|
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
Demonstrates college-level proficiency in organization, grammar and style.
|
|
5.0
to >4.0 pts
Meets Expectation
Project
is clearly organized, well written, and in proper format, as outlined
in the assignment. Strong sentence and paragraph structure; few errors
in grammar and spelling.
|
4.0
to >3.0 pts
Approaches Expectation
Project
is fairly well organized and written and is in proper format, as
outlined in the assignment. Reasonably good sentence and paragraph
structure; significant number of errors in grammar and spelling.
|
3.0
to >2.0 pts
Below Expectation
Project
is poorly organized; does not follow proper paper format. Inconsistent
to inadequate sentence and paragraph development; numerous errors in
grammar and spelling.
|
2.0
to >0 pts
Limited Evidence
Project
is not organized or well written and is not in proper paper format.
Poor quality work; unacceptable in terms of grammar and spelling.
|
|
5.0 pts
|
|
Total Points:
25.0
The below is only for reference for the above assignment
Module 8
Option #1: Critical Thinking Paper on Issue or Problem
Select an issue or problem that you wish to investigate critically. Formulate a question or thesis (Links to an external site.) on the issue so that your research has a clear and cogent direction.
Use Paul and Elder’s (2012) intellectual standards to find a topic or problem that is clear, relevant, significant, and precise.
Now, write a paper that addresses the problem or issue via scholarly sources.
Your paper should include the following:
-
Title page: include your name, date, title of essay, and class
-
Introduction: provide a two-paragraph introduction (Links to an external site.) that frames the issue or problem carefully
-
Engagement with issue or problem using scholarly sources and the intellectual standards proposed by Paul and Elder (2012): What
is the issue? Why is it significant? Why is this issue relevant to you
(and/or your community)? What have you learned about the depth and
breadth of the issue or problem from scholarly sources? How do the
scholarly sources aid you in fair-mindedness and logic?
-
Conclusion (Links to an external site.): Reflect
on your issue or problem and how the sources informed your thinking.
What have you learned? How can you apply the intellectual standards and
elements of reason to this issue or problem to come to creative
solutions? What critical questions remain?
- References
-
Journal Submission. Each module lecture contains a
section with journal prompts that focus on reflection and application of
the module content. Use the Journal Template to record your answers for
each module’s prompt(s). Include these entries at the end of your Final
Portfolio.
Details
- Cite all claims and ideas using scholarly sources. While it is
acceptable to write in the first person, be sure to cite your sources to
support your inferences.
- Your paper should engage a minimum of six scholarly sources that are not required or recommended readings for this course. The CSU-Global Library (Links to an external site.) is a good place to find these sources.
- Your paper should be eight to ten pages in length and formatted according to the CSU-Global Guide to Writing & APA (Links to an external site.).
- Papers should be double-spaced, 12-point font.
Keep in mind the following milestones throughout the course designed to assist you in crafting your Final Portfolio
- Week 1: Submit Portfolio Topic (worth 25 points)
- Week 4: Submit Revised Portfolio Topic and Preliminary Outline (worth 25 points)
Refer to the Portfolio Project rubric below to understand how your project will be graded.
Option #2: Annotated Bibliography
Select an issue or problem that you wish to investigate critically. Formulate a question or thesis (Links to an external site.) on the issue so that your research has a clear and cogent direction.
Use Paul and Elder’s (2012) intellectual standards to find a topic or problem that is clear, relevant, significant, and precise.
Now, construct an annotated bibliography (Links to an external site.) that addresses the problem or issue through scholarly sources. See this example (Links to an external site.) for a good overview of how an annotated bibliography should be
constructed.
Your annotated bibliography should include the following:
-
Title page: include your name, date, title of annotated bibliography, and class
-
Introduction (Links to an external site.): provide a two-paragraph introduction that frames the issue or problem carefully
-
Annotations (Links to an external site.):
Summarize the main point or arguments of each scholarly source. What
are the main arguments? What is the point of this book or article? What
topics are covered? If someone asked what this article/book is about,
what would you say? After summarizing a source, it may be helpful to
evaluate it. Is it a useful source? How does it compare with other
sources in your bibliography? Is the information reliable? Is this
source biased or objective? What is the goal of this source? Each
annotation should be roughly one or two paragraphs in length.
