Discussion Rubric #2

These instructions were developed by Dr. Jane Blood-Siegfried and have been successfully used at the Duke University School of Nursing.

For more information about discussion forums please see the section on Managing Discussions.

Purpose: Demonstrate an understanding of the assigned reading while clarifying the course content in a thoughtful and analytical manner. Develop group networking and interaction skills and share opinions and ideas on the study questions. It is well understood that group interaction and personal reflection are critical to learning in an online environment. All of you are content experts in certain areas of nursing. Let’s share our expertise with each other to make this a stronger experience.

  • All students are required to respond to the different cases. In order to keep a dialogue moving forward, you are encouraged to end your posts with a question.
  • You are also encouraged to re-title your posts each time you submit a response within a thread. Metaphors can be useful here.
  • Your comments will be graded for quality not quantity. Posts should not be more than 100 words. Be creative and thoughtful. I expect that each of you will post a minimum of 3 times per week.
  • This is not a session for criticism of others ideas, but a forum to discuss the differences in ideas. Humor is also appreciated.
  • You will need to stay disciplined to accomplish the work! It isn’t possible to have a good discussion if you only log in on the weekend, or only participate once a week. So plan to discuss throughout the week with multiple but meaningful postings! You are also accountable to your peers for the quality/relevance of your weekly participation in the discussion!

Grading rubric

“5” Response integrates multiple views and/or shows value for other participants’ responses in its thread. Alternatively, the response contributes language, a metaphor or a study tool that serves to deepen the dialogue.

“4” Consistently demonstrates knowledge of the issues, theory, and applications, critical thinking, and appropriate use of current concepts however it is missing one or more key points.

“3” Response builds on the ideas of one or two participants and digs deeper into assignment questions or issues.

“2” Entry shows minimal evidence of interaction with other participants’.

“1” Does not understand the minimum concepts for this project or has added no thought to the subject.

“0” No response.