Getting good or bad grades can cause a person to try a little harder. My experience has been it’s not really how hard you try, but how objective/subjective the person i
Getting good or bad grades can cause a person to try a little harder. My experience has been it's not really how hard you try, but how objective/subjective the person is that is asxsigning the grade. How do you feel about the rubric that is being used in this program. Is there a better system that would give a better picture of how a person is
Rubric Detail
A rubric lists grading criteria that instructors use to evaluate student work. Your instructor linked a rubric to this item and made it available to you. Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric's layout.
Content
https%3A%2F%2Fkeiseruniversity.blackboard.com%2Fwebapps%2Frubric%2FWEB-INF%2Fjsp%2Fcourse%2FrubricGradingPopup.jsp%3Fmode%3Dgrid%26isPopup%3Dtrue%26rubricCount%3D1%26prefix%3D_7714706_1%26course_id%3D_411476_1%26maxValue%3D100.0%26rubricId%3D_345993_1%26viewOnly%3Dtrue%26displayGrades%3Dfalse%26type%3Dgrading%26rubricAssoId%3D_605243_1
Name: Week 7 Video Presentation
Description: Up to 10% deduction may be implemented for not following APA style standards (e.g., references and in-text citations).
| Poor | Satisfactory | Good | Excellent | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Introduction | Points: Points Range: 0 (0.00%) – 10.35 (10.35%) One of the following components are included in the presentation: (1) Student introduces the article topic, tells the reader what to expect. (2) rough background of literature (3) Student describes significance of the problem, (4)researcher's question(s) and hypothesis introduces the article topic, tells the reader what to expect. Student describes significance of the problem, researcher's hypothesis, and rough background of literature. Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 10.5 (10.50%) – 11.85 (11.85%) Two of the following components are included in the presentation: (1) Student introduces the article topic, tells the reader what to expect. (2) rough background of literature (3) Student describes significance of the problem, (4)researcher's question(s) and hypothesis what to expect. Student describes significance of the problem, researcher's hypothesis, and rough background of literature. Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 12 (12.00%) – 13.35 (13.35%) Three of the following components are included in the presentation: (1) Student introduces the article topic, tells the reader what to expect. (2) rough background of literature (3) Student describes significance of the problem, (4)researcher's question(s) and hypothesis Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 13.5 (13.50%) – 15 (15.00%) All of the following components are included in the presentation: (1) Student introduces the article topic, tells the reader what to expect. (2) rough background of literature (3) Student describes significance of the problem, (4)researcher's question(s) and hypothesis Feedback: |
| Methods | Points: Points Range: 0 (0.00%) – 10.35 (10.35%) One of the following are demonstrated: (1) Student accurately and thoroughly explains the research design, (2) includes sampling, (3) identification and measurement of variables, (4) procedures, and data collection. Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 10.5 (10.50%) – 11.85 (11.85%) Two of the following are demonstrated: (1) Student accurately and thoroughly explains the research design, (2) includes sampling, (3) identification and measurement of variables, (4) procedures, and data collection. Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 12 (12.00%) – 13.35 (13.35%) Three of the following are demonstrated: (1) Student accurately and thoroughly explains the research design, (2) includes sampling, (3) identification and measurement of variables, (4) procedures, and data collection. Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 13.5 (13.50%) – 15 (15.00%) Four of the following are demonstrated: (1) Student accurately and thoroughly explains the research design, (2) includes sampling, (3) identification and measurement of variables, (4) procedures, and data collection. Feedback: |
