MSN 55502 On what policy issues might nurses lobby Congress? What strategies might nurse use to have their voices heard?

1

MSN5550 Health Promotion: Prevention of Disease

Discussion Board Rubric

Criteria Unsatisfactory-Beginning Developing Accomplished Exemplary Total

Ideas, Arguments, & Analysis

0-30 points 35-39 points 40-44 points 45-50 points /50

Ideas expressed lack an understanding of the discussion topic. Comments are irrelevant, off-topic, and/or confusing to follow. Viewpoint, if given, is not supported with evidence or examples.

Ideas expressed in discussion posts show a minimal understanding of the discussion topic. Comments are general in nature and/or occasionally may not be relevant. Rehashes or summarizes ideas with limited analysis, original thought, and/or supported viewpoints.

Ideas expressed in discussion posts are mostly substantive and relevant to topic; some original thought. Demonstrates logical thinking, reasoning, and/or analysis for most part. Viewpoint is supported with evidence and/or examples.

Ideas expressed in discussion posts include original thought, substantial depth, and are relevant to topic. Viewpoint shows strong logical thinking, reasoning, and analysis with evidence and examples. Construction of new meaning and insights are evident.

Connection to Course Materials

0-13 points 14-15 points 16-17 points 18-20 points /20

No connections are made to readings or other course materials (lectures, media, resources, etc.), and/or if made, are not clearly stated and are largely personal opinions.

Minimal direct connections are made to readings and/or other course materials (lectures, media, resources, etc.). Connections are largely inferred and somewhat unclear at times.

Some direct connections are made to readings and/or other course materials (lectures, media, resources, etc.) and are clearly stated for the most part.

Strong, direct connections are made to readings and/or other course materials (lectures, media, resources, etc.) and are clearly stated.

Contribution to Learning Community

0-13 points 14-15 points 16-17 points 18-20 points /20

Negligible contribution to the learning community. Rarely engages with students and generally ignores others’ posts and/or has a negative effect through misrepresenting content in other posts, inappropriate comments made, and/or attempts to dominate the discussion.

Somewhat contributes to the learning community but the focus is generally on own posts. Occasionally interacts with others’ postings but little attempt to involve other students in the discussion. Short statements such as “I agree with…”.

Contributes to the learning community. Often attempts to direct group discussion to present relevant viewpoints and meaningful reflection by others. Interacts respectfully with students.

Effectively contributes to the learning community. Frequently initiates dialogue and motivates group discussion by providing feedback to students’ postings, asking follow-up questions, and through thoughtful, reflective comments. Respectfully encourages a variety of viewpoints and invites contributions from others.

2

Discussion Board Rubric (continued)

Criteria Unsatisfactory-Beginning Developing Accomplished Exemplary Total

Writing Quality

0-6 points 7 points 8 points 9-10 points /10

Posts show a below average/poor writing style that lacks standard English, and/or is difficult for readers to follow. Contains frequent errors in grammar, punctuation, usage, and spelling.

Posts show an average and/or casual writing style using standard English that is generally clear but contains some errors in grammar, punctuation, usage, and spelling.

Discussion posts show above average writing style that is clear using standard English with minor errors in grammar, punctuation, usage, and/or spelling.

Discussion posts are well written and clearly articulated using standard English, characterized by elements of a strong writing style with correct grammar, punctuation, usage, and spelling.

TOTAL POINTS (sum of 5 Criteria) /100

Source: Rubric by Denise Kreiger, Instructional Design/Technology Services, SC&I, Rutgers, 3/2014