EDUC 260: Reading Responses

Online discussions focus on your readings. Contributions are rated by the quality and thoughtfulness of remarks, rather than the quantity of postings. "Contribution" refers to summarizing important points, making key insights, participating actively, and bringing additional and relevant information to the discussions that go beyond the class readings.

For each set of assigned readings, you will participate in an online discussion which will span several days. A reading guide for each set of readings is provided to focus your response and prepare you for class discussion.

There are 4 reading responses and each is worth 5 points. The points are assigned according to the rubric below.

Keep in mind, your postings should demonstrate engagement with the class (e.g. building on the ideas of others) and show your understanding of the reading. Use information from the readings (or other credible sources, including others' postings or your personal experience) to support your claims. To enhance the critical content of your work, avoid making statements purely based on feelings and personal opinion.

If the assessment of your participation in the conferences is spread across more than one grade, then the instructor decides which grade is most appropriate. It does not necessarily depend where the majority of the traits lie.

Evaluation Rubric

5 points	Active, timely and regular postings. Actively engages with the class. Makes critical comments on others' ideas. builds on the ideas of others and brings new ideas to the discussion. Postings are well written and coherent, show evidence of having read the readings carefully, and understood them fully. Readings are clearly synthesized into the discussion and a strong understanding of the main points of readings is shown. Postings are well documented through examples, quotes and references (to readings, outside sources, and acknowledgement of others' posts.)
4 points	Timely and regular postings. Engages with the class. Makes reference to others' ideas/shows an understanding of others' ideas. Postings are clearly written and address the readings. Readings are synthesized into the discussion and/or a good understanding of the main points of the readings is shown. Ideas within postings are documented through examples, quotes and references (to readings, outside sources, and acknowledgement of others' posts).
3 points	Limited timely postings. Refers to others' ideas or shows some understanding of others' ideas. Postings are clear, refer to the readings and demonstrate adequate understanding of the readings. Limited documentation of ideas through examples, quotes and references (to readings and acknowledgement of others' posts).
2 points	Very limited regular postings or bunches posts at one time. Makes vague reference to other's posts (for example, says, "I agree" or "good idea", but shows little or no understanding of others' ideas) or constructs postings that stand alone (no reference to others). Postings are incomplete, somewhat difficult to comprehend, make vague or general reference to readings or reflect a hasty reading of the materials. Postings are superficial, confused or reflect a hasty, incomplete or confused reading of the materials.
1 point	Very few postings. Does not actively participate in the conference. If any, makes weak reference to others' posts (which add nothing more to the discussion or shows no understanding of others' ideas). Postings do not make use of any specific knowledge gained from the readings and may be made up, make no reference to the readings or make statements that are unrelated to the discussion.
0 points	No participation, or discussion postings are unrelated to the readings, or answers are incomprehensible.