| Results | Points: Points Range: 0 (0.00%) – 10.35 (10.35%) None of the following are demonstrated: (1) the results of the study are presented; (2) the interpretation of results are clearly and concisely described (3) the connection to the researchers' questions/hypotheses are made Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 10.5 (10.50%) – 11.85 (11.85%) One of the following are demonstrated: (1) the results of the study are presented; (2) the interpretation of results are clearly and concisely described (3) the connection to the researchers' questions/hypotheses are made Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 12 (12.00%) – 13.35 (13.35%) Two of the following are demonstrated: (1) the results of the study are presented; (2) the interpretation of results are clearly and concisely described (3) the connection to the researchers' questions/hypotheses are made Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 13.5 (13.50%) – 15 (15.00%) Three of the following are demonstrated: (1) the results of the study are presented; (2) the interpretation of results are clearly and concisely described (3) the connection to the researchers' questions/hypotheses are made Feedback: |
| Critique | Points: Points Range: 0 (0.00%) – 13.8 (13.80%) One of the following are demonstrated: (1) Critique addresses strengths and weaknesses of the study (2) Student applies higher-level thinking skills about possible flaws in the study prior to making recommendations (3) Critiques are have a clear connection to the design of the study and information provided; (4) generalizability of the study is discussed in a clear and logical manner. Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 14 (14.00%) – 15.8 (15.80%) Two of the following are demonstrated: (1) Critique addresses strengths and weaknesses of the study (2) Student applies higher-level thinking skills about possible flaws in the study prior to making recommendations (3) Critiques are have a clear connection to the design of the study and information provided; (4) generalizability of the study is discussed in a clear and logical manner. Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 16 (16.00%) – 17.8 (17.80%) Three of the following are demonstrated: (1) Critique addresses strengths and weaknesses of the study (2) Student applies higher-level thinking skills about possible flaws in the study prior to making recommendations (3) Critiques are have a clear connection to the design of the study and information provided; (4) generalizability of the study is discussed in a clear and logical manner. Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 18 (18.00%) – 20 (20.00%) Four of the following are demonstrated: (1) Critique addresses strengths and weaknesses of the study (2) Student applies higher-level thinking skills about possible flaws in the study prior to making recommendations (3) Critiques are have a clear connection to the design of the study and information provided; (4) generalizability of the study is discussed in a clear and logical manner. Feedback: |
| Creative Thinking | Points: Points Range: 0 (0.00%) – 6.9 (6.90%) Recommendations for future research does not include the following: (1) understanding of research design (2) gaps or flaws in the study reviewed (3) original thinking. Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 7 (7.00%) – 7.9 (7.90%) Recommendations for future research demonstrates one of the following: (1) understanding of research design (2) gaps or flaws in the study reviewed (3) original thinking. Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 8 (8.00%) – 8.9 (8.90%) Recommendations for future research demonstrates two of the following: (1) understanding of research design (2) gaps or flaws in the study reviewed (3) original thinking. Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 9 (9.00%) – 10 (10.00%) Recommendations for future research demonstrates three of the following: (1) understanding of research design (2) gaps or flaws in the study reviewed (3) original thinking. Feedback: |
| Organization | Points: Points Range: 0 (0.00%) – 3.45 (3.45%) Presentation is vague or uninteresting. Lacks supporting points and related details. Information lacks connection to the presentation topic. Information is not organized. Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 3.5 (3.50%) – 3.95 (3.95%) Presentation is general, and at times uninteresting. Content is not clear and lack significant detail. Some information is linked to the presentation topic. Information is loosely organized. Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 4 (4.00%) – 4.45 (4.45%) Presentation is general, but still interesting. Content is somewhat clear but could use more detail. Most information is linked to the presentation topic. Information is organized. Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 4.5 (4.50%) – 5 (5.00%) Presentation is thorough and interesting. Content is very clear and very detailed. Information is directly linked to presentation topic. Information is very organized. Feedback: |
