Executive Solution Overview
– ## CommunityCareApplicationAssignment.docx – ## Community-Care-Scenario455.pdf – ## Rubric-CommunityCareApplicationCommunicationandGroupDynamics.pdf **## CommunityCareApplicationAssignment.docx** Access the "Allied Health Community." Read the Community Care Scenario for this course and complete th…
Instant Solution Download
$6.99Immediate access to the full model answer, formatted citations, and rubric breakdown.
Need a Fresh Custom Paper?
Have this question answered from scratch according to your specific instructions and deadline.
Order on TutorsGallery →Assignment Prompt & Instructions
– ## CommunityCareApplicationAssignment.docx
– ## Community-Care-Scenario455.pdf
– ## Rubric-CommunityCareApplicationCommunicationandGroupDynamics.pdf
**## CommunityCareApplicationAssignment.docx**
Access the "Allied Health Community." Read the Community Care Scenario for this course and complete the following assignment:
Write an action plan of 500 to 700 words detailing how the group dynamics and communication between group members can be improved. Include the following:
1. Identify three major events that occurred that caused this meeting be considered ineffective.
2. What meeting guidelines, methods, or best practices can be implemented to create a more effective meeting? (Consider what could have been implemented prior to the meeting, at the beginning of the meeting, during the meeting, and at the end of the meeting.)
3. Describe communication processes that can improve group dynamics and meeting effectiveness.
4. Describe how this group can be structured differently to clarify roles and responsibilities. Describe strategies that can be implemented to improve the group dynamics.
5. Evaluate each group using the Stages of Group Development discussed in Chapter 16 in your textbook. Using this information, describe how these stages can be applied in this situation.
**## Community-Care-Scenario455.pdf**
COMMUNITY CARE Scenario
Type of Care Provided
Scenario
Care provided in this capacity is done through clinics such as 24-hour urgent care centers and minute
clinics provided through local pharmacies or community locations. These facilities increase access to
care at affordable rates and in convenient locations.
It was time for the team meeting. This was the fourth time the team at the community clinic was meet-
ing to try and come to consensus regarding a problem that arose with a patient. The personalities of the
group made the meetings interesting. John was a bit of a bully. Connie had a unique way of looking at
things and did not seem to be in harmony with the rest of the group. Lucia was easily intimidated, and
it seemed that John was aware of this and took advantage of her feelings. Sally was the social butterfly
of the group and wanted to keep everyone happy. Walt typically slipped into the meeting and spent the
time browsing his Facebook account. The others would come in, sit down, and only speak when asked
a direct question. The boss was frustrated that the team had yet to come up with a consensus.
Just before the meeting began, Lucia began feeling anxious when John came in. She had been working
on an alternative plan, had developed handouts, and was ready to make a suggestion at this meeting.
Seeing John, she began to have second thoughts about bringing up her idea since the last time John
had shot her down. She was hoping that the boss would see that she was interested in helping the
group and that he might consider her for a promotion that was soon to be determined. Sally came in and
checked in with each of the group members to see how they and their families were doing, what every-
one’s plans were for the weekend, and other “nurturing” type questions.
The meeting began. John stood up and said, “We all know the reason we are meeting. Some people in
this group just cannot see the big picture. There needs to be compromise in order for us to move for-
ward. We all know who these people are and I hope they can come on board so we can be out of here
by noon.” The boss, appearing a bit irritated at this outburst, said, “John, that is not the purpose of this
meeting. We need to determine the best solution for our patient.” John immediately countered that this
was the fourth meeting, yet the problem continued. Connie proposed that maybe someone had a sug-
gestion as to how the problem could be solved. John said something barely audible under his breath,
but no suggestions came forth.
Sally pointed out that today was Teresa’s birthday and that everyone should sing happy birthday for her.
John stood up saying, “You are kidding, right?” and walked to the back of the room. They all sang to
Teresa and then a round table discussion began so everyone could share their ideas. When it came to
Lucia, she slid her handouts under her laptop and said that she had nothing to add as all her ideas had
already been mentioned.
The meeting came to an end without a solution. The boss was visibly upset as he threw his papers down
on the table and gave the group an ultimatum, “Have a solution on my desk in 24 hours or we will be
discussing solutions to our lack of consensus.”
**## Rubric-CommunityCareApplicationCommunicationandGroupDynamics.pdf**
11/29/25, 1:42 PM
Page 1 of 10about:srcdoc
Community Care Application: Communication and Group Dynamics –
Rubric
Identifying E!ectiveness 14 points
Criteria Description
Identifying Effectiveness
5. Target 14 points
The action plan clearly identifies three major events that caused this meeting
to be considered ineffective with a comprehensive rationale about why it was
ineffective.
4. Acceptable 11.9 points
The action plan clearly identifies three major events that caused this meeting
to be considered ineffective with a clear rationale about why it was ineffective.
3. Approaching 10.5 points
The action plan identifies three major events that caused this meeting to be
considered ineffective with a basic rationale about why it was ineffective.
2. Insufficient 9.1 points
The action plan does not identify at least three major events that caused this
meeting to be considered ineffective and the rationale is flawed.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
The action plan does not identify three major events that caused this meeting
to be considered ineffective and the rationale is not included.
Collapse All
11/29/25, 1:42 PM
Page 2 of 10about:srcdoc
Meeting Best Practices 14 points
Criteria Description
Meeting Best Practices
5. Target 14 points
The action plan thoroughly describes the meeting guidelines, methods, or
best practices that could be implemented to create a more effective meeting.
4. Acceptable 11.9 points
The action plan skillfully describes the meeting guidelines, methods, or best
practices that could be implemented to create a more effective meeting.
3. Approaching 10.5 points
The action plan provides a basic description of the meeting guidelines,
methods, or best practices that could be implemented to create a more
effective meeting.
2. Insufficient 9.1 points
The action does not clearly describe the meeting guidelines, methods, or best
practices that could be implemented to create a more effective meeting.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
The action omits information and does not describe the meeting guidelines