500 -Week 3 Discussion

4/9/2017 https://blackboard.strayer.edu/bbcswebdav/institution/MKT/500/1158/Week3/Week 3 Discussion Grading Rubric.html https://blackboard.strayer.edu/bbcswebdav/institution/MKT/500/1158/Week3/Week%203%20Discussion%20Grading%20Rubric.html 1/3 Points: 20 W eek 3 Discussion: Taking a Position that W orks Criteria No Attem pt 0 Below Expectations 1 Below Developing2 Developing 3 Below Exem plary 4 Exem plary 5 Tell us your favorite product that you purchased using social m edia. Does not attem pt to describe purchase. Merely gives nam es of product, does not give any background how social m edia is involved. Provides product purchase, but does not provide a real life exam ple of using social m edia. Made a general statem ent about product and social m edia. Total post is too short and not fully developed (below 5 sentences). Provides product purchase, and does provide a real life exam ple of using social m edia. However m ore description of the exam ple was needed to fully com prehend how it was related to the discussion thread. Total Post is too short to be fully developed. (below 10 sentences m ore than 5 sentences). The post content is fine, but the form atting contains gram m ar, spelling, or other form atting m istakes. The discussion points were identified and described with high accuracy, and all appropriate inform ation was identified and discussed clearly. All of the other guidelines are followed. Include the inform ation from the fill in the blank positioning statem ent. Does not provide inform ation. Fill in the blank statem ent 1/3 com plete. Fill in the blank statem ent ½ com plete. Total post is too short and not fully developed (below 5 sentences). Fill in the blank statem ent ¾ com plete. Total Post is too short to be fully developed. (below 10 sentences m ore than 5 sentences). The post content is fine, but the form atting contains gram m ar, spelling, or other form atting m istakes. The discussion points were identified and described with high accuracy, and all appropriate inform ation was identified and discussed clearly. All of the other guidelines 4/9/2017 https://blackboard.strayer.edu/bbcswebdav/institution/MKT/500/1158/Week3/Week 3 Discussion Grading Rubric.html https://blackboard.strayer.edu/bbcswebdav/institution/MKT/500/1158/Week3/Week%203%20Discussion%20Grading%20Rubric.html 2/3 are followed. State your opinion on how well social m edia clearly portrayed the positioning statem ent. Does not provide a personal opinion about how well social m edia portrayed positioning statem ent. Personal opinion about how well social m edia portrayed positioning statem ent is a superficial reaction, does not provide any analysis. Personal opinion about how well social m edia portrayed positioning statem ent is m ore than a superficial reaction. But does not provide exam ples within the analysis of how the statem ent is portrayed. Total post is too short and not fully developed (below 5 sentences). The exam ples of clear portrayal are present, the post does not fully explain why it works for the target m arket Total Post is too short to be fully developed. (below 10 sentences m ore than 5 sentences). The post content is fine, but the form atting contains gram m ar, spelling, or other form atting m istakes. The discussion points were identified and described with high accuracy, and all appropriate inform ation was identified and discussed clearly. All of the other guidelines are followed. Response to Peer Does not respond to peer. The student m erely restates/sum m arizes another student’s response. The student m erely states an opinion or offers a superficial reaction. The answer is too short and not fully developed (below 5 sentences). Responded to at least one other student, but response was not substantive. Follow-up question m ight or m ight not be included To im prove the student could provide a description of issue and how these facts are related to the discussion thread topic, or provide a different point of view. The answer is too short and not fully developed (below 10 sentences m ore than 5 sentences) The response does not dem onstrate an understanding of im portant concepts by furthering the discussion conversation using at least 1 topic m entioned by peer. One follow- up question was not included. Or the post was not labeled with the peer’s nam e. Responded to at least one other student; response was substantive and all of the other guidelines are followed. Post is labeled with peer’s nam e 4/9/2017 https://blackboard.strayer.edu/bbcswebdav/institution/MKT/500/1158/Week3/Week 3 Discussion Grading Rubric.html https://blackboard.strayer.edu/bbcswebdav/institution/MKT/500/1158/Week3/Week%203%20Discussion%20Grading%20Rubric.html 3/3 The post could have been better by furthering the discussion by introducing a new point of view. Or a real life exam ple could be used to illustrate a new point of view.