Assignment Prompt & Instructions
– ## DiscussionAssignment.docx
**## DiscussionAssignment.docx**
Rules for Discussion – RTI and EBP
Each student is to make a minimum of 2 substantive posts and 2 replies. Canvas often groups posts and I will respond to posts of the same topic. So, I may not be able to respond to each and every post, but I will group my responses to make sure to address the topics presented. Discussions cannot be made up or substituted with another assignment.
This assignment will use the Assignment Rubric displayed earlier. Your original posts and responses are to be reflective of the current literature, clearly state your position and be brief but thorough. Your responses should also be respectful of the person whose post you are responding to. In this discussion, you will present two effective RTI and/or EBP strategies. You can do 2 of EBP or RTI or 2 of either one of the topics. Your discussion should reflect best practice as found in the literature and not just a personal preference. Your posts do not have to be long but complete enough that others can understand the intervention or strategy and how it is used. Do not hesitate to reach out to me for assistance.
RTI and EBP cover a lot of territory. Obviously, you could not cover the entire area of responses in these topics so focus your posts on a specific element(s) of RTI or EBP such as the state of the literature in these topics, issues and problems with some element of RTI or EBP or issues with implementation of RTI or EBP. Please free to focus on any elements of EBP or RtI that you find interesting.
**General Rubric For All Assignments**
This rubric will be used in evaluating the quality of your discussion contributions and written assignments. Numeric values are not assigned to the categories as they change according to the value of the assignment. I want to see well thought out and referenced ideas, not opinion based on experience. Experience is a wonderful thing, but in this course, we will stick to researched facts from your text and peer-reviewed articles.
| | | | | |
| — | — | — | — | — |
| | **Criteria Ratings** |
| | | | | |
| **Grasp of readings** | **Excellent**<br>Writing and oral expression represents researched perspective, evidence and conclusions accurately, fairly, and eloquently; Demonstrates a firm understanding of the implications of researched arguments. | **Good**<br>Writing and oral presentation represents the researched perspective, evidence, and conclusions accurately but with little detail. | **Developing**<br>Writing and oral presentation mostly represents the researched perspective, evidence, and conclusions though not clearly and/or there are minor inaccuracies. Some opinion. | **Needs Improvement**<br>Writing and/or poor oral presentation represents the researched perspective, evidence, and/or conclusions. Mostly opinion. |
| | | | | |
| **Critical analysis** | **Excellent**<br>Presents a clear, focused, and compelling position. Recognizes and presents the complexity of the issue. | **Good**<br>Position/opinions articulated well but needs more support and refining. | **Developing**<br>Analysis and thought are limited. Lacks support from research. Some opinion. | **Needs Improvement**<br>Vague and general comments. Mostly opinion. |
| | | | | |
| **Evidence** | **Excellent**<br>Evidence is cited, detailed, and well-chosen. Evidence is clearly articulated. | **Good**<br>Evidence is well chosen but not well articulated, is not particularly presented and not clearly substantiated. | **Developing**<br>Evidence is weak and lacking in detail.<br>Some opinion. | **Needs Improvement**<br>Evidence does not support ideas. Mostly opinion. |
| | | | | |
| **Organization & Clarity** | **Excellent**<br>Thoughts flow logically with good transitions, including supported research. | **Good**<br>Thoughts are mostly well-structured and mostly presented clearly. | **Developing**<br>Jumps from one idea to another without structure, transitions or connections. | **Needs Improvement**<br>Thoughts are not presented logically. Mostly opinion. |
| | | | | |
| **Mechanics** | **Excellent**<br>When applicable, thoughts/paper are appropriately organized using APA format throughout. There are no incomplete or run on sentences. No spelling or grammar issues. | **Good**<br>Thoughts/paper is appropriately organized with only minor grammatical issues. | **Developing**<br>There are many formatting, spelling, word usage and grammar issues. | **Needs Improvement**<br>Unacceptable. There are incomplete and/or run-on sentence(s). Thoughts are characterized by spelling and grammar errors. |
**## DiscussionAssignment.docx**
Rules for Discussion – RTI and EBP
Each student is to make a minimum of 2 substantive posts and 2 replies. Canvas often groups posts and I will respond to posts of the same topic. So, I may not be able to respond to each and every post, but I will group my responses to make sure to address the topics presented. Discussions cannot be made up or substituted with another assignment.
