NURS 8002 Assignment Learning Online

NURS 8002 Assignment Learning Online

Have you ever read an online blog? If so, what was the aim of the blog? What did you like or did not like
about the blog?
In this course, you will engage in a series of Blog Assignments with your colleagues. Blogs help to
facilitate a meaningful and somewhat informal classroom environment that fosters dialogue,
interaction, and the dissemination of ideas in a functional platform (Kuo et al., 2017). Blogs also serve as
way to promote a community and collaborate learning approach through the sharing of ideas. Although
they may function like a Discussion Board, the aim is to be more open-ended in nature and somewhat
informal in sharing your perspectives and thoughts on a given prompt or idea.

Photo Credit: artisteer / iStock / Getty Images Plus / Getty Images
For this first Blog Assignment, reflect on your experiences, either academically or professionally, in
which you have employed a given strategy to allow for success that may transfer successfully toward
learning online. Think about how this strategy may help to inform your overall approach toward
completing an online doctorate degree.
Reference: Kuo, Y.-C., Belland, B. R., & Kuo, Y.-T. (2017). Learning through blogging: Students’ perspectives in collaborative blog-enhanced learning communities. Educational Technology & Society, 20(2), 37–50.
To prepare:
 Review the strategies and tips in the documents linked in this week’s Learning Resources, such
as Plagiarism Prevention Resource Kit and Scholarly Voice: Overview, and those presented in
“Writing at the Graduate Level.”
 Review the Walden University Catalog, Field Experience: College of Nursing, and Programs: DNP
Doctoral Project resources to review your program of study and requirements for the
completion of the DNP.
 Reflect on strategies you might use to ensure success in your program of study and for
completion of your DNP degree requirements. For example, consider time management,
organization, prioritization, and any other strategies that might be of considerable use in an
academic or professional capacity.
By Day 3 of Week 1
Post a brief description of at least one strategy you have used in the past (academically or
professionally) that was advantageous in empowering you in terms of one or more of the following skill
sets: planning, time management, studying, and effective technology use. Then identify a strategy that
you have not yet tried and explain how this strategy may be beneficial, given your strengths and any
potential areas of improvement. Be specific and provide examples.
Read a selection of your colleagues' responses.
By Day 6 of Week 1

Read a selection of your colleagues’ responses and respond to at least two of your colleagues on two
different days by suggesting at least one additional strategy to your colleague not yet selected and
explain how and/or why you think it will contribute to their success as an online doctoral student.
Submission and Grading Information
Grading Criteria

To access your rubric:
Week 1 Blog Rubric

Post by Day 3 of Week 1 and Respond by Day 6 of Week 1

To Participate in this Blog:
Week 1 Blog

What’s Coming Up in Weeks 2–3?

Photo Credit: [BrianAJackson]/[iStock / Getty Images Plus]/Getty Images
Next week, you will examine how your academic and professional goals align to Walden University’s
vision, mission, and social change outcomes. You also analyze plans for incorporating social change into
your program of study and for professional practice.
Next Week

To go to the next week:
Week 2-3

Week 1: Strategies for Successful Online Learning
What does it mean to be successful as an online student? What skills, knowledge, or experiences might
you possess to ensure your success in your academic program? What does it mean to be a Walden
University student?

It may come as no surprise that pursuing doctoral education is a significant milestone in any student’s
academic journey. Whether you have completed an online degree or participated in some coursework
online, the online learning environment may present unique challenges for ensuring your success and
accountability in meeting and exceeding degree requirements. Throughout your academic journey, you
will be presented with support resources, strategies, and opportunities to refine your previous skills and
knowledge that can be applied for your academic success in your degree program.
This week, you will examine support resources and strategies for ensuring your success as an online
student at Walden University. You will also review your DNP program requirements, including field
experience and DNP doctoral project components to help you prepare in planning for future coursework
and goal setting.
Learning Objectives
Students will:
 Evaluate strategies for self-empowerment in academic and professional settings
 Analyze strategies to address strengths and areas of improvement in academic and professional
settings

Learning Resources

Required Readings (click to expand/reduce)

Walden University. (n.d.). Doctor of nursing practice.
https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/catalog/doctor-nursing-practice

