NRS 410 Discussion: Characteristic Findings of Immune Dysfunction

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

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

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

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

per discussion thread

per discussion thread