Discussion Question Rubric: Personal Safety of our Elders
Discussion Question Rubric: Personal Safety of our Elders
Discussion Question Rubric: Personal Safety of our Elders
Elder abuse. Include physical, emotional, sexual, etc. How, as an APRN, can you screen for and address elder abuse? What types of health promotion concepts can be used to help advocate for the personal safety of our elders? Are there screening tools available? In what unconventional locations within your community might an elder screening be performed?
RUBRIC:
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 PointsCriteriaExemplaryExceeds ExpectationsAdvancedMeets ExpectationsIntermediateNeeds ImprovementNoviceInadequateTotal 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 pointsComponents 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 pointsComponents 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 pointsAbsent 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 points40Peer 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 pointsEvidence 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 pointsLacks 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 pointsPost 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 peer posts.
Missing several instruction requirements.
Submits post late.
27 points40Frequency of DistributionInitial post and peer post(s) made on multiple separate days.
All instruction requirements noted.
10 pointsInitial post and peer post(s) made on multiple separate days.
8 pointsMinimum of two post options (initial and/or peer) made on separate days.
7 pointsAll posts made on same day.
Submission demonstrates inadequate preparation.
No post submitted.
6 points10OrganizationWell-organized content with a clear and complex purpose statement and content argument. Writing is concise with a logical flow of ideas
5 pointsOrganized content with an informative purpose statement, supportive content, and summary statement. Argument content is developed with minimal issues in content flow.
4 pointsPoor organization and flow of ideas distract from content. Narrative is difficult to follow and frequently causes reader to reread work.
Purpose statement is noted.
3 pointsIllogical flow of ideas. Prose rambles. Purpose statement is unclear or missing.
Demonstrates incomplete understanding of content and/or inadequate preparation.
No purpose statement.
Submits assignment late.
2 points5APA, Grammar, and SpellingCorrect APA formatting with no errors.
The writer correctly identifies reading audience, as demonstrated by appropriate language (avoids jargon and simplifies complex concepts appropriately).
Writing is concise, in active voice, and avoids awkward transitions and overuse of conjunctions.
There are no spelling, punctuation, or word-usage errors.
5 pointsCorrect and consistent APA formatting of references and cites all references used. No more than two unique APA errors.
The writer demonstrates correct usage of formal English language in sentence construction. Variation in sentence structure and word usage promotes readability.
There are minimal to no grammar, punctuation, or word-usage errors.
4 pointsThree to four unique APA formatting errors.
The writer occasionally uses awkward sentence construction or overuses/inappropriately uses complex sentence structure. Problems with word usage (evidence of incorrect use of thesaurus) and punctuation persist, often causing some difficulties with grammar. Some words, transitional phrases, and conjunctions are overused.
Multiple grammar, punctuation, or word usage errors.
3 pointsFive or more unique formatting errors or no attempt to format in APA.
The writer demonstrates limited understanding of formal written language use; writing is colloquial (conforms to spoken language).
The writer struggles with limited vocabulary and has difficulty conveying meaning such that only the broadest, most general messages are presented.
Grammar and punctuation are consistently incorrect. Spelling errors are numerous.
Submits assignment late.
2 points5Total Points100
ORDER NOW FOR AN EXCELLENT PAPER FROM HEALTH CARE PAPER GURUS: Discussion Question Rubric: Personal Safety of our Elders
You must proofread your paper. But do not strictly rely on your computer’s spell-checker and grammar-checker; failure to do so indicates a lack of effort on your part and you can expect your grade to suffer accordingly. Papers with numerous misspelled words and grammatical mistakes will be penalized. Read over your paper – in silence and then aloud – before handing it in and make corrections as necessary. Often it is advantageous to have a friend proofread your paper for obvious errors. Handwritten corrections are preferable to uncorrected mistakes.
Use a standard 10 to 12 point (10 to 12 characters per inch) typeface. Smaller or compressed type and papers with small margins or single-spacing are hard to read. It is better to let your essay run over the recommended number of pages than to try to compress it into fewer pages.
Likewise, large type, large margins, large indentations, triple-spacing, increased leading (space between lines), increased kerning (space between letters), and any other such attempts at “padding” to increase the length of a paper are unacceptable, wasteful of trees, and will not fool your professor.