Walden University. (n.d.). Field experience: College of nursing. Field Experience.
https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/fieldexperience/son

Walden University. (n.d.). Plagiarism prevention resource kit. Writing Center.
https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/plagiarism

Walden University. (n.d.). Scholarly voice: Overview. Writing Center.
https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/scholarlyvoice

Walden University. (n.d.). Subject research: Nursing. Walden Library.
https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/library/subject/nursing

Walden University. (n.d.). Using evidence: Synthesis. Writing Center.
https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/evidence/synthesis

Walden University. (2020). Writing at the graduate level. Writing Center.
https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/scholarly#s-lg-box-2804295

Westlake, C. (2012). Practical tips for literature synthesis. Clinical Nurse Specialist, 26(5), 244–249.
https://doi.org/10.1097/NUR.0b013e318263d766

Document: DNP Project Process Guide (Word document)

Required Media (click to expand/reduce)

Review the following media resources available from the Walden Library:
Walden University. (n.d.). Library webinar archives: Nursing. Walden Library.
https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/library/webinararchives/nursing
 “Introduction to Nursing Research in the Walden Library”
 “Advanced Nursing Research Library Lab”

Module 1: The Foundations of Successful Doctoral Study
Welcome to the first module of Foundations and Essentials for the Doctor of Nursing Practice. The work
you complete in this course provides a strong foundation for graduate study at Walden University.

Following successful completion of your program, you will be prepared to address the challenges and
opportunities to develop and contribute to the science that will lead nursing practice for the future.
How will your role as a scholar-practitioner impact the field of nursing practice? As you engage in the
assessments for this course, reflect on how you will be developing your skills as a doctoral student and
scholar-practitioner.
What's Happening This Module?
This course is composed of 5 separate modules covering 11 weeks of content. Each module consists of
an overarching topic, and each week within the module includes specific subtopics for learning. As you
work through each module, you will have an opportunity to draw upon the knowledge you gain in the
assessments and components of learning throughout each of the modules.
Module 1: The Foundations of Successful Doctoral Study is a 3-week module—Weeks 1–3 of the
course—in which you will analyze strategies to be successful in the online learning environment and for
doctoral study at Walden University. In your Blog for Week 1, you will explore and determine strategies
for self-empowerment in academic and professional settings. In Weeks 2–3, you will reflect on your
academic and professional goals in relation to Walden University’s vision, mission, and social change
outcomes. In your Assignment, you will analyze how your academic and professional goals align to the
American Association of Colleges of Nursing’s (AACN’s) The Essentials of Doctoral Education for
Advanced Nursing Practice (DNP Essentials). You will also consider plans for incorporating social change
into your program of study and professional practice.
What do I have to do? When do I have to do it?

Review your Learning Resources. Days 1–7, Weeks 1, 2, and 3

Blog: Learning Online Post by Day 3 of Week 1 and respond to
your colleagues by Day 6 of Week 1.

Assignment: AACN Competencies and the
Walden Mission, Vision, and Outcomes Submit your Assignment by Day 7 of Week 3.

Go to the Week's Content
Rubric Detail

Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric's layout.
Name: NURS_8002_Week1_Blog_Rubric

Exit

 Grid View
 List View

Excellent
90%–100%

Good
80%–89%

Fair
70%–79%

Poor
0%–69%

Main Posting:

Response to the Blog
prompt is reflective with
critical analysis and
synthesis representative of
knowledge gained from the
course readings for the
module and current credible
sources.

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS:NURS 8002 Assignment Learning Online

18 (30%) – 20 (33.33%)
Thoroughly responds to the
Blog prompt(s).
Is reflective with critical
analysis and synthesis
representative of knowledge
gained from the course
readings for the module and/or
current practice experiences.
No less than 75% of post has
exceptional depth and
breadth.

16 (26.67%) – 17 (28.33%)
Responds to most of the Blog
prompt(s).
Is somewhat reflective with
critical analysis and synthesis
representative of knowledge
gained from the course
readings for the module and/or
current practice experiences.
50% of the post has
exceptional depth and
breadth.