-
Conclusion (Links to an external site.): Reflect
on your issue or problem and how the sources informed your thinking.
What have you learned? How can you apply the intellectual standards and
elements of reason to this issue or problem to come to creative
solutions?
- References
-
Journal Submission. Each module lecture contains a
section with journal prompts that focus on reflection and application of
the module content. Use the Journal Template to record your answers for
each module’s prompt(s). Include these entries at the end of your Final
Portfolio.
Details
Keep in mind the following milestones throughout the course designed to assist you in crafting your Final Portfolio
- Week 1: Submit Portfolio Topic (worth 25 points)
- Week 4: Submit Revised Portfolio Topic and Preliminary Outline (worth 25 points)
Refer to the Portfolio Project rubric below to understand how your project will be graded.
Rubric
HUM101 Mod 8 PP
HUM101 Mod 8 PP
| Criteria |
Ratings |
Pts
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
Content
|
40.0
to >32.0 pts
Meets Expectation
Demonstrates strong or adequate knowledge of critical thinking; correctly represents knowledge from the readings and sources.
|
32.0
to >24.0 pts
Approaches Expectation
Some significant but not major errors or omissions in demonstration of knowledge.
|
24.0
to >16.0 pts
Below Expectation
Major errors or omissions in demonstration of knowledge.
|
16.0
to >0 pts
Limited Evidence
Fails to demonstrate knowledge of the materials.
|
|
40.0 pts
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
Requirements
|
30.0
to >24.0 pts
Meets Expectation
The Portfolio includes all of the required components, as specified in the assignment.
|
24.0
to >18.0 pts
Approaches Expectation
The Portfolio includes most of the required components, as specified in the assignment.
|
18.0
to >12.0 pts
Below Expectation
The Portfolio includes some of the required components, as specified in the assignment.
|
12.0
to >0 pts
Limited Evidence
The Portfolio includes few of the required components, as specified in the assignment.
|
|
30.0 pts
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
Critical Analysis
|
45.0
to >36.0 pts
Meets Expectation
Demonstrates strong or adequate critical analysis of thinking and reasoning.
|
36.0
to >27.0 pts
Approaches Expectation
Some significant but not major errors or omissions in critical analysis of thinking and reasoning.
|
27.0
to >18.0 pts
Below Expectation
Major errors or omissions in critical analysis of thinking and reasoning.
|
18.0
to >0 pts
Limited Evidence
Fails to demonstrate critical analysis of thinking and reasoning.
|
|
45.0 pts
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
Synthesis and Evaluation
|
30.0
to >24.0 pts
Meets Expectation
Information
is from reliable source(s); interpretation and/or evaluation is
rigorous, affording a comprehensive and coherent analysis or synthesis.
|
24.0
to >18.0 pts
Approaches Expectation
Information
is from reliable source(s); interpretation and/or evaluation approaches
course expectations in developing a coherent analysis or synthesis.
|
18.0
to >12.0 pts
Below Expectation
Reliability
or relevance of sources or information is questionable. Some
interpretation and/or evaluation, but not enough to develop a coherent
analysis or synthesis.
|
12.0
to >0 pts
Limited Evidence
Reliability or relevance of sources or information is questionable. Little to no interpretation and/or evaluation.
|
|
30.0 pts
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
Analysis
|
35.0
to >28.0 pts
Meets Expectation
Provides
strong or adequate thought, insight, and analysis of concepts and
applications pertaining to critical thinking and reasoning.
|
28.0
to >21.0 pts
Approaches Expectation
Some
significant but not major errors or omissions in thought, insight, and
analysis of concepts and applications pertaining to critical thinking
and reasoning.
|
21.0
to >14.0 pts
Below Expectation
Major
errors or omissions in thought, insight, and analysis of concepts and
applications pertaining to critical thinking and reasoning.
|
14.0
to >0 pts
Limited Evidence
Fails to demonstrate thought, insight, and analysis of concepts and applications pertaining to critical thinking and reasoning.