Discussion Question Rubric: Personal Safety of our Elders
The paper must be neatly formatted, double-spaced with a one-inch margin on the top, bottom, and sides of each page. When submitting hard copy, be sure to use white paper and print out using dark ink. If it is hard to read your essay, it will also be hard to follow your argument.
ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE CLASS
Discussion Questions (DQ)
Initial responses to the DQ should address all components of the questions asked, include a minimum of one scholarly source, and be at least 250 words.
Successful responses are substantive (i.e., add something new to the discussion, engage others in the discussion, well-developed idea) and include at least one scholarly source.
One or two sentence responses, simple statements of agreement or “good post,” and responses that are off-topic will not count as substantive. Substantive responses should be at least 150 words.
I encourage you to incorporate the readings from the week (as applicable) into your responses.
Weekly Participation
Your initial responses to the mandatory DQ do not count toward participation and are graded separately.
In addition to the DQ responses, you must post at least one reply to peers (or me) on three separate days, for a total of three replies.
Participation posts do not require a scholarly source/citation (unless you cite someone else’s work).
Part of your weekly participation includes viewing the weekly announcement and attesting to watching it in the comments. These announcements are made to ensure you understand everything that is due during the week.
APA Format and Writing Quality
Discussion Question Rubric: Personal Safety of our Elders
Familiarize yourself with APA format and practice using it correctly. It is used for most writing assignments for your degree. Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in LoudCloud for APA paper templates, citation examples, tips, etc. Points will be deducted for poor use of APA format or absence of APA format (if required).
Cite all sources of information! When in doubt, cite the source. Paraphrasing also requires a citation.
I highly recommend using the APA Publication Manual, 6th edition.
Use of Direct Quotes
I discourage overutilization of direct quotes in DQs and assignments at the Masters’ level and deduct points accordingly.
As Masters’ level students, it is important that you be able to critically analyze and interpret information from journal articles and other resources. Simply restating someone else’s words does not demonstrate an understanding of the content or critical analysis of the content.
It is best to paraphrase content and cite your source.
LopesWrite Policy
For assignments that need to be submitted to LopesWrite, please be sure you have received your report and Similarity Index (SI) percentage BEFORE you do a “final submit” to me.
Once you have received your report, please review it. This report will show you grammatical, punctuation, and spelling errors that can easily be fixed. Take the extra few minutes to review instead of getting counted off for these mistakes.
Review your similarities. Did you forget to cite something? Did you not paraphrase well enough? Is your paper made up of someone else’s thoughts more than your own?
Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in LoudCloud for tips on improving your paper and SI score.
Late Policy
The university’s policy on late assignments is 10% penalty PER DAY LATE. This also applies to late DQ replies.
Please communicate with me if you anticipate having to submit an assignment late. I am happy to be flexible, with advance notice. We may be able to work out an extension based on extenuating circumstances.
If you do not communicate with me before submitting an assignment late, the GCU late policy will be in effect.
I do not accept assignments that are two or more weeks late unless we have worked out an extension.
As per policy, no assignments are accepted after the last day of class. Any assignment submitted after midnight on the last day of class will not be accepted for grading.
Communication
Communication is so very important. There are multiple ways to communicate with me:
Questions to Instructor Forum: This is a great place to ask course content or assignment questions. If you have a question, there is a good chance one of your peers does as well. This is a public forum for the class.
Individual Forum: This is a private forum to ask me questions or send me messages. This will be checked at least once every 24 hours.
Grading Rubric Guidelines
Performance Category 10 9 8 4 0
Scholarliness
Demonstrates achievement of scholarly inquiry for professional and academic decisions. • Provides relevant evidence of scholarly inquiry clearly stating how the evidence informed or changed professional or academic decisions
• Evaluates literature resources to develop a comprehensive analysis or synthesis.
• Uses valid, relevant, and reliable outside sources to contribute to the threaded discussion • Provides relevant evidence of scholarly inquiry but does not clearly state how the evidence informed or changed professional or academic decisions.
• Evaluates information from source(s) to develop a coherent analysis or synthesis.
• Uses some valid, relevant, reliable outside sources to contribute to the threaded discussion. • Discusses using scholarly inquiry but does not state how scholarly inquiry informed or changed professional or academic decisions.
• Information is taken from source(s) with some interpretation/evaluation, but not enough to develop a coherent analysis or synthesis.
• Little valid, relevant, or reliable outside sources are used to contribute to the threaded discussion.
