3rd to MIT President Sally Kornbluth, MIT Corp Chair, Mark Gorenberg
Dear Dr. Kornbluth and Mr. Gorenberg,
The US House of Representatives is deeply concerned by ongoing and pervasive acts of antisemitic
harassment and intimidation at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). Failing to act decisively to ensure a safe learning environment for all students would be a grave dereliction of your responsibilities as President of MIT and Chair of the MIT Corporation.
This Congress will not stand idly by and allow an environment hostile to Jewish students to persist. The House believes that your institution is in violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, and the inability or
unwillingness to rectify this violation through action requires accountability.
Postsecondary education is a unique opportunity for students to learn and have their ideas and beliefs challenged. However, universities receiving hundreds of millions of federal funds annually have denied
students that opportunity and have been hijacked to become venues for the promotion of terrorism, antisemitic harassment and intimidation, unlawful encampments, and in some cases, assaults and riots.
The House of Representatives will not countenance the use of federal funds to indoctrinate students into hateful, antisemitic, anti-American supporters of terrorism. Investigations into campus antisemitism by the Committee on Education and the Workforce and the Committee on Ways and Means have been expanded into a Congress-wide probe across all relevant jurisdictions to address this national crisis. The undersigned Committees will conduct oversight into the use of federal funds at MIT and its learning environment under authorities granted to each Committee.
• The Committee on Education and the Workforce has been investigating your institution since December 7, 2023. The Committee has broad jurisdiction over postsecondary education, including its compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, campus safety concerns over disruptions to the learning environment, and the awarding of federal student aid under the Higher Education Act.
• The Committee on Oversight and Accountability is investigating the sources of funding and other support flowing to groups espousing pro-Hamas propaganda and engaged in antisemitic harassment and intimidation of students. The Committee on Oversight and Accountability is the principal oversight committee of the US House of Representatives and has broad authority to investigate “any matter” at “any time” under House Rule X.
• The Committee on Ways and Means has been investigating several universities since November 15, 2023, when the Committee held a hearing entitled From Ivory Towers to Dark Corners: Investigating the Nexus Between Antisemitism, Tax-Exempt Universities, and Terror Financing. The Committee followed the hearing with letters to those institutions on January 10, 202
Home assignment II on Spectroscopy 2024 Answers.pdf
Answers to Home assignment on UV-Visible spectroscopy: Calculation of wavelength of UV-Visible absorption
1.4 modern child centered education - mahatma gandhi-2.pptx
Child centred education is an educational approach that priorities the interest, needs and abilities of the child in the learning process.
A Strategic Approach: GenAI in Education
Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies such as Generative AI, Image Generators and Large Language Models have had a dramatic impact on teaching, learning and assessment over the past 18 months. The most immediate threat AI posed was to Academic Integrity with Higher Education Institutes (HEIs) focusing their efforts on combating the use of GenAI in assessment. Guidelines were developed for staff and students, policies put in place too. Innovative educators have forged paths in the use of Generative AI for teaching, learning and assessments leading to pockets of transformation springing up across HEIs, often with little or no top-down guidance, support or direction.
This Gasta posits a strategic approach to integrating AI into HEIs to prepare staff, students and the curriculum for an evolving world and workplace. We will highlight the advantages of working with these technologies beyond the realm of teaching, learning and assessment by considering prompt engineering skills, industry impact, curriculum changes, and the need for staff upskilling. In contrast, not engaging strategically with Generative AI poses risks, including falling behind peers, missed opportunities and failing to ensure our graduates remain employable. The rapid evolution of AI technologies necessitates a proactive and strategic approach if we are to remain relevant.
Mule 4.6 & Java 17 Upgrade | MuleSoft Mysore Meetup #46
Mule 4.6 & Java 17 Upgrade | MuleSoft Mysore Meetup #46
Event Link:-
https://meetups.mulesoft.com/events/details/mulesoft-mysore-presents-exploring-gemini-ai-and-integration-with-mulesoft/
Agenda
● Java 17 Upgrade Overview
● Why and by when do customers need to upgrade to Java 17?
● Is there any immediate impact to upgrading to Mule Runtime 4.6 and beyond?
● Which MuleSoft products are in scope?
For Upcoming Meetups Join Mysore Meetup Group - https://meetups.mulesoft.com/mysore/
YouTube:- youtube.com/@mulesoftmysore
Mysore WhatsApp group:- https://chat.whatsapp.com/EhqtHtCC75vCAX7gaO842N
Speaker:-
Shubham Chaurasia - https://www.linkedin.com/in/shubhamchaurasia1/
Priya Shaw - https://www.linkedin.com/in/priya-shaw
Organizers:-
Shubham Chaurasia - https://www.linkedin.com/in/shubhamchaurasia1/
Giridhar Meka - https://www.linkedin.com/in/giridharmeka
Priya Shaw - https://www.linkedin.com/in/priya-shaw
Shyam Raj Prasad-
https://www.linkedin.com/in/shyam-raj-prasad/
BÀI TẬP BỔ TRỢ TIẾNG ANH GLOBAL SUCCESS LỚP 3 - CẢ NĂM (CÓ FILE NGHE VÀ ĐÁP Á...
