Skip to Main Content of Page

Collaborative On-Line Research and Learning

131 Grading Rubric Collaborative Analysis 1

Contact Collaborative On-Line Research and Learning

Collaborative On-Line Research and Learning

Thomas Treadwell

Department of Psychology
West Chester University of Pennsylvania
ttreadwell@wcupa.edu

Evan Leach

Department of Management
West Chester University of Pennsylvania
Eleach64@aol.com

Donna Ascraft

Department of Psychology
Clarion University
Clarion, PA
ashcraft@clarion.edu

Collaborative Analysis 1 Rubric

Category	4 Accomplished	3 Developing	2 Beginning	1 Does Not Meet
Writing & Language	Well formed ideas explicated using clear writing and proper grammar. Concise and logical writing.	Good writing and minimal grammatical errors.	Numerous grammatical errors, poor flow, writing needs improvement.	Does not meet minimum requirements.
Formatting & Readings	The paper is written in APA format without error. All citations are both in text and in the works cited.	There are minimal APA formatting errors.	There are numerous APA formatting errors	Does not meet minimum requirements.
Team Composition - Jung Typology	The paper includes a thorough discussion of team members personality profiles & the impact of different personalities on team collaboration.	The paper includes brief discussion of team members personality profiles & the impact of different personalities on team collaboration.	The paper includes minimal discussion of team members personality profiles & the impact of different personalities on team collaboration	Does not meet minimum requirements.
Relevant Readings:	The paper demonstrates that all members read the assigned readings and integrated those ideas into the paper (must be cited).	The paper cites all sources; however, they were not integrated into the writing	Minimal outside references. Limited and poor citations.	Does not meet minimum requirements.
Team Effectiveness	Defined 1. In-groups and out-groups. 2. Identified members of the in-group and out-group from your team? Discussed why some team members are part of the in-group and why some are not. Gave examples from your team.	Most topics were addressed well, one or two were missing.	There were numerous topics missing, and or the writing was minimal or poor.	Does not meet minimum requirements.
Team Effectiveness:	Discussed & gave team examples of how your team’s in-groups and out-groups affect team functioning. Described how team plans to merge the groups.	Most topics were addressed well, one or two were missing.	There were numerous topics missing, and or the writing was minimal or poor.	Does not meet minimum requirements.
Team Effectiveness:	Defined: Out-group homogeneity bias? Illustrated how it affects group processes? Described it for your team. Identified the ultimate attribution error. Illustrated how it affected team progress?	Most topics were addressed well, one or two were missing.	There were numerous topics missing, and or the writing was minimal or poor.	Does not meet minimum requirements.
Team Effectiveness	Identified & Defined team norms? Gave examples of norms from your team! Defined your role in the Team? Defined Team Roles! Gave examples of roles from your team?	Most topics were addressed well, one or two were missing.	There were numerous topics missing, and or the writing was minimal or poor.	Does not meet minimum requirements.
Team Effectiveness	Addressed Dysfunction # 1 /Building Trust? Explained [without defining] your teams predictive trust vs vulnerability-based trust. Gave example(s) from your team.	Most topics were addressed well, one or two were missing.	There were numerous topics missing, and or the writing was minimal or poor	Does not meet minimum requirements.
Team Evolution	Identified the Tuckman stage team is currently in. Explained how this stage is specific to your team. Used examples from your team	The readings were clearly done and applied to the evolution of the team. However, the writing should be improved or there were sections that need elaboration.	The writing is poor. The stages were only minimally developed	Does not meet minimum requirements.
Team Evolution - WTW Data	Presented, illustrated & explained who-to-whom data.	WTW data reported with some explanation of data.	Some data reported but mimimal discussion of data.	Does not meet minimum requirements.
Barriers & Solutions	Described the problems that the team encountered.	Problems, plan, and process were discussed fairly well.	Poor analysis of problems and lack of problem solving process.	Does not meet minimum requirements.
Barriers & Solutions	Described how team planned to solve these problems Used a table format.	Problems listed with some plan to reslove.	Problems listed with an incomplete plan to reslove.	Does not meet minimum requirements.
Collaborative vs.. Cooperative Work:	Accomplished. Collaboration, written in one voice and good integration of ideas.	Developing The degree of collaboration is developing with some cooperative issues regarding integration of ideas.	Beginning Limited degree of collaboration with significant cooperative issues regarding integration of ideas.	Does not meet minimum requirements. Team interaction/process and paper are both cooperative in nature. Team should seek help from PG.

Back to top of page.