14 (23.33%) – 15 (25%)
Responds to some of the Blog
prompt(s).
One to two criteria are not
addressed or are superficially
addressed.
Is somewhat lacking reflection
and critical analysis and
synthesis.
Somewhat represents
knowledge gained from the
course readings for the
module.

0 (0%) – 13 (21.67%)
Does not respond to the Blog
prompt(s).
Lacks depth or superficially
addresses criteria.
Lacks reflection and critical
analysis and synthesis.
Does not represent knowledge
gained from the course
readings for the module.

Main Posting:

Writing

5 (8.33%) – 5 (8.33%)
Written clearly and concisely.
Contains no grammatical or
spelling errors.
Adheres to current APA
manual writing rules and style.

4 (6.67%) – 4 (6.67%)
Written concisely.
May contain one to two
grammatical or spelling errors.
Adheres to current APA
manual writing rules and style.

3 (5%) – 3 (5%)
Written somewhat concisely.
May contain more than two
spelling or grammatical errors.
Contains some APA formatting
errors.

0 (0%) – 2 (3.33%)
Not written clearly or
concisely.
Contains more than two
spelling or grammatical errors.
Does not adhere to current
APA manual writing rules and
style.

Main Posting:

Timely and full participation

5 (8.33%) – 5 (8.33%)
Meets requirements for timely,
full, and active participation.
Posts main Blog post by due
date.

4 (6.67%) – 4 (6.67%)
Posts main Discussion by due
date.
Meets requirements for full
participation.

3 (5%) – 3 (5%)
Posts main Blog post by due
date.

0 (0%) – 2 (3.33%)
Does not meet requirements
for full participation.
Does not post main Blog post
by due date.

First Response:

Post to colleague’s main

5 (8.33%) – 5 (8.33%)
Response exhibits critical
thinking and application to
practice settings.

4 (6.67%) – 4 (6.67%)
Response has some depth
and may exhibit critical
thinking or application to
practice setting.

3 (5%) – 3 (5%)
Response is on topic and may
have some depth.

0 (0%) – 2 (3.33%)
Response may not be on topic
and lacks depth.

post that is reflective. Responds to questions posed

by faculty.

First Response:
Writing

5 (8.33%) – 5 (8.33%)
Communication is professional
and respectful to colleagues.
Response fully answers
faculty questions, if posed.
Provides clear, concise
opinions and ideas.
Response is effectively written
in standard, edited English.

4 (6.67%) – 4 (6.67%)
Communication is mostly
professional and respectful to
colleagues.
Response mostly answers
faculty questions, if posed.
Provides opinions and ideas.
Response is written in
standard, edited English.

3 (5%) – 3 (5%)
Response posed in the Blog
may lack effective professional
communication.
Response somewhat answers
faculty questions, if posed.

0 (0%) – 2 (3.33%)
Responses posted in the Blog
lack effective communication.
Response to faculty questions
is missing.

First Response:
Timely and full participation

5 (8.33%) – 5 (8.33%)
Meets requirements for timely,
full, and active participation.
Posts by due date.

4 (6.67%) – 4 (6.67%)
Meets requirements for full
participation.
Posts by due date.

3 (5%) – 3 (5%)
Posts by due date.

0 (0%) – 2 (3.33%)
Does not meet requirements
for full participation.
Does not post by due date.

Second Response:
Post to colleague’s main
post that is reflective.

5 (8.33%) – 5 (8.33%)
Response exhibits critical
thinking and application to
practice settings.
Responds to questions posed
by faculty.

4 (6.67%) – 4 (6.67%)
Response has some depth
and may exhibit critical
thinking or application to
practice setting.

3 (5%) – 3 (5%)
Response is on topic and may
have some depth.

0 (0%) – 2 (3.33%)
Response may not be on topic
and lacks depth.

Second Response:
Writing

3 (5%) – 3 (5%)
Response posed in the Blog
may lack effective professional
communication.
Response somewhat answers
faculty questions, if posed.

0 (0%) – 2 (3.33%)
Responses posted in the Blog
lack effective communication.
Response to faculty questions
is missing.

Second Response:
Timely and full participation

5 (8.33%) – 5 (8.33%)
Meets requirements for timely,
full, and active participation.

