Appendix 3: Rubric for discussion board
The rubric below was derived from the rubric published at: https://www2.uwstout.edu/content/profdev/rubrics/discussionrubric.html
Rubric for discussion board
| Criteria | Unsatisfactory | Check minus | Check | Check plus | Score |
| Frequency and timeliness of posts | Did not submit at least three initial posts. Did not submit at least five responses to peers’ posts. Posts are not well distributed since last grading of the board (e.g., all or most on the last day before grading of the board). | Submitted three initial posts. Submitted at least four responses to peers’ posts. Posts are not well distributed since last grading of the board. | Submitted four initial posts. Submitted at least six responses to peers’ posts. Posts are not well distributed since last grading of the board. | Submitted five initial posts. Submitted at least eight responses to peers’ posts. Posts are well distributed since last grading of the board (not posted all on one day or only at the beginning or only on the last day of the module). | |
| Critical Analysis – Quality of content posted | Discussion postings show little or no evidence that readings were completed or understood. Postings are largely personal opinions or feelings, or “I agree” or “Great idea,” without supporting statements or references to concepts from the scaffolding assignments and primary literature. | Discussion postings repeat and summarize basic, correct information, but do not link the scaffolding assignments and primary literature. Posts do not consider alternative perspectives or connections between ideas. Sources are not cited. | Discussion postings display an understanding of the scaffolding assignments and the primary literature. They demonstrate an engagement with underlying concepts including correct use of terminology and proper citation of sources. | Discussion postings display an excellent understanding of the scaffolding assignments, primary literature, and underlying concepts. The correct terminology is used throughout. Postings integrate references to the scientific literature to support important points. Well-edited quotes are cited appropriately. No more than 10% of the posting is a direct quotation. | |
| Participation in the Learning Community | Discussion postings do not contribute to ongoing conversations or respond to peers’ posts. There is no evidence of replies to questions. | Discussion postings sometimes contribute to ongoing conversations as evidenced by affirming statements or references to relevant research, asking related questions, or making an oppositional statement supported by research. | Discussion postings regularly contribute to ongoing conversations as evidenced by affirming statements or references to relevant research, asking related questions, or making an oppositional statement supported by research. | Discussion actively stimulate and sustain further discussion by building on peers’ responses as evidenced by a focused argument around a specific issue, asking a new related question, detailed affirming statements or references to relevant research, or oppositional statements supported by research. | |
| Etiquette in Dialogue with Peers | Written interactions on the discussion board show disrespect for others. | Some of the written interactions on the discussion board show respect and interest for the ideas and writing of teammates. | Written interactions on the discussion board show respect and interest for the ideas and writing of teammates. | Written interactions on the discussion board show respect and interest for the ideas and writing of teammates. Team member encourages a positive interaction with others by their constructive and positive comments. | |
| Quality of Writing and Proofreading | Does not submit posts that are in complete sentences. Written responses contain numerous grammatical, spelling or punctuation errors. The style of writing does not facilitate effective communication. | Submitted posts that are in complete sentences. Written responses include some grammatical, spelling or punctuation errors that distract the reader. | Submitted posts that are in complete sentences. Written responses are largely free of grammatical, spelling or punctuation errors. The style of writing generally facilitates communication. | Submitted posts that are in complete sentences. Written responses are free of grammatical, spelling or punctuation errors. The style of writing facilitates communication. |
