Grading Rubric: HCMG 730 Case Study #3 (170 points)
Content Excellent
80-72 Points: Completely
addresses relevant aspects
of the questions. Leads
Question #1: (80) readers into the discussion
fluently.
● Who
● What Writing in the body of this
paper is credible and cited
information
properly. Depth of
● What
reasoning is evident.
alternatives
● What is the goal
Student has a very good
knowledge of the topic and
is able to convey fluently in
writing.
Student supports responses
with relevant research
Question #2: Role 25-23 Points : Student
Playing Group actively participated in the
Discussion (25) discussion. It was evident
that they had incorporated
the assumptions assigned to
their role. Students was
Good
71-62 Points: Adequately
addresses the questions.
Reader is clear regarding
Writing is credible and
cited properly most of the
time. Depth of reasoning is
mainly sufficient.
Student has an adequate
knowledge of the topic and
is able to convey fluently in
writing, most of the time.
Student supports
responses with some
research, most is relevant
22-20 Points: Student
participated in the
discussion. They made
some valid points. They
incorporated some of the
assumptions assigned to
Fair
61-49 Points: Fair attempt
however it is unclear that all the
questions were answered. The
reader is left to wonder what
the writer is addressing
specifically. Writing is credible
and cited properly, some of the
time. Depth of reasoning
remains superficial.
The paper does not adequately
focus on the major topic.
Student has a less than
adequate knowledge of the
topic and is not able to convey
this fluently in writing.
Student does not use
appropriate research to support
their response
19-17 Points: Student minimally
participated in the discussion.
They incorporated some of the
assumptions assigned to their
role. They were somewhat able
Poor
48-0 Points: Poorly addressed
topic. There is no strength in
the answers to the questions.
It is difficult to assess what the
writer meant.
Poorly analyzed. A few
statements are made regarding
the topic but there is no depth
evident and citations are
improper most of the time.
Novice thinking is evident and
student is unable to convey the
major theory in writing.
Student does not use any (or
poor) research to support their
response.
16-0 Points: Student
participated minimally or not at
all. They did not address some
of the assumptions assigned to
their role. They were not able
to articulate their point of view
 able to articulate their point
of view in a way that
supported their role. .
Question #3: 21-18 Points: Reflection
Reflection on Role explains student’s own
Playing (20) thinking related to the
roleplaying. Reflection
indicates how they will
advise the family and what
the next steps are.
Reflection is well written and
of sufficient content.
Question #4: How 30-27 Points: Completely
would the case be addresses the question
different… (30)
Depth of reasoning is
evident.
Student has a very good
knowledge of the topic and
is able to convey fluently in
writing.
Student supports responses
with relevant research
their role. Student was
able to articulate their
point of view.
17-14 points: Reflection
somewhat explains
student’s thinking with
regard to roleplaying.
Reflection somewhat
indicates how they will
advise the family and what
the next steps are.
Reflection has some issues
related to content.
26 – 24 Points: Adequately
addresses the questions.
Depth of reasoning is
mainly sufficient.
Student has an adequate
knowledge of the topic and
is able to convey fluently in
writing, most of the time.
Student supports
responses with some
research, most is relevant
to articulate their point of view.
xx
23 -21 Points: Fair attempt
however it is unclear that the
question was answered. The
reader is left to wonder what
the writer is addressing
specifically.
Depth of reasoning remains
superficial.
Student has a less than
adequate knowledge of the
topic and is not able to convey
this fluently in writing.
Student does not use
in a way that supported their
role.
13-0 Points: It is unclear how
the roleplaying affected the
students view. The student did
not address how they would
advise the family or what the
next steps are.
20 – 0 Points: Poorly
addressed topic. There is no
strength in the answer to the
question. It is difficult to assess
what the writer meant.
Poorly analyzed. A few
statements are made regarding
the topic but there is no depth
evident and citations are
improper most of the time.
Novice thinking is evident and
student is unable to convey the
major theory in writing.

10-9 Points:  Attention to
detail is evident. No
APA and
misspellings or grammatical
Mechanics  (10) errors.
Student observed APA rules
with no/very few errors
evident.  All references cited
in text are evident on
reference page and vice
versa.  reference page and vice
5 Points: References are of
excellent quality.
Peer reviewed journals,
References (5)
manuscripts, & other
scholarly materials used.
8-7 Points:  Some attention
to detail is evident. Has 1-2
misspellings and/or
grammatical errors.
  Student observed some
APA rules however, few to
moderate APA errors
evident.  Most references
cited in text are evident on
versa.
4 Points: References are of
adequate quality. Some
peer reviewed journals,
manuscripts, & scholarly
materials used.
appropriate research to support Student does not use any (or
their response poor) research to support their
response.
6-5 Points:  Has 3-4 misspellings 4-0 Points: 
and/or grammatical errors.
Has more than 4 misspellings
and/or grammatical errors.
Fair attempt to use APA Few APA rules applied.  Student
evident.  effort reflects little
understanding of the
application of APA.   Few to no
Few references cited in text are references are cited both in
cited on reference page and vice text and on the reference page
versa.   and vice versa.  
3-2 Points: Fair use of 1-0 Points: Poor or no
references. 1-2 adequate references noted.
references noted but nothing
beyond this.