• Demonstrates little or no understanding of the topic. • Discusses using scholarly inquiry but does not state how scholarly inquiry informed or changed professional or academic decisions.
• Information is taken from source(s) without any interpretation/evaluation.
• The posting uses information that is not valid, relevant, or reliable • No evidence of the use of scholarly inquiry to inform or change professional or academic decisions.
• Information is not valid, relevant, or reliable
Performance Category 10 9 8 4 0
Application of Course Knowledge –
Demonstrate the ability to analyze, synthesize, and/or apply principles and concepts learned in the course lesson and outside readings and relate them to real-life professional situations • Posts make direct reference to concepts discussed in the lesson or drawn from relevant outside sources;
• Applies concepts to personal experience in the professional setting and or relevant application to real life. • Posts make direct reference to concepts discussed in the lesson or drawn from relevant outside sources.
• Applies concepts to personal experience in their professional setting and or relevant application to real life
• Interactions with classmates are relevant to the discussion topic but do not make direct reference to lesson content • Posts are generally on topic but do not build knowledge by incorporating concepts and principles from the lesson.
• Does not attempt to apply lesson concepts to personal experience in their professional setting and or relevant application to real life
• Does not demonstrate a solid understanding of the principles and concepts presented in the lesson • Posts do not adequately address the question posed either by the discussion prompt or the instructor’s launch post.
• Posts are superficial and do not reflect an understanding of the lesson content
• Does not attempt to apply lesson concepts to personal experience in their professional setting and or relevant application to real life • Posts are not related to the topics provided by the discussion prompt or by the instructor; attempts by the instructor to redirect the student are ignored
• No discussion of lesson concepts to personal experience in the professional setting and or relevant application to real life
Performance Category 5 4 3 2 0
Interactive Dialogue
Replies to each graded thread topic posted by the course instructor, by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT, of each week, and posts a minimum of two times in each graded thread, on separate days.
(5 points possible per graded thread) • Exceeds minimum post requirements
• Replies to each graded thread topic posted by the course instructor, by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT, of each week, and posts three or more times in each graded thread, over three separate days.
• Replies to a post posed by faculty and to a peer
• Summarizes what was learned from the lesson, readings, and other student posts for the week. • Replies to each graded thread topic posted by the course instructor, by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT, of each week, and posts a minimum of two times in each graded thread, on separate days
• Replies to a question posed by a peer
Summarizes what was learned from the lesson, readings, and other student posts for the week. • Meets expectations of 2 posts on 2 different days.
• The main post is not made by the Wednesday deadline
• Does not reply to a question posed by a peer or faculty • Has only one post for the week
• Discussion posts contain few, if any, new ideas or applications; often are a rehashing or summary of other students’ comments • Does not post to the thread
• No connections are made to the topic
Minus 1 Point Minus 2 Point Minus 3 Point Minus 4 Point Minus 5 Point
Grammar, Syntax, APA
Note: if there are only a few errors in these criteria, please note this for the student in as an area for improvement. If the student does not make the needed corrections in upcoming weeks, then points should be deducted.
Points deducted for improper grammar, syntax and APA style of writing.
The source of information is the APA Manual 6th Edition • 2-3 errors in APA format.
• Written responses have 2-3 grammatical, spelling, and punctuation errors.
• Writing style is generally clear, focused, and facilitates communication. • 4-5 errors in APA format.
• Writing responses have 4-5 grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors.
• Writing style is somewhat focused. • 6-7 errors in APA format.
• Writing responses have 6-7 grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors.
• Writing style is slightly focused making discussion difficult to understand. • 8-10 errors in APA format.
• Writing responses have 8-10 grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors.
• Writing style is not focused, making discussion difficult to understand. • Post contains greater than 10 errors in APA format.
• Written responses have more than 10 grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors.
• Writing style does not facilitate communication.
• The student continues to make repeated mistakes in any of the above areas after written correction by the instructor
0 points lost
-5 points lost
Total Participation Requirements
per discussion thread The student answers the threaded discussion question or topic on one day and posts a second response on another day. The student does not meet the minimum requirement of two postings on two different days
Early Participation Requirement
per discussion thread The student must provide a substantive answer to the graded discussion question(s) or topic(s), posted by the course instructor (not a response to a peer), by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT of each week. The student does not meet the requirement of a substantive response to the stated question or topic by Wednesday at 11:59 pm MT.