This assignment will use the Assignment Rubric displayed earlier. Your original posts and responses are to be reflective of the current literature, clearly state your position and be brief but thorough. Your responses should also be respectful of the person whose post you are responding to. In this discussion, you will present two effective RTI and/or EBP strategies. You can do 2 of EBP or RTI or 2 of either one of the topics. Your discussion should reflect best practice as found in the literature and not just a personal preference. Your posts do not have to be long but complete enough that others can understand the intervention or strategy and how it is used. Do not hesitate to reach out to me for assistance.
RTI and EBP cover a lot of territory. Obviously, you could not cover the entire area of responses in these topics so focus your posts on a specific element(s) of RTI or EBP such as the state of the literature in these topics, issues and problems with some element of RTI or EBP or issues with implementation of RTI or EBP. Please free to focus on any elements of EBP or RtI that you find interesting.
**General Rubric For All Assignments**
This rubric will be used in evaluating the quality of your discussion contributions and written assignments. Numeric values are not assigned to the categories as they change according to the value of the assignment. I want to see well thought out and referenced ideas, not opinion based on experience. Experience is a wonderful thing, but in this course, we will stick to researched facts from your text and peer-reviewed articles.
| | | | | |
| — | — | — | — | — |
| | **Criteria Ratings** |
| | | | | |
| **Grasp of readings** | **Excellent**<br>Writing and oral expression represents researched perspective, evidence and conclusions accurately, fairly, and eloquently; Demonstrates a firm understanding of the implications of researched arguments. | **Good**<br>Writing and oral presentation represents the researched perspective, evidence, and conclusions accurately but with little detail. | **Developing**<br>Writing and oral presentation mostly represents the researched perspective, evidence, and conclusions though not clearly and/or there are minor inaccuracies. Some opinion. | **Needs Improvement**<br>Writing and/or poor oral presentation represents the researched perspective, evidence, and/or conclusions. Mostly opinion. |
| | | | | |
| **Critical analysis** | **Excellent**<br>Presents a clear, focused, and compelling position. Recognizes and presents the complexity of the issue. | **Good**<br>Position/opinions articulated well but needs more support and refining. | **Developing**<br>Analysis and thought are limited. Lacks support from research. Some opinion. | **Needs Improvement**<br>Vague and general comments. Mostly opinion. |
| | | | | |
| **Evidence** | **Excellent**<br>Evidence is cited, detailed, and well-chosen. Evidence is clearly articulated. | **Good**<br>Evidence is well chosen but not well articulated, is not particularly presented and not clearly substantiated. | **Developing**<br>Evidence is weak and lacking in detail.<br>Some opinion. | **Needs Improvement**<br>Evidence does not support ideas. Mostly opinion. |
| | | | | |
| **Organization & Clarity** | **Excellent**<br>Thoughts flow logically with good transitions, including supported research. | **Good**<br>Thoughts are mostly well-structured and mostly presented clearly. | **Developing**<br>Jumps from one idea to another without structure, transitions or connections. | **Needs Improvement**<br>Thoughts are not presented logically. Mostly opinion. |
| | | | | |
| **Mechanics** | **Excellent**<br>When applicable, thoughts/paper are appropriately organized using APA format throughout. There are no incomplete or run on sentences. No spelling or grammar issues. | **Good**<br>Thoughts/paper is appropriately organized with only minor grammatical issues. | **Developing**<br>There are many formatting, spelling, word usage and grammar issues. | **Needs Improvement**<br>Unacceptable. There are incomplete and/or run-on sentence(s). Thoughts are characterized by spelling and grammar errors. |