**kim woods** participation and login posts
Now, since this is a 600-level class, we have reached the second highest level of rigor expectations here at the university. The next highest level of course work is 700-level classes and that is for doctorate programs.
This 600-level class permits your opinions to be shared, but all opinions and ideas in posts must be backed up and supported with academic content in this graduate course. It’s mentioned in the instructor policy document and is a policy I do ensure is upheld.
If you have not been earning S bubbles on your posts, are you meeting all the requirements that have been laid out for participation requirements?
Are your posts…
- Substantial in content (i.e., lengthy)?
- Founded in facts?
- Supported with academic resources?
- Giving credit and attribution to the author(s) of the sources you consulted?
One factor that can contribute to not earning a green S bubble – if you write opinion posts that have no supporting academic content.
Another factor for not earning participation credit is posting a big, long quote, expecting it to “speak” for you and them you have very few supporting sentences of your own that you wrote. I support the use of quotations in academic work, but quotes are meant to enhance and supplement your own writing and should not take the place of you having to write your own work.
Another reason students could not earn a green S bubble is that the post is short and thus lacking significantly in substantial content.
Another reason a person could not earn credit is by not giving proper credit and attribution to the ideas and concepts that are presented in the participation post. Protect yourself against plagiarism. Since all posts are required to contain academic content, all posts must have in-text citations and a reference to give credit and author attributions. This is mandatory to earn credit for your post. Any element that is missing will result in no credit for the post. This is in the instructor policy document too.