Class Discussions

Grading Criteria

Grading Criteria
Grading Process

Note: If you do not participate in the weekly discussion forums, during the posted timeframe for each forum, you will be considered as not showing up for the course and will be required to withdraw and to register to take the course later.

1. Grading Criteria

For many weeks in the course, learners will participate in an online, virtual, or combined class discussion forum guided by either a set of questions/issues for discussion, activities to promote learning of key ideas and concepts, or issues for reflection. You will be required to interact with other students by responding to their posts throughout the week or within the virtual forum discussion. Class discussions forums are the core of GCAP learning and the learning activities are designed to help you prepare for active and in-depth participation in the discussions.

Participation marks will be awarded for active contribution to class discussions. You are expected to make substantive contributions to the forum dialogue. To do so, you must have read the required materials and given considerable thought to the concepts and theoretical issues presented. In general, scholarly work involves the ability to analyze information critically, to synthesize information from a variety of sources, to self-reflect, compare and contrast similar theoretical structures across different theories, and to raise relevant examples to illustrate principles.

Every week, you will participate in class discussions based on the learning outcomes, key concepts, readings, and learning activities. The rationale for including class discussions in most GCAP courses is based in constructivist learning theory. Here are some basic principles of constructivist learning:

Learning is an active not a passive process. Particularly in graduate studies, you are not simply offered knowledge to absorb and reproduce. You are part of a learning community in which your active contribution to your own learning is essential to the outcomes targeted.
Learning is creative. It occurs when people construct meaning through engagement with ideas, experiences, and their own responses to those ideas.
Learning is social. As a social activity, meaning is co-constructed through interaction with others. The class discussions are intended to mirror the constructive collaboration that occurs in your dialogue with clients.
Learning occurs in context. We are all culture-bound, to some degree, in the sense that we exist within particular sociocultural contexts and bring forward our own cultural lenses in our meaning-making. The beauty of dialogue is that it always reflects a meeting of cultures, in the same way that we have argued that all counselling is multicultural. In this interaction, the possibility for generating new perspectives and for moving outside of our cultural encapsulation is optimized.
Learning is continuous. You may think you have gained everything you can from a particular reading or learning activity in the course as you worked through it on your own. However, active engagement in conversations with others gives you an opportunity to apply ideas in practice, to build on the learning brought forward by others, and to consider and reconsider your own perspectives.
Learning is purposeful. A number of metacognitive skills have been introduced that are designed to enhance your competency as a counselling practitioner, and these are based on the premise that you can learn how to learn. These same skills (e.g., cognitive complexity, critical thinking, reflective practice) are engaged through engagement with other people.

The class forum discussions are intended to mirror the kinds of conversations that occur in face-to-face graduate seminars, in a peer consultation or supervision groups in counselling practice, or in professional dialogues in other contexts. You are expected to read and consider what others have said before you contribute to the dialogue, so that your contribution is responsive, additive, and co-constructive. The shared conversation is organic and may involve insights you did not anticipate, which is the very nature of constructivist learning. The instructor is present in the discussion as a facilitator, a co-learner, a mentor. Their roles are to (a) keep the dialogue moving and on track; (b) introduce new ideas, ask challenging questions, invite consideration of alternative perspectives; and (c) pull out important themes, synthesize the learning, and provide feedback related to competency development. However, you are each invited to take up these roles in collaboration with the instructor to make the class discussion more vibrant and interesting.

For online forum discussions, you are strongly encouraged to spread your posts out throughout the first five days of the GCAP week (Wednesday through Sunday) and to reserve Monday and Tuesday for last minute postings. This will allow you to use Monday and Tuesday predominantly as reading days for preparation for the upcoming study week and, if you plan ahead, to take Tuesday as a non GCAP day so you can be rejuvenated for the start of the new posting week. Posts on Monday and Tuesday will still count, but if you consistently post only on these last days of the week, it will affect your participation marks negatively (see criteria below). Some instructions are provided in specific courses to post responses at a certain time of the week to allow for richer discussions.

For virtual class discussions, you will meet at a set time(s) with your instructor on specific week(s), for conversation and dialogue either in addition to, or in place of the online discussions. The expectations for your contribution in the virtual discussion are equivalent to the online class discussions in intent and focus. Some instructions are provided in specific courses or specific weeks to prepare and respond in certain ways in the virtual discussion to allow for richer dialogue (i.e., assigned ‘roles’ in discussions).