4 (6.67%) – 4 (6.67%)
Meets requirements for full
participation.

3 (5%) – 3 (5%)
Posts by due date.

0 (0%) – 2 (3.33%)
Does not meet requirements
for full participation.

Posts by due date. Posts by due date. Does not post by due date.

Total Points: 60
Name: NURS_8002_Week1_Blog_Rubric

Excellent	Good	Fair	Poor
RESPONSIVENESS TO DISCUSSION QUESTION Discussion post minimum requirements: *The original posting must be completed by Wednesday, Day 3, at 11:59pm MST. Two response postings to two different peer original posts, on two different days, are required by Saturday, Day 6, at 11:59pm MST. Faculty member inquiries require responses, which are not included in the minimum number of posts. Your Discussion Board postings should be written in standard edited English and follow APA style for format and grammar as closely as possible given the constraints of the online platform. Be sure to support the postings with specific citations from this week’s Learning Resources as well as resources available through the Walden University online databases. Refer to the Essential Guide to APA Style for Walden Students to ensure your in-text citations and reference list are correct.	8 (26.67%) – 8 (26.67%) Discussion postings and responses exceed the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: Respond to the question being asked or the prompt provided; – Go beyond what is required in some meaningful way (e.g., the post contributes a new dimension, unearths something unanticipated); -Are substantive, reflective, with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence. – Demonstrate significant ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning -Resources as well as additional resources and has read, viewed, or considered a sampling of colleagues’ postings; -Exceed the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.	7 (23.33%) – 7 (23.33%) Discussion postings and responses meet the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: -Respond to the question being asked or the prompt provided; -Are substantive, reflective, with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence.re -Demonstrate ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning Resources and has read, viewed, or considered a sampling of colleagues’ postings -Meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.	6 (20%) – 6 (20%) Discussion postings and responses are minimally responsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: – do not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question or prompt; and/or -May (lack) lack in depth, reflection, analysis, or synthesis but rely more on anecdotal than scholarly evidence; and/or -Do not adequately demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning -Resources and/or a sampling of colleagues’ postings; and/or has posted by the due date at least in part. – Lack ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Do not meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.	0 (0%) – 5 (16.67%) Discussion postings and responses are unresponsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: – do not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question or prompt; and/or – Lack in substance, reflection, analysis, or synthesis but rely more on anecdotal than scholarly evidence. – Lack ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Do not demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning Resources and/or a sampling of colleagues’ postings; and/or does not meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.
CONTENT KNOWLEDGE	8 (26.67%) – 8 (26.67%) Discussion postings and responses: -demonstrate in-depth understanding and application of concepts and issues presented in the course (e.g., insightful interpretations including analysis, synthesis and/or evaluation of topic; – are well supported by pertinent research/evidence from a variety of and multiple peer- reviewed books and journals, where appropriate; -Demonstrate significant mastery and thoughtful/accurate application of content, applicable skills or strategies presented in the course.	7 (23.33%) – 7 (23.33%) Discussion postings and responses: -demonstrate understanding and application of the concepts and issues presented in the course, presented with some understanding and application of concepts and issues presented in the course (e.g., insightful interpretations including analysis, synthesis and/or evaluation of topic; -are supported by research/evidence from peer-reviewed books and journals, where appropriate; and · demonstrate some mastery and application of content, applicable skills, or strategies presented in the course.	6 (20%) – 6 (20%) Discussion postings and responses: – demonstrate minimal understanding of concepts and issues presented in the course, and, although generally accurate, display some omissions and/or errors; –lack support by research/evidence and/or the research/evidence is inappropriate or marginal in quality; and/or lack of analysis, synthesis or evaluation of topic – demonstrate minimal content, skills or strategies presented in the course. ——-Contain numerous errors when using the skills or strategies presented in the course	0 (0%) – 5 (16.67%) Discussion postings and responses demonstrate: -A lack of understanding of the concepts and issues presented in the course; and/or are inaccurate, contain many omissions and/or errors; and/or are not supported by research/evidence; and/or lack of analysis, synthesis or evaluation of topic -Many critical errors when discussing content, applicable skills or strategies presented in the course.
CONTRIBUTION TO THE DISCUSSION	8 (26.67%) – 8 (26.67%) Discussion postings and responses significantly contribute to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by: -providing Rich and relevant examples; discerning and thought-provoking ideas; and stimulating thoughts and probes; – -demonstrating original thinking, new perspectives, and extensive synthesis of ideas supported by the literature.	7 (23.33%) – 7 (23.33%) Discussion postings and responses contribute to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by -providing relevant examples; thought-provoking ideas – Demonstrating synthesis of ideas supported by the literature	6 (20%) – 6 (20%) Discussion postings and responses minimally contribute to the quality of discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by: – providing few and/or irrelevant examples; and/or – providing few if any thought- provoking ideas; and/or -. Information that is restated from the literature with no/little demonstration of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas.	0 (0%) – 5 (16.67%) Discussion postings and responses do not contribute to the quality of interaction/discussion and thinking and learning as they do not: -Provide examples (or examples are irrelevant); and/or -Include interesting thoughts or ideas; and/or – Demonstrate of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas
QUALITY OF WRITING	6 (20%) – 6 (20%) Discussion postings and responses exceed doctoral -level writing expectations. They: · Use grammar and syntax that is clear, concise, and appropriate to doctoral level writing; · Make few if any errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · Use original language and refrain from directly quoting original source materials; -provide correct APA · Are positive, courteous, and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints.	5 (16.67%) – 5 (16.67%) Discussion postings and responses meet doctoral -level writing expectations. They: ·Use grammar and syntax that is clear and appropriate to doctoral level writing; ; · Make a few errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · paraphrase but refrain from directly quoting original source materials; Provide correct APA format · Are courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints;.	4 (13.33%) – 4 (13.33%) Discussion postings and responses are minimally below doctoral-level writing expectations. They: · Make more than occasional errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · Directly quote from original source materials and/or paraphrase rather than use original language; lack correct APA format; and/or · Are less than courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.	0 (0%) – 3 (10%) Discussion postings and responses are well below doctoral -level writing expectations. They: · Use grammar and syntax that is that is unclear · Make many errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; and –use incorrect APA format · Are discourteous and disrespectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.
Total Points: 30

