no plagarism no high turn-in will upload the feedback from the rubric as needed

no plagarism no high turn-in will upload the feedback from the rubric as needed
6-2 Small Group Collaboration: Peer Feedback Group Draft of Final Project Discussion Topic Top of Form  Starts Apr 3, 2021 11:59 PM Bottom of Form This is a group activity. For more information on groups, please see About Group Work. Submit your almost completed final project newsletter to the small group discussion and provide constructive feedback using the Newsletter Example Review. To complete this assignment, review the following documents: Small Group Collaboration Guidelines and Rubric Newsletter Example Review For this activity, you will work with a small group to receive and give feedback as you wrap up your newsletter that is due in Module Seven. Use the checklist as your guide for your draft as well as for giving feedback on others’ drafts. Note: You will not be able to see any of your peers’ discussion posts until you have created and posted your own discussion thread
no plagarism no high turn-in will upload the feedback from the rubric as needed
CHE 300 Small Group Collaboration Guidelines and Rubric In this course, the small group collaboration will be used in Modules One, Two, Three , Four , and Six to provide constructive feedback to your peers’ milestone submissions. Incorporate the feedback you receive from your group members into your final project submission. The cornerstone of reviewing a classmate’s work and providing useful feedback is an environment of trust and respect. As a re viewer, you will serve as editor, facilitator, and coach. Yours is the role of a compassionate professional. The author of the work, too, is a professional, wh o thanks reviewers for their feedback, avoids defensive reactions and commentary, and tries to maintain an objective ear. Initial Post for Small Group Collaboration In your initial post , consider the prompt info rmation provided in brightspace .  Module One : Using the Newsletter Example Review document, c omplete your initial anal ysis of the example newsletters. Then, copy and paste that information into the discussion post.  Module Two : Post your proposed sources and an explanation of why you want to use those resources .  Module Three : Look at the provided SMART objectives , identify the missing pieces , and suggest a re vision that includes all parts of a SMART objective.  Module Four : Post one broad goal and two SMART objectives you could use for your newsletter.  Module Six: Post a draft of your newsletter ( as much as you have co mpleted by Thursday of this module) to rece ive feedback and improve your newsletter before you submit it to your instructor. Feedback to Peers in Small Group Collaboration In response to your peers, offer actionable and constructive feedback. It is good practice to start with a positive comment, t hen suggest an improvement to their original post. The goal of these collaborations is to improve assignments before submitting work to the instructor. Although not required, please c onsider the following for providing and receiving constructive criticism . As a r eviewer: 1. Take the time to read the milestone submission thoroughly. You will likely need to read it through several times. You might w ant to read the submission in its entirety and then jot down your first impressions. Then, you will want to read it a second (and e ven third) time to develop your critique. 2. You are critiquing the piece, not the person. Your goal is to help the author achieve his or her goal. Keep your personal jud gment about the subject matter to yourself. You may not be the intended audience for t he piece, but to the best of your ability, analyze it as if you were the intended audience. 3. Use the assignment’s objectives to focus the critique. 4. The critique should start with the strengths of the piece. What works and why? Provide concrete example s. 5. Next, suggest areas for revision. Keep the tone positive and provide concrete suggestions for revision. 6. The final comment should be an overall summary of the piece and your impressions, focusing on the positive. As the a uthor: 1. Listen to (or rea d) the critique of your submission carefully, avoiding any desire to defend your choices. 2. If you are unclear what the reviewer means, ask him or her to clarify. 3. If after hearing/reading the critique you have any questions, feel free to pose them to t he group. For example, you might be concerned that your submission is confusing, not quite appropriate to the subject, or not relevant. You might ask, “Do you feel my analysis was solid enough? I debated whether to argue my case further.” 4. Take special note of repeated commentary on the same issue. This may signify an area for improvement. 5. Thank the reviewers for their feedback. If some commentary was especially helpful, that is useful information for the reviewe r. Different writers have different str engths, and different reviewers have different strengths, too. 6. Remember, it is your submission. You are the ultimate decision maker on what goes into the piece. You do not have to accept a ny of the suggestions for improvement if you do not want to. Howe ver, at the same time, do not just dismiss suggestions out of hand. Example: Several reviewers suggest that your conclusion was not as strong as it could be. Try redrafting it. If possible, allow some time before you read it again. Y ou may be surprised at the results. 7. Accept that negative feedback comes with the territory. Your job is not to make everyone happy but to make your submission th e best that it can be. Guidelines for Submission: Initial posts should meet the specific assignment guidelines l isted in the prompt within the module. Feedback to peers should be in complete sentences. Critical Elements Proficient (100 %) Needs Improvement (75%) Not Evident (0%) Value Initial post Initial post meets expectations of specific prompt for that small group collaboration Initial post address es some expectations from specific prompt for that small group collaboration Does not create an initial post 50 Feedback Provides constructive, actionable feedback to peers Provides feedback to peer s that is not constructive or actionable Does not provide feedback to peers 50 Total 100%