| Verbal Communication | Points: Points Range: 0 (0.00%) – 3.45 (3.45%) Speaker's voice is consistently too weak or too strong. Speaker fails to use inflections to emphasize key points and create interest or speaker often uses inflections inappropriately. Speaker's talking pace is consistently too slow or too fast. Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 3.5 (3.50%) – 3.95 (3.95%) Speaker's voice is frequently too weak or too strong. Speaker rarely uses inflections to emphasize key points and create interest or speaker sometimes uses inflections inappropriately. Speaker's talking pace is often too slow or too fast. Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 4 (4.00%) – 4.45 (4.45%) Speaker's voice is generally steady, strong, and clear. Speaker sometimes uses inflections to emphasize key points and create interest. Speaker's talking pace is appropriate. Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 4.5 (4.50%) – 5 (5.00%) Speaker's voice is very confident, steady, strong, and clear. Speaker consistently uses inflections to emphasize key points or to create interest. Speaker's talking pace is consistently appropriate. Feedback: |
| Mechanics | Points: Points Range: 0 (0.00%) – 0 (0.00%) Presentation is less than 11 minutes long. Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 3 (3.00%) – 3 (3.00%) Presentation is 11-12 minutes long. Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 4 (4.00%) – 4 (4.00%) Presentation is 13-14 minutes long. Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 5 (5.00%) – 5 (5.00%) Presentation is at least 15 minutes long. Feedback: |
| Article Submission | Points: Points Range: 0 (0.00%) – 0 (0.00%) Did not submit a full version of the article Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 0 (0.00%) – 0 (0.00%) Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 0 (0.00%) – 0 (0.00%) Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 5 (5.00%) – 5 (5.00%) Submitted the a full version of the article Feedback: |
| Visual Tools | Points: Points Range: 0 (0.00%) – 3.45 (3.45%) Visual aids demonstrate no creativity or clarity and are often difficult to read. Contains numerous errors and lack of detail. Little care taken in production. Presentation is weakened by the visual tools. Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 3.5 (3.50%) – 3.95 (3.95%) Visual aids have limited creativity or clarity or are sometimes difficult to read. May have some errors and show some detail. Some care has been taken in production. Presentation is not enhanced by the visual tools. Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 4 (4.00%) – 4.45 (4.45%) Visual aids are reasonably creative, clear, and easy to read. Evident that presentation shows a general attention to detail and accuracy. General care has been taken in production. Presentation is sometimes enhanced by the visual tools. Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 4.5 (4.50%) – 5 (5.00%) Visual aids are very creative, clear, and easy to read. Clearly evident that presentation is well constructed, accurate, and shows attention to detail. Extra care has been taken in the production. Presentation is enhanced by the visual tools. Feedback: |
Show Descriptions Show Feedback
Introduction–
Levels of Achievement: Poor 0 (0.00%) – 10.35 (10.35%) One of the following components are included in the presentation: (1) Student introduces the article topic, tells the reader what to expect. (2) rough background of literature (3) Student describes significance of the problem, (4)researcher's question(s) and hypothesis introduces the article topic, tells the reader what to expect. Student describes significance of the problem, researcher's hypothesis, and rough background of literature. Satisfactory 10.5 (10.50%) – 11.85 (11.85%) Two of the following components are included in the presentation: (1) Student introduces the article topic, tells the reader what to expect. (2) rough background of literature (3) Student describes significance of the problem, (4)researcher's question(s) and hypothesis what to expect. Student describes significance of the problem, researcher's hypothesis, and rough background of literature. Good 12 (12.00%) – 13.35 (13.35%) Three of the following components are included in the presentation: (1) Student introduces the article topic, tells the reader what to expect. (2) rough background of literature (3) Student describes significance of the problem, (4)researcher's question(s) and hypothesis Excellent 13.5 (13.50%) – 15 (15.00%) All of the following components are included in the presentation: (1) Student introduces the article topic, tells the reader what to expect. (2) rough background of literature (3) Student describes significance of the problem, (4)researcher's question(s) and hypothesis Feedback:
