This criterion is linked
to a Learning Outcome Reflection Length

Number of words –
excludes reference section and direct quotes from references that are longer
than 5 words

5 to >3.0 pts Meets Expectations Reflection paper
content was greater than 150 words.

3 to >0.0 pts Partially Meets Expectations Reflection paper
content was between 100-149 words.

0 pts Does not Meet Expectations Reflection paper
content was less than 99 words.

5 pts

This criterion is linked
to a Learning Outcome Grammar, Usage, and
Spelling

Utilizes proper
grammar and spelling as outlined below.

5 to >3.0 pts Meets Expectations Reflection paper
contained less than 2 grammar, usage, or spelling errors.

3 to >0.0 pts Partially Meets Expectations Reflection paper
contained 3-4 grammar, usage, or spelling errors.

0 pts Does not Meet Expectations Reflection paper
contained more than 5 grammar, usage, or spelling errors and proofreading was
not apparent.

5 pts

This criterion is linked
to a Learning Outcome References and
Utilization of Outside Resources

Inclusion of one peer
reviewed behavioral source and one course assigned reading

5 to >3.0 pts Meets Expectations The author used
references from peer- reviewed behavioral sources in APA format and cited one
or more original behavioral references, outside of the assigned readings.
Hyperlinks to the cited external references are provided.

3 to >0.0 pts Partially Meets Expectations The author used
references in APA format of assigned readings but did not include an
additional peer-reviewed behavioral reference or did not include a hyperlink
to the externally cited reference.

0 pts Does not Meet Expectations The author neither
utilized APA format for referenced material used nor cited an outside
peer-reviewed behavioral reference.

5 pts

This criterion is linked
to a Learning Outcome Addressing the Prompt
& Application

Author answers the
questions presented in the prompt and applies the week’s readings/topics.

5 to >3.0 pts Meets Expectations Directly and
thoroughly responds to the assignment prompt, demonstrating clear
understanding of the required topic. Develops ideas logically and coherently,
using organized, empirical, and evidence‑informed writing. Shows strong application
of the week’s assigned readings or topic, making explicit, accurate
connections between course content and the student’s insights.

3 to >0.0 pts Partially Meets Expectations Responds to the
assignment prompt, but the development of ideas may be only partially clear,
briefly addressed, or lacking depth. Organization may be uneven, with some
logical flow but limited support for claims. References the week’s topic or
readings only tangentially, without demonstrating real application or
meaningful integration. Contains general or surface‑level statements rather
than well‑supported insights.

0 pts Does not Meet Expectations Does not respond to
the assignment prompt, OR focuses mainly on personal opinions or unrelated
content. Lacks logical organization, clarity, and development of ideas.
Demonstrates no or limited application of the week’s assigned readings or
topic. Provides irrelevant or unsupported information, showing minimal or no
connection to course material.

5 pts

This criterion is linked
to a Learning Outcome Peer Review

Your peer review text
must be copied and pasted into the comments of your own reflection paper
submission to receive credit.

5 to >3.0 pts Meets Expectations Completes peer-review
of colleague’s reflection paper and provides well-thought- out, thorough
feedback.

3 to >0.0 pts Partially Meets Expectations Completes peer-review
of colleague’s reflection paper, but provides only vague, non-specific
feedback or input.

0 pts Does not Meet Expectations Does not complete peer-
review of a colleague’s reflection paper or does not copy the text into the
comments section of their own submission to allow for grading.

5 pts