Participation in the online or virtual forum discussions is evaluated on the basis of both the frequency of your contributions and the quality of your comments. The specific grading criteria for these two components are described below.

You are NOT permitted to miss posting or contributing to the class discussion for any of the active discussions during the semester without impacting your overall grade.

Evaluation Component Grading Criteria
Online Discussion Forums
(10 marks) Grading Criteria
Virtual Discussion Forums
(10 marks) Weight

Extent and Timing of Participation

The purpose of discussion questions is to facilitate dialogue. Posting your answers without paying attention to the comments from other students will not result in full grades. You are expected to be an active participant in the conversation. Try to manage your participation much as you would in a face-to-face discussion, taking turns in terms of who posts first and clustering your responses to several other students when possible.

Generally 3-4 thoughtful posts per discussion question each week will earn maximum grades. An excessive number of posts, however, won't increase your chances of a high grade, because this pattern clutters the forums and detracts from the overall learning experience of other students. To achieve maximum participation grades, students' posts will be distributed throughout the week (i.e., initial posts between Wednesday and Saturday with ongoing responses to others' posts continuing through Monday and Tuesday.) This is the only way to promote an in-depth dialogue about the issues.

You should look at your participation in the class discussion forums as roughly equivalent to the three hours you would spend in a traditional, on-campus graduate seminar. Your reading, preparation, and assignment time take place in addition to those three hours.

Required posts to the questions or issues raised in the weekly discussion (typically 2-3 posts per week). Please note that some class forums contain more questions than you are required to respond to, which will provide you with some options for response. You are welcome to engage in the discussions of all questions. You must to respond to the number required for your specific course. The number of required posts will vary from course to course—sometimes from lesson to lesson.

Two responses (minimum) per week in response to the postings of other students.

Responses to questions or issues posted in the forums must be between 100 and 200 words, unless otherwise specified. The class discussion forums can be accessed in Moodle. Please be careful to select the appropriate class discussion forum for each week.

The purpose of discussion questions is to facilitate dialogue. In virtual class discussions, contributing to the dialogue without paying attention to the comments from other students will not result in full grades. You are expected to be an active participant in the conversation, and to be respectful, thoughtful, and reflective as much as possible. You are expected to manage conflict and disagreements that may arise with sensitivity and professionalism. Also, consider the timing of your comments to ensure others have their opportunity to speak and to allow the space for silence.

Generally, a minimum of 3-4 substantive and thoughtful contributions per virtual forum will earn maximum grades. Lengthy discussion points or questions, won't increase your chances of a high grade because this pattern takes over the discussion and detracts from the overall learning experience of other students.

You should look at your participation in the virtual class discussion as roughly equivalent to the three hours you would spend in a traditional, on-campus graduate seminar. Your reading, preparation, and assignment time take place in addition to those three hours.

Required posts related to the questions or issues are posted in the weekly forum (typically 2-3 questions per week). Please note that some weeks contain more questions than you are required to respond to in the virtual discussion, which will provide you with some options for conversations. The instructor will facilitate the dialogue in the virtual forum, or assign student facilitators, depending on the format of the dialogue. The number of required topics for discussion will vary from course to course—sometimes from week to week.

Substantive responses to questions or issues should be between 2-4 minutes, unless otherwise specified. The virtual class discussion forum take place in Microsoft Teams. Please be careful to select the appropriate forum for each week.

50%

Quality of Online/Virtual Comments
The quality of your comments is evaluated on the basis of criteria similar to those used in evaluating written assignments. Comments should demonstrate that you have read the background material and given thought to the issues raised. You should also demonstrate your active engagement in the process of self-reflection.