|
|
35.0 pts
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
Journal Submissions
|
30.0
to >24.0 pts
Meets Expectation
All
journal entries are completed. Each journal submission engages with
assigned material. Each submission uses tools of the module to address
issues of critical reasoning.
|
24.0
to >18.0 pts
Approaches Expectation
At
least six journal entries are completed. At least six journal
submissions engage with assigned materials and use tools of the module
to address issues of critical reasoning.
|
18.0
to >12.0 pts
Below Expectation
18
to 13 Points: At least four journal entries are completed. At least
four journal submissions engage with assigned materials and use tools of
the module to address issues of critical reasoning.
|
12.0
to >0 pts
Limited Evidence
At
least two journal entries are completed. At least two journal
submissions engage with assigned materials and use tools of the module
to address issues of critical reasoning.
|
|
30.0 pts
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
Sources
|
15.0
to >12.0 pts
Meets Expectation
Cites and integrates at least six to five credible sources.
|
12.0
to >9.0 pts
Approaches Expectation
Cites and integrates four to three credible sources.
|
9.0
to >6.0 pts
Below Expectation
9 to 7 Points: Cites and integrates two to one credible sources.
|
6.0
to >0 pts
Limited Evidence
Cites and integrates no credible sources.
|
|
15.0 pts
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
Application of Source Material
|
15.0
to >12.0 pts
Meets Expectation
Sources
well or adequately chosen to provide substance and perspectives on the
issue; knowledge from the course linked properly to source material.
|
12.0
to >9.0 pts
Approaches Expectation
Some significant but not major problems with selection and linkage of sources.
|
9.0
to >6.0 pts
Below Expectation
Major problems with selection and linkage of sources.
|
6.0
to >0 pts
Limited Evidence
Source selection is seriously flawed; no linkage to knowledge from the course.
|
|
15.0 pts
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
Organization
|
20.0
to >16.0 pts
Meets Expectation
Project
is clearly organized, well written, and in proper essay format
including an introduction, body, and conclusion. Conforms to project
requirements.
|
16.0
to >12.0 pts
Approaches Expectation
Small
number of significant but not major flaws in organization and writing;
is in proper essay format. In a minor way does not conform to project
requirements.
|
12.0
to >8.0 pts
Below Expectation
Major
problems in organization and writing; does not completely follow proper
essay format. In a significant way does not conform to project
requirements.
|
8.0
to >0 pts
Limited Evidence
Project is not well organized or well written and is not in proper essay format. Does not conform to project requirements.
|
|
20.0 pts
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
Grammar and Style
|
20.0
to >16.0 pts
Meets Expectation
Strong
sentence and paragraph structure; few or no minor errors in grammar and
spelling; appropriate writing style; clear and concise with no
unsupported comments.
|
16.0
to >12.0 pts
Approaches Expectation
Small number of significant but not major errors in grammar and spelling; generally appropriate writing.
|
12.0
to >8.0 pts
Below Expectation
Inconsistent
to inadequate sentence and paragraph development; work needed on
grammar and spelling; does not meet program expectations.
|
8.0
to >0 pts
Limited Evidence
Poor quality; unacceptable in terms of grammar and/or spelling; inappropriate writing style that interferes with clarity.
|
|
20.0 pts
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
Demonstrates proper use of APA style
|
20.0
to >16.0 pts
Meets Expectation
Project
contains proper APA formatting, according to the CSU-Global Guide to
Writing and APA Requirements, with no more than one significant error.
|
16.0
to >12.0 pts
Approaches Expectation
Few
errors in APA formatting, according to the CSU-Global Guide to Writing
and APA Requirements, with no more than two to three significant errors.
|
12.0
to >8.0 pts
Below Expectation
Significant
errors in APA formatting, according to the CSU-Global Guide to Writing
and APA Requirements, with four to five significant errors.
|
8.0
to >0 pts
Limited Evidence
Numerous
errors in APA formatting, according to the CSU-Global Guide to Writing
and APA Requirements, with more than five significant errors.
|
|
20.0 pts
|
Total Points:
300.0
|
|