Excellent

Good

Fair

Poor

RESPONSIVENESS TO DISCUSSION QUESTION

Discussion post minimum requirements:

*The original posting must be completed by Wednesday, Day 3, at 11:59pm MST. Two response postings to two different peer original posts, on two different days, are required by Saturday, Day 6, at 11:59pm MST. Faculty member inquiries require responses, which are not included in the minimum number of posts. Your Discussion Board postings should be written in standard edited English and follow APA style for format and grammar as closely as possible given the constraints of the online platform. Be sure to support the postings with specific citations from this week’s Learning Resources as well as resources available through the Walden University online databases. Refer to the Essential Guide to APA Style for Walden Students to ensure your in-text citations and reference list are correct.

8 (26.67%) – 8 (26.67%)

Discussion postings and responses exceed the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: Respond to the question being asked or the prompt provided; – Go beyond what is required in some meaningful way (e.g., the post contributes a new dimension, unearths something unanticipated); -Are substantive, reflective, with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence. – Demonstrate significant ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning -Resources as well as additional resources and has read, viewed, or considered a sampling of colleagues’ postings; -Exceed the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.

7 (23.33%) – 7 (23.33%)

Discussion postings and responses meet the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: -Respond to the question being asked or the prompt provided; -Are substantive, reflective, with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence.re -Demonstrate ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning Resources and has read, viewed, or considered a sampling of colleagues’ postings -Meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.

6 (20%) – 6 (20%)

Discussion postings and responses are minimally responsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: – do not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question or prompt; and/or -May (lack) lack in depth, reflection, analysis, or synthesis but rely more on anecdotal than scholarly evidence; and/or -Do not adequately demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning -Resources and/or a sampling of colleagues’ postings; and/or has posted by the due date at least in part. – Lack ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Do not meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.

