This criterion is linked
to a Learning Outcome Reflection Length Number of words –
excludes reference section and direct quotes from references that are longer
than 5 words | 5 to
>3.0 pts Meets Expectations Reflection paper content was greater than 150 words.
3 to
>0.0 pts Partially Meets Expectations Reflection paper content was between
100-149 words.
0 pts Does not
Meet Expectations Reflection paper
content was less than 99 words. | 5 pts |
This criterion is linked
to a Learning Outcome Grammar, Usage, and
Spelling Utilizes proper
grammar and spelling as outlined below. | 5 to
>3.0 pts Meets Expectations Reflection paper contained less than 2 grammar, usage, or
spelling errors.
3 to
>0.0 pts Partially Meets Expectations Reflection paper contained 3-4
grammar, usage, or spelling errors.
0 pts Does not
Meet Expectations Reflection paper
contained more than 5 grammar, usage, or spelling errors and proofreading was
not apparent. | 5 pts |
This criterion is linked
to a Learning Outcome References and
Utilization of Outside Resources Inclusion of one peer
reviewed behavioral source and one course assigned reading | 5 to
>3.0 pts Meets Expectations The author used references from peer- reviewed behavioral
sources in APA format and cited one or more original behavioral references,
outside of the assigned readings. Hyperlinks to the cited external references
are provided.
3 to
>0.0 pts Partially Meets Expectations The author used references in APA
format of assigned readings but did not include an additional peer-reviewed
behavioral reference or did not include a hyperlink to the externally cited
reference.
0 pts Does not
Meet Expectations The author neither
utilized APA format for referenced material used nor cited an outside
peer-reviewed behavioral reference. | 5 pts |
This criterion is linked
to a Learning Outcome Addressing the Prompt
& Application Author answers the
questions presented in the prompt and applies the week’s readings/topics. | 5 to >3.0 pts
Meets Expectations Directly and
thoroughly responds to the assignment prompt, demonstrating clear
understanding of the required topic. Develops ideas logically and coherently,
using organized, empirical, and evidence‑informed writing. Shows strong application
of the week’s assigned readings or topic, making explicit, accurate
connections between course content and the student’s insights.
3 to
>0.0 pts Partially Meets Expectations Responds to the assignment prompt,
but the development of ideas may be only partially clear, briefly addressed,
or lacking depth. Organization may be uneven, with some logical flow but
limited support for claims. References the week’s topic or readings only
tangentially, without demonstrating real application or meaningful
integration. Contains general or surface‑level statements rather than well‑supported
insights.
0 pts Does not
Meet Expectations Does not respond to
the assignment prompt, OR focuses mainly on personal opinions or unrelated
content. Lacks logical organization, clarity, and development of ideas.
Demonstrates no or limited application of the week’s assigned readings or
topic. Provides irrelevant or unsupported information, showing minimal or no
connection to course material. | 5 pts |
This criterion is linked
to a Learning Outcome Peer Review Your peer review text
must be copied and pasted into the comments of your own reflection paper
submission to receive credit. | 5 to
>3.0 pts Meets Expectations Completes peer-review of colleague’s reflection paper and
provides well-thought- out, thorough feedback.
3 to
>0.0 pts Partially Meets Expectations Completes peer-review of colleague’s
reflection paper, but provides only vague, non-specific feedback or input.
0 pts Does not
Meet Expectations Does not complete peer-
review of a colleague’s reflection paper or does not copy the text into the
comments section of their own submission to allow for grading. | 5 pts |