BÀI TẬP BỔ TRỢ TIẾNG ANH GLOBAL SUCCESS LỚP 3 - CẢ NĂM (CÓ FILE NGHE VÀ ĐÁP Á...Nguyen Thanh Tu Collection
https://app.box.com/s/hqnndn05v4q5a4k4jd597rkdbda0fniiSupporting (UKRI) OA monographs at Salford.pptx
How libraries can support authors with open access requirements for UKRI funded books
Wednesday 22 May 2024, 14:00-15:00.
678020731-Sumas-y-Restas-Para-Colorear.pdf
KKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK
The geography of Taylor Swift - some ideas
Geographical themes connected with Taylor Swift's ERAS tour - coming to the UK in June 2024
Chapter 3 - Islamic Banking Products and Services.pptx
Chapter 3 - Islamic Banking Products and Services.pptxMohd Adib Abd Muin, Senior Lecturer at Universiti Utara Malaysia
This slide is prepared for master's students (MIFB & MIBS) UUM. May it be useful to all.special B.ed 2nd year old paper_20240531.pdf
Instagram:-
https://instagram.com/special_education_needs_01?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=
WhatsApp:-
https://chat.whatsapp.com/JVakNIYlSV94x7bwunO3Dc
YouTube:-
https://youtube.com/@special_education_needs
Teligram :- https://t.me/special_education_needs
Slide Shere :-
https://www.slideshare.net/shabnambano20?utm_campaign=profiletracking&utm_medium=sssite&utm_source=ssslideview
Digital Tools and AI for Teaching Learning and Research
This Presentation in details discusses on Digital Tools and AI for Teaching Learning and Research
How libraries can support authors with open access requirements for UKRI fund...
How libraries can support authors with open access requirements for UKRI funded books
Wednesday 22 May 2024, 14:00-15:00.
Recently uploaded (20)
June 3, 2024 Anti-Semitism Letter Sent to MIT President Kornbluth and MIT Cor...
June 3, 2024 Anti-Semitism Letter Sent to MIT President Kornbluth and MIT Cor...
Home assignment II on Spectroscopy 2024 Answers.pdf
Home assignment II on Spectroscopy 2024 Answers.pdf
1.4 modern child centered education - mahatma gandhi-2.pptx
1.4 modern child centered education - mahatma gandhi-2.pptx
Mule 4.6 & Java 17 Upgrade | MuleSoft Mysore Meetup #46
Mule 4.6 & Java 17 Upgrade | MuleSoft Mysore Meetup #46
Adversarial Attention Modeling for Multi-dimensional Emotion Regression.pdf
Adversarial Attention Modeling for Multi-dimensional Emotion Regression.pdf
BÀI TẬP BỔ TRỢ TIẾNG ANH GLOBAL SUCCESS LỚP 3 - CẢ NĂM (CÓ FILE NGHE VÀ ĐÁP Á...
BÀI TẬP BỔ TRỢ TIẾNG ANH GLOBAL SUCCESS LỚP 3 - CẢ NĂM (CÓ FILE NGHE VÀ ĐÁP Á...
Chapter 3 - Islamic Banking Products and Services.pptx
Chapter 3 - Islamic Banking Products and Services.pptx
Digital Tools and AI for Teaching Learning and Research
Digital Tools and AI for Teaching Learning and Research
How libraries can support authors with open access requirements for UKRI fund...
How libraries can support authors with open access requirements for UKRI fund...
Week 3 ls205
- 1. LS205 LS 205 Enhancing Leadership Through Technology Introduction Week 03
- 2. Week 3 Agenda • Reading: Leading Geeks pages 97- 218 • Week 3 Discussion Board • Week 3 Quiz • Review Week 3 PowerPoint Summary
- 3. Discussion Board • Post a response to the discussion board • Respond to at least two other students’ post • Use complete sentences and proper grammar. • Cite sources – example (websites, etc.)
- 4. Test Tips • Tests are true/ false and multiple choice • Approximately 10 questions • Prepare by reviewing your reading assignment
- 5. Case Study • Continue to work on your case study • View acceptable List of Organizations for Case Study • View Guide lines/grading rubric
- 6. Case Study Guide Line/Grading Rubrics Criteria Weight Paper is at least 5-6 pages in length and contains four or more properly cited references. 75 Includes detailed use of technology within the organization. 75 Explains in detail what technology is used.. 50 Explains in detail the pros and cons of the ethical considerations identified and referred to in the Module 1 Course Project. 30 Paper has no spelling and grammatical errors and is APA formatted. 20 Total 250
- 7. LS 205 Enhancing Leadership Through Technology Introduction • What are you going to learn? – Students will apply critical thinking to various forms of technologies capable of enhancing their leadership ability.. – Students will be given opportunities to interact with various forms of technologies. – Students will be exposed to academic materials concerning the role of technology in leadership development.
- 8. Top 10 Strategic Technology Trends for 2015 • Top 10 Technology Trends
Editor's Notes
- Email me any questions to alicia.Mitchell@Beulah.edu