0 (0%) – 5 (16.67%)

Discussion postings and responses are unresponsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: – do not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question or prompt; and/or – Lack in substance, reflection, analysis, or synthesis but rely more on anecdotal than scholarly evidence. – Lack ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Do not demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning Resources and/or a sampling of colleagues’ postings; and/or does not meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.

CONTENT KNOWLEDGE

8 (26.67%) – 8 (26.67%)

Discussion postings and responses: -demonstrate in-depth understanding and application of concepts and issues presented in the course (e.g., insightful interpretations including analysis, synthesis and/or evaluation of topic; – are well supported by pertinent research/evidence from a variety of and multiple peer- reviewed books and journals, where appropriate; -Demonstrate significant mastery and thoughtful/accurate application of content, applicable skills or strategies presented in the course.

7 (23.33%) – 7 (23.33%)

Discussion postings and responses: -demonstrate understanding and application of the concepts and issues presented in the course, presented with some understanding and application of concepts and issues presented in the course (e.g., insightful interpretations including analysis, synthesis and/or evaluation of topic; -are supported by research/evidence from peer-reviewed books and journals, where appropriate; and · demonstrate some mastery and application of content, applicable skills, or strategies presented in the course.

6 (20%) – 6 (20%)

Discussion postings and responses: – demonstrate minimal understanding of concepts and issues presented in the course, and, although generally accurate, display some omissions and/or errors; –lack support by research/evidence and/or the research/evidence is inappropriate or marginal in quality; and/or lack of analysis, synthesis or evaluation of topic – demonstrate minimal content, skills or strategies presented in the course. ——-Contain numerous errors when using the skills or strategies presented in the course

0 (0%) – 5 (16.67%)

Discussion postings and responses demonstrate: -A lack of understanding of the concepts and issues presented in the course; and/or are inaccurate, contain many omissions and/or errors; and/or are not supported by research/evidence; and/or lack of analysis, synthesis or evaluation of topic -Many critical errors when discussing content, applicable skills or strategies presented in the course.

CONTRIBUTION TO THE DISCUSSION

8 (26.67%) – 8 (26.67%)

Discussion postings and responses significantly contribute to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by: -providing Rich and relevant examples; discerning and thought-provoking ideas; and stimulating thoughts and probes; – -demonstrating original thinking, new perspectives, and extensive synthesis of ideas supported by the literature.

7 (23.33%) – 7 (23.33%)

Discussion postings and responses contribute to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by -providing relevant examples; thought-provoking ideas – Demonstrating synthesis of ideas supported by the literature

6 (20%) – 6 (20%)

Discussion postings and responses minimally contribute to the quality of discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by: – providing few and/or irrelevant examples; and/or – providing few if any thought- provoking ideas; and/or -. Information that is restated from the literature with no/little demonstration of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas.

0 (0%) – 5 (16.67%)

Discussion postings and responses do not contribute to the quality of interaction/discussion and thinking and learning as they do not: -Provide examples (or examples are irrelevant); and/or -Include interesting thoughts or ideas; and/or – Demonstrate of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas

QUALITY OF WRITING

6 (20%) – 6 (20%)

Discussion postings and responses exceed doctoral -level writing expectations. They: · Use grammar and syntax that is clear, concise, and appropriate to doctoral level writing; · Make few if any errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · Use original language and refrain from directly quoting original source materials; -provide correct APA · Are positive, courteous, and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

5 (16.67%) – 5 (16.67%)

Discussion postings and responses meet doctoral -level writing expectations. They: ·Use grammar and syntax that is clear and appropriate to doctoral level writing; ; · Make a few errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · paraphrase but refrain from directly quoting original source materials; Provide correct APA format · Are courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints;.

4 (13.33%) – 4 (13.33%)

Discussion postings and responses are minimally below doctoral-level writing expectations. They: · Make more than occasional errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · Directly quote from original source materials and/or paraphrase rather than use original language; lack correct APA format; and/or · Are less than courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

0 (0%) – 3 (10%)

Discussion postings and responses are well below doctoral -level writing expectations. They: · Use grammar and syntax that is that is unclear · Make many errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; and –use incorrect APA format · Are discourteous and disrespectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

Total Points: 30