Methods–
Levels of Achievement: Poor 0 (0.00%) – 10.35 (10.35%) One of the following are demonstrated: (1) Student accurately and thoroughly explains the research design, (2) includes sampling, (3) identification and measurement of variables, (4) procedures, and data collection. Satisfactory 10.5 (10.50%) – 11.85 (11.85%) Two of the following are demonstrated: (1) Student accurately and thoroughly explains the research design, (2) includes sampling, (3) identification and measurement of variables, (4) procedures, and data collection. Good 12 (12.00%) – 13.35 (13.35%) Three of the following are demonstrated: (1) Student accurately and thoroughly explains the research design, (2) includes sampling, (3) identification and measurement of variables, (4) procedures, and data collection. Excellent 13.5 (13.50%) – 15 (15.00%) Four of the following are demonstrated: (1) Student accurately and thoroughly explains the research design, (2) includes sampling, (3) identification and measurement of variables, (4) procedures, and data collection. Feedback:
Results–
Levels of Achievement: Poor 0 (0.00%) – 10.35 (10.35%) None of the following are demonstrated: (1) the results of the study are presented; (2) the interpretation of results are clearly and concisely described (3) the connection to the researchers' questions/hypotheses are made Satisfactory 10.5 (10.50%) – 11.85 (11.85%) One of the following are demonstrated: (1) the results of the study are presented; (2) the interpretation of results are clearly and concisely described (3) the connection to the researchers' questions/hypotheses are made Good 12 (12.00%) – 13.35 (13.35%) Two of the following are demonstrated: (1) the results of the study are presented; (2) the interpretation of results are clearly and concisely described (3) the connection to the researchers' questions/hypotheses are made Excellent 13.5 (13.50%) – 15 (15.00%) Three of the following are demonstrated: (1) the results of the study are presented; (2) the interpretation of results are clearly and concisely described (3) the connection to the researchers' questions/hypotheses are made Feedback:
Critique–
Levels of Achievement: Poor 0 (0.00%) – 13.8 (13.80%) One of the following are demonstrated: (1) Critique addresses strengths and weaknesses of the study (2) Student applies higher-level thinking skills about possible flaws in the study prior to making recommendations (3) Critiques are have a clear connection to the design of the study and information provided; (4) generalizability of the study is discussed in a clear and logical manner. Satisfactory 14 (14.00%) – 15.8 (15.80%) Two of the following are demonstrated: (1) Critique addresses strengths and weaknesses of the study (2) Student applies higher-level thinking skills about possible flaws in the study prior to making recommendations (3) Critiques are have a clear connection to the design of the study and information provided; (4) generalizability of the study is discussed in a clear and logical manner. Good 16 (16.00%) – 17.8 (17.80%) Three of the following are demonstrated: (1) Critique addresses strengths and weaknesses of the study (2) Student applies higher-level thinking skills about possible flaws in the study prior to making recommendations (3) Critiques are have a clear connection to the design of the study and information provided; (4) generalizability of the study is discussed in a clear and logical manner. Excellent 18 (18.00%) – 20 (20.00%) Four of the following are demonstrated: (1) Critique addresses strengths and weaknesses of the study (2) Student applies higher-level thinking skills about possible flaws in the study prior to making recommendations (3) Critiques are have a clear connection to the design of the study and information provided; (4) generalizability of the study is discussed in a clear and logical manner. Feedback:
Creative Thinking–
Levels of Achievement: Poor 0 (0.00%) – 6.9 (6.90%) Recommendations for future research does not include the following: (1) understanding of research design (2) gaps or flaws in the study reviewed (3) original thinking. Satisfactory 7 (7.00%) – 7.9 (7.90%) Recommendations for future research demonstrates one of the following: (1) understanding of research design (2) gaps or flaws in the study reviewed (3) original thinking. Good 8 (8.00%) – 8.9 (8.90%) Recommendations for future research demonstrates two of the following: (1) understanding of research design (2) gaps or flaws in the study reviewed (3) original thinking. Excellent 9 (9.00%) – 10 (10.00%) Recommendations for future research demonstrates three of the following: (1) understanding of research design (2) gaps or flaws in the study reviewed (3) original thinking. Feedback:
