Skip to main content

RCampus ePortfolios

iRubric: Part I-III rubric

iRubric: Part I-III rubric


edit   print   share   Copy to my rubrics   Bookmark   test run   assess...   delete   Do more...
Part I-III 
Dialogue
The purpose of this assignment is to individually reflect on the issue of exclusion the group is examining, stakeholders involved with the issue, and your own positionalities in relation to the issue.
Rubric Code: T58B4
Ready to use
Public Rubric
Subject: Education  
Type: Project  
Grade Levels: Graduate

Powered by iRubric U546 Part I-III
  Exemplary

10 pts

Meritorious

9 pts

Satisfactory

8 pts

Failing

7 pts

Explanation of the Issue
20 %

Exemplary

Clearly articulates the problems/challenges/issues in the case, delivering all relevant information necessary for full understanding. Evidence (lit too) of context for the specified population at IU is well described.
Meritorious

Clearly articulates the problems/challenges/issues in the case so that understanding is not seriously impeded by omissions. Evidence (lit too) of the context for the specified population at IU is defined, but could be further examined.
Satisfactory

Articulates the problems/challenges/issues in the case but description leaves some terms undefined, ambiguities unexplored, and/or background for the specified population at IU unknown.
Failing

States the problem/issues/challenges in the case without clarification or description. No context for the specified population at IU is provided.
Stakeholders
20 %

Exemplary

Clearly identifies the relevant stakeholders (i.e., faculty, students, staff) in the case and complexities stakeholders may face. may see (self and role) issues differently based on social identities related to stakeholders--demonstrates synthesis of ideas from literature, self, and stakeholders to outline complexities.
Meritorious

Identifies the relevant stakeholders (i.e., faculty, students, staff) in the case, but perspectives about tensions related to stakeholders are not often considered (more synthesis of ideas needed)
Satisfactory

Identifies some relevant stakeholders (i.e., faculty, students, staff) but misses primary stakeholder to consider or complexities stakeholders may face. Views related to (self and role) are not considered. No evidence of synthesis of ideas
Failing

Fails to identify relevant stakeholders and does not consider perspectives about the relevant stakeholders in the case. Viewpoints based on (self and role) are dismissed.
Self and the Role
20 %

Exemplary

thoroughly analyzes own and others' salient identities and carefully evaluates the relevance of contexts when presenting a case. Masterfully articulates how power, privilege, and oppression (self and others) shape the way the issues in the case are considered.
Meritorious

Identify own and others' salient identities and several relevant contexts when presenting a case. Articulates how power, privilege, and oppression (self and others) plays a role but does not differentiate how.
Satisfactory

Questions some assumptions about differences in perspectives based on salient identities. Identifies several relevant contexts when presenting a position. May be more aware of others' considerations based on power, privilege, and oppression than one's own (or vice versa).
Failing

Shows an emerging awareness of present salient identities influencing perspectives on the case. Fails to identify some areas where power, privilege, and oppression play a role in the case.
Appropriate Structure and Grammar
20 %

Exemplary

The final product is well- organized, structured in a way that builds on the
argument or central thesis, and is free of errors related to grammar and APA style
Meritorious

The final product is well- organized and clearly structured, with minimal grammatical errors and/or APA style errors
Satisfactory

The final product contains problems with organization and structure and/or numerous grammatical errors (many APA style errors)
Failing

Assignment is not completed or final product is poorly organized and
structured and/or possesses significant grammatical errors (lack of attention to APA style)
Complexity of Thought
20 %

Exemplary

Demonstrates significant complexity of thought as well as creative approaches in content and structure. Clear organizational statement, thesis, and conclusion.
Meritorious

Complexity of thought is of adequate depth and elements of creativity are present in work. sometimes trailing off with ideas (e.g. weak conclusion or introduction).
Satisfactory

Complexity of thought is
inconsistent between topics, with some demonstrating complexity and others inadequate
Failing

Assignment is not
completed or lacks complexity of thought required of graduate-level work



Keywords:
  • Dialogue

Subjects:

Types:

Discuss this rubric




Do more with this rubric:
Preview

Preview

Preview this rubric.
Edit

Edit

Modify this rubric.
Copy

Copy

Make a copy of this rubric and begin editing the copy.

Print

Print

Show a printable version of this rubric.
Categorize

Categorize

Add this rubric to multiple categories.
Bookmark

Bookmark

Bookmark this rubric for future reference.
Assess
Test run

Test run

Test this rubric or perform an ad-hoc assessment.
Grade

Grade

Build a gradebook to assess students.
Collaborate

Collaborate

Apply this rubric to any object and invite others to assess.
Share
Publish

Publish

Link, embed, and showcase your rubrics on your website.
Email

Email

Email this rubric to a friend.
Discuss

Discuss

Discuss this rubric with other members.
 

Do more with rubrics than ever imagined possible.

Only with iRubrictm.


iRubric and RCampus are Trademarks of Reazon Systems, Inc.

Copyright (C) Reazon Systems Inc. All Rights Reserved
n16