CGE Project Introduction (graded) - Get Instant Homework

Week 1: CGE Project Introduction (graded)
11 unread reply.11 reply.

This course will focus on approaching your CGE project topic from a project management perspective. We will spend a majority of this course laying the critical planning foundation. Feedback from your colleagues and peers should be a routine practice when it comes to projects. For this discussion, please address the following.

State your PICOT either as a post or an attachment to the Week 1 PICOT worksheet.
Provide a brief overview of your project and how you came to choose this project.
Read through the posts of your classmates and provide constructive feedback. Ask any questions you may have about a classmate’s topic or share any experience you have in that area. Remember to always be respectful and encouraging when it comes to providing feedback.
Threaded Discussion Grading Rubric

Participation for MSN

Threaded Discussion Guiding Principles

The ideas and beliefs underpinning the threaded discussions (TDs) guide students through engaging dialogues as they achieve the desired learning outcomes/competencies associated with their course in a manner that empowers them to organize, integrate, apply and critically appraise their knowledge to their selected field of practice. The use of TDs provides students with opportunities to contribute level-appropriate knowledge and experience to the topic in a safe, caring, and fluid environment that models professional and social interaction. The TD’s ebb and flow is based upon the composition of student and faculty interaction in the quest for relevant scholarship. Participation in the TDs generates opportunities for students to actively engage in the written ideas of others by carefully reading, researching, reflecting, and responding to the contributions of their peers and course faculty. TDs foster the development of members into a community of learners as they share ideas and inquiries, consider perspectives that may be different from their own, and integrate knowledge from other disciplines.

Participation Guidelines

Each weekly threaded discussion is worth up to 25 points. Students must post a minimum of two times in each graded thread. The two posts in each individual thread must be on separate days. Posting twice on two different days meets the minimum requirement however for full credit, the student must post at least three substantive posts on three different days. The student must provide an answer to each graded thread topic posted by the course instructor, by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT, of each week. If the student does not provide an answer to each graded thread topic (not a response to a student peer) before the Wednesday deadline, 5 points are deducted for each discussion thread in which late entry occurs (up to a 10-point deduction for that week). Subsequent posts, including essential responses to peers, must occur by the Sunday deadline, 11:59 p.m. MT of each week. Week 8 only- Subsequent posts, including essential responses to peers, must occur by the Saturday deadline, 11:59 p.m. MT of Week 8.

Direct Quotes

Good writing calls for the limited use of direct quotes. Direct quotes in Threaded Discussions are to be limited to one short quotation (not to exceed 15 words). The quote must add substantively to the discussion. Points will be deducted under the Grammar, Syntax, APA category.

MSNST_TDGradingRubric_Final_2016.05.18 Revised 10/31/16 – Education Track

Grading Rubric Guidelines

Point Values

Exceptional

(100%)

Outstanding or highest level of performance

Exceeds

(88%)

Very good or high level of performance

Meets

(80%)

Competent or satisfactory level of performance

Needs Improvement

(38%)

Poor or failing level of performance

Developing

(0)

Unsatisfactory level of performance

Performance Category

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

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

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)

· Replies to each graded thread topic posted by the course instructor, by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT, of each week.

· A minimum of three posts in each graded thread, over three separate days.

· Replies to a post from a peer and faculty member’s question. A response to faculty could include a question posed to a specific student or the entire class.

· Summarizes what was learned from the lesson, readings, and other student posts for the week. The summary could be included in one of the three minimum posts.

· 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 or post by a peer but not to a faculty post

· Summarizes what was learned from the lesson, readings, and other student posts for the week. The summary could be included in one of the three minimum posts.

· Makes two posts on 2 different days

· Does not reply to a question or post by a peer

· Makes limited, if any, connections, and those are often cast in the form of vague generalities.

· Has only one post for the week or posts twice on the same day.

· 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 Points

Minus 3 Points

Minus 4 Points

Minus 5 Points

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 Current 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,…