Sample Discussion Rubrics

Below is a simple and more complex rubric you may wish to adapt for your online discussions.

Simple Discussion Rubric

A Simple Discussion Post Rubric

Points	10	7	3	0
Quality of Post	Appropriate comments: thoughtful, reflective, and respectful of other’s postings.	Appropriate comments and responds respectfully to other's postings.	Responds, but with minimum effort (e.g., "I agree with Bill.").	No posting.
Relevance of Post	Posts topics related to the discussion topic; prompts further discussion of the topic.	Posts topics related to the discussion topic.	Posts topics not related to the discussion topic, or makes short or irrelevant remarks.	No posting.
Contribution to the Class	Aware of community. Attempts to motivate group discussion. Presents creative approaches to the topic.	Attempts to present relevant viewpoints for group consideration. Interacts freely.	Does not make an effort to contribute to the class.	No posting.

Complex Discussion Rubric

A Complex Discussion Post Rubric

Points	Outstanding 100	Good 85	Average 75	Limited 65	Flawed 55	Non-submitted 0
Demonstrates Careful Reading & Inquiry Into Subject	Shows serious contemplation of readings. Shows original thought that goes far beyond the obvious.	Indicates reading was completed. Addresses some of the prompt’s implications.	Relies primarily on plot summary.	Suggests reading assignment scanned but not read carefully. Rehashes ideas from other posts.	Gives little indication that the reading assignment was completed. Post is not relevant to the module questions or current discussion.	No posting.
Responsibly Cited	Quotes used support writer’s point (“proves” it). Are original - unexpected quote choices and/or uses quotes from multiple places of the text properly integrated (not just dropped in).	Quotes used support writer’s point (“proves” it). Are somewhat predictable. Poorly integrated.	Some quotes are used, but there are too few examples or rely mostly on generalizations. Some quotes do not effectively support writer’s point or arepoorly integrated.	Some quotes are used, but are paraphrased, not integrated, do not make sense as support, or are out of context	No quotes are used; textual evidence (even paraphrased evidence) is weak.	No posting.
Quality of Prose	Clear & articulate. Has correct grammar & punctuation. Quotes are properly cited.	Contains minor errors in mechanics or documentation.	Contains several proofing or documentation errors. Diction is ordinary	Post is sloppy, hard for readers to follow. Fails to use capital letters or punctuation. Contains multiple documentation errors.	Contains multiple mechanical errors. Diction is informal and/or inappropriate. Citations are missing.	No posting.
Engagement with Others	Shows concerted and honest effort to engage with others. Responds to ideas in a way that advances discussion beyond the obvious. Interacts easily & accurately with other posts in the thread.	Shows attention to other posts in the thread. Incorporates and acknowledges ideas of others in attempt to advance the discussion (perhaps in predictable ways).	Offers little interaction with other posts in the thread. Mostly summarizes what others have said without adding to discussion.	Does not acknowledge other posts. Misrepresents content of other posts.	Ignores other posts in thread. Does not engage with others.	No posting.