Core constructs accurately identified and described

Material from previous units integrated to formulate ideas and generate dialogue

Personal perceptions, attitudes, values reflected in the contributions

Self-awareness, sensitivity to others, openness to personal growth demonstrated

New and related perceptions of an issue raised

Ability to synthesize, personalize, and apply learning to personal development demonstrated

Relevant readings and research cited to support points

At least one of your contributions each week should incorporate specific reference to the core readings or additional resources that you have accessed to prepare for the discussion. For online discussions, all sources must be appropriately cited using APA format (i.e., author, year, and, for direct quotes, page or paragraph number). If your source is from the required readings (i.e., text, course notes, or required articles), there is no need to add the full reference; however, if you are introducing a new source to support your contribution, provide the full reference in APA format and/or a weblink to facilitate access to the resource. For virtual discussions, sources must be appropriatly stated and if you are introducing a new source to support your contribution, add the full reference in APA format and/or a weblink in the ‘chat’ of the virtual discussion to facilitate access to the resource.

Marks are awarded for a pattern of responses; individual responses are not graded. You do not need to meet all of the quality criteria above in each contribution, but you must demonstrate them each week overall.
50%

For more tips about how to maximize your learning and your grade in the online discussion, see the Section 5.4 on Class Discussion in the Student Handbook.

2. Grading Process

Mid-term Evaluation (Optional)

You are responsible for managing the quality of your own posts or virtual contributions throughout the semester, based on the grading criteria listed above. However, you have an opportunity in Week 6 of the course to submit a test run for feedback from your course instructor. Please follow the instructions for the Final Evaluation below, but select your best post or virtual response from any of the first six weeks to submit for review. This is optional, but strongly recommended. For courses that include a summer institute or modular format, the option to submit a mid-term evaluation is not possible due to the shortened number of weekly class discussions.

Final Evaluation (Required)

To facilitate evaluation of your class discussion participation, you are required to prepare a document at the end of the semester to provide evidence to your instructor of the quantity and quality of your contributions to the class discussion. Please follow the steps below to prepare this document, then submit it to the appropriate Assignment Drop Box by the due date posted in your course schedule.

A. Quantity and Timing Assessment:

Students are expected to track the quantity of their contributions each week throughout the semester and also the days of the week that the posts were made in online discussions. "Cheerleader" posts or comments (i.e., "Great comments, Cynthia!" or "I completely agree, Ben!") should not be counted, unless they go on to provide a substantive addition to the discussion. Nor should posts or dialogue outside of the weekly topic discussions, within the forum or outside the forum, be counted (i.e., posts to the Coffee Room, Course Questions, Announcements, or any forums set up to coordinate small group meetings or to arrange partners).
Remember: This is not a race! More posts or comments do not guarantee a higher grade. However, not meeting the minimum number will result in a lower grade. In addition, if you consistently post or speak at the end of the week or the virtual forum, you are not offering an opportunity to your peers or your instructor to interact with you on your ideas, and this will result in a lower grade on this portion of the assignment.
See the Discussion Submission sheet for a suggested format. The reason we are having you provide your participation assessment is that it removes the potential of subjectivity in the evaluation and allows us to standardize evaluation of participation across instructors. We want the evaluations of your work to be data driven so that we have a concrete basis for negotiating any discrepancy in perspective between students and instructors. For online class discussions, you can use the tools available in Moodle to create this report. Go to your Profile, in Course details/Course profiles choose the course you wish to view the data, then click on Reports/Outline Report (for a list of total posts per forum) and on Miscellaneous/Forum Posts (to see what each of those posts were). These tools will also save you time in isolating your posts for submission on the quality assessment portion below. For virtual discussions, the instructor may take notes of the dialogue. You are responsible for keeping a record of a summary of your contributions to the discussion topics by noting the length of your comments (e.g., 2-4 minutes), when you contributed to that dialogue (e.g., 10 minutes into the discussion; initial, midway, or conclusion), and how frequently you made substantive comments (e.g., 3 times within the specific topic). Virtual class discussions will also be recorded in Microsoft Teams and used exclusively as a back-up for the purpose of instructor review relative to grading and feedback.

