University of Washington Terminology Used to Describe Deaf Individuals Paper

http://www.washington.edu/doit/how-are-terms-deaf-deafened-hard-hearing-and-hearing-impaired-typically-used (Links to an external site.)
For deeper understanding and knowledge about the Deaf community and Deaf culture as well as the terminology used to describe persons within the community, students need to read the information from the above website and post their reaction to it. Initial postings should be a minimum of 2 paragraphs in length. The post should focus on your perspective on the terminology discussed in the article as well as other terminology the student has seen or heard used by the general public. While discussion boards tend to be more informal in nature, the posting should still try to avoid language that is too casual or disrespectful. Students must post their reaction by 5/29/19.
Students are also expected to respond to at least one peer by 5/31/19. The response should be substantive in nature and add to the conversation. Responses such as “I like what you have to say.” without further elaboration is not acceptable. Again, responses should be respectful and made with an open-mind to varying perspectives and opinions.
Both portions must be completed and submitted on time in order to receive full credit. Points will be given to each student for participating in the discussions in a meaningful way. There is a rubric provided to help guide your post.
1 Point
2 Points
3 Points
4 Points
5 Points
Main Post
Posting reflects shallow or is lacking in integration of material. May contain erroneous information. References absent or unclearly applied. Length too short to support argument. No or very little application of information.
Posting supported by at least one reference from readings and lecture. Length does not support integrated thought. May contain numerous errors in writing convention. Comments shared of questionable validity. Application of information is minimal.
Posting supported by at least one reference from readings and lecture. Length may not support integrated thought. May contain some errors in writing conventions. Posting shares valid concepts, but application is not present or is unclear.
Posting supported by two references from reading and two paragraphs in length. May have a few errors in writing conventions. Posting shares valid ideas but lacks true integration of information.
Well-integrated posting supported with references from readings and lecture. Two paragraphs in length using appropriate writing conventions. Demonstrates clear understanding of the material and ability apply the information.
Response
No response or shallow /vague response to fellow student Response was not supported by literature and example. (No reference)
Response to post reflects understanding of points made by the author. Response does not add new information or is not supported by literature and example (Reference may be not present or may be inappropriate)
Response supports or refutes the original post. Response either does not provide any new information in the process or is not adequately supported by literature and example (at least one reference)
Response reflects understanding of points made by author and either supports or refutes. Information is added to original post. Response is minimally supported by literature and example (at least one reference).
Response reflects understanding of points made by the author and either supports or refutes. Information is added to the original post. Response is well supported by literature example (at least one reference).

“Place your order now for a similar assignment and have exceptional work written by our team of experts, guaranteeing you A results.”