Organization–
Levels of Achievement: Poor 0 (0.00%) – 3.45 (3.45%) Presentation is vague or uninteresting. Lacks supporting points and related details. Information lacks connection to the presentation topic. Information is not organized. Satisfactory 3.5 (3.50%) – 3.95 (3.95%) Presentation is general, and at times uninteresting. Content is not clear and lack significant detail. Some information is linked to the presentation topic. Information is loosely organized. Good 4 (4.00%) – 4.45 (4.45%) Presentation is general, but still interesting. Content is somewhat clear but could use more detail. Most information is linked to the presentation topic. Information is organized. Excellent 4.5 (4.50%) – 5 (5.00%) Presentation is thorough and interesting. Content is very clear and very detailed. Information is directly linked to presentation topic. Information is very organized. Feedback:
Verbal Communication–
Levels of Achievement: Poor 0 (0.00%) – 3.45 (3.45%) Speaker's voice is consistently too weak or too strong. Speaker fails to use inflections to emphasize key points and create interest or speaker often uses inflections inappropriately. Speaker's talking pace is consistently too slow or too fast. Satisfactory 3.5 (3.50%) – 3.95 (3.95%) Speaker's voice is frequently too weak or too strong. Speaker rarely uses inflections to emphasize key points and create interest or speaker sometimes uses inflections inappropriately. Speaker's talking pace is often too slow or too fast. Good 4 (4.00%) – 4.45 (4.45%) Speaker's voice is generally steady, strong, and clear. Speaker sometimes uses inflections to emphasize key points and create interest. Speaker's talking pace is appropriate. Excellent 4.5 (4.50%) – 5 (5.00%) Speaker's voice is very confident, steady, strong, and clear. Speaker consistently uses inflections to emphasize key points or to create interest. Speaker's talking pace is consistently appropriate. Feedback:
Mechanics–
Levels of Achievement: Poor 0 (0.00%) – 0 (0.00%) Presentation is less than 11 minutes long. Satisfactory 3 (3.00%) – 3 (3.00%) Presentation is 11-12 minutes long. Good 4 (4.00%) – 4 (4.00%) Presentation is 13-14 minutes long. Excellent 5 (5.00%) – 5 (5.00%) Presentation is at least 15 minutes long. Feedback:
Article Submission–
Levels of Achievement: Poor 0 (0.00%) – 0 (0.00%) Did not submit a full version of the article Satisfactory 0 (0.00%) – 0 (0.00%) Good 0 (0.00%) – 0 (0.00%) Excellent 5 (5.00%) – 5 (5.00%) Submitted the a full version of the article Feedback:
Visual Tools–
Levels of Achievement: Poor 0 (0.00%) – 3.45 (3.45%) Visual aids demonstrate no creativity or clarity and are often difficult to read. Contains numerous errors and lack of detail. Little care taken in production. Presentation is weakened by the visual tools. Satisfactory 3.5 (3.50%) – 3.95 (3.95%) Visual aids have limited creativity or clarity or are sometimes difficult to read. May have some errors and show some detail. Some care has been taken in production. Presentation is not enhanced by the visual tools. Good 4 (4.00%) – 4.45 (4.45%) Visual aids are reasonably creative, clear, and easy to read. Evident that presentation shows a general attention to detail and accuracy. General care has been taken in production. Presentation is sometimes enhanced by the visual tools. Excellent 4.5 (4.50%) – 5 (5.00%) Visual aids are very creative, clear, and easy to read. Clearly evident that presentation is well constructed, accurate, and shows attention to detail. Extra care has been taken in the production. Presentation is enhanced by the visual tools. Feedback:
Name:Week 7 Video Presentation
Description:Up to 10% deduction may be implemented for not following APA style standards (e.g., references and in-text citations).
Collepals.com Plagiarism Free Papers
Are you looking for custom essay writing service or even dissertation writing services? Just request for our write my paper service, and we'll match you with the best essay writer in your subject! With an exceptional team of professional academic experts in a wide range of subjects, we can guarantee you an unrivaled quality of custom-written papers.
Get ZERO PLAGIARISM, HUMAN WRITTEN ESSAYS
Why Hire Collepals.com writers to do your paper?
Quality- We are experienced and have access to ample research materials.
We write plagiarism Free Content
Confidential- We never share or sell your personal information to third parties.
Support-Chat with us today! We are always waiting to answer all your questions.