B. Quality Assessment:

Look for a post in the Questions about Assignments forum during Week 12 of the course that lists three weeks (randomly selected by the course instructor) that may be used to evaluate the quality of your class discussion participation. There will be absolutely no negotiation on these weeks so you must be prepared throughout the semester for this random selection by maintaining the quality of your posts each week. (Note: the rationale for identifying three weeks and then only requesting submissions from two of them is that one of the weeks may have been an atypically poor example of the overall quality of posts, perhaps due to illness or an exceptionally busy week at work or home. Or you may have used one of these weeks as your free-from-class discussion week.)
Select two of the three weeks and provide a maxiumum of two or three examples per week or per virtual discussion of your substantive contributions (not responses to the posts of other students) that you would like the instructor to evaluate. The examples must be drawn from two different weeks but cannot be drawn from all three weeks. Indicate with each submitted contribution which week / lesson number it is drawn from.
For online class discussion assessment, create a screen shot of each post. If you are using a PC, press the Function key on your computer at the same time as pressing the PRT SC (print screen) key. A screen shot will be created. If you are using a MAC, you may need to use the Grab program (look under Applications, then Utilities to open this program). Paste the 2-3 screen shots into a Word document for your assignment submission. For virtual class discussion assessment, provide a summary of your substantive contribution, when in the discussion you shared your ideas, and how long you spoke.
Above each of your selected posts, copy the discussion forum question to which you were responding, and clearly indicate the lesson number and title. Remember, you aren't expected to meet all of the quality criteria in each post, so you may select two or three contributions from each week that together demonstrate how you have met these criteria.
In the Word document, provide a rationale in point form, or in less than 200 words, to indicate how your substantive contribution examples meet the criteria for this portion of the discussion forum grade. Please do not simply list the criteria that you believe you met; rather provide an explanation about what went into writing the post or speaking about the topic and how you met those criteria. For example, it is not enough to say that you synthesized information. What information did you synthesize? What new ideas emerged from this process for you? How did this process of evaluation and synthesis contribute to the quality of your contribution to the discussion? You may omit contributions that do not strengthen your demonstration for this assessment.
For online discussions, you will not be graded for APA on the posts themselves, except for proper citation of reference(s) for sources used. Nor will your rationale be graded for APA compliance. For virtual discussions, you will not be graded on grammar, except for appropriate language and professionalism.
Please see the Discussion Submission sheet for a suggested format to prepare your submission and provide your self-assessment.

Examples of rationales for your quality and quantity scores:

Online Discussion Forum: Quality Score: 9/10 Virtual Discussion Forum: Quality Score: 9/10

Together, the three posts copied above met nearly all of the elements required for high quality posts, as they included critical reflection on material from previous weeks in this course (i.e., integrating the idea of cognitive schemata from Week 2 with the concept of culture shock in today's lesson and pointing out some potential implications of this), references made to this week's readings that support the position detailed in my posts , and application of the reading material from this week on a personal level (i.e., reflecting on my response to a client whose worldview I couldn't relate to and looking at how my own values were a barrier to working with her effectively). I also presented some original ideas I was thinking about as I reflected critically on culture shock and how this concept might apply to organizations as a whole as dramatic changes in their clientele occur over time. My citing of my sources was nearly perfect—I forgot to cite the year for one posting. I also missed citing the core readings so a score of 10/10 is not warranted.

Together, the three contributions to the virtual discussion forum summarized above met nearly all of the elements required for high quality posts. I included critical reflection on material from previous weeks in this course (i.e., integrating the idea of cognitive schemata from Week 2 with the concept of culture shock in today's lesson and pointing out some potential implications of this). I talked about values and application of the reading material from this week on a personal level (i.e., reflecting on my response to a client whose worldview I couldn't relate to, and looking at how my own values were a barrier to working with her effectively). I also presented some original ideas I was thinking about as I reflected critically on culture shock and how this concept might apply to organizations as a whole as dramatic changes in their clientele occur over time. A key area of improvement is that I could have synthesized other’s comments more succinctly and tied my response closer to the core readings so a score of 10/10 is not warranted.

Online Discussion Forum Quantity Score: 10/10 Virtual Discussion Forum Quantity Score: 10/10

I posted three substantive initial posts and responded to six of my peers' posts this week. This exceeds the minimum guidelines. My initial posts were early in the week; I responded to other students on the weekend; and I participated again in the forums on Monday to contribute to concluding the week's discussions. My pattern of posts and my attention to what others were saying helped to move the dialogue forward, especially as we explored the idea of culture shock more fully.

I contributed three substantive responses to the virtual forum this week. They were 3-4 minutes each and contributed to the overall discussion and were not clustered at one point in the discussion. I shared naturally and encouraged others to share their ideas. The timing of my responses and contributions occurred with careful attention to what others were saying, and helped to move the dialogue forward, especially as we explored the idea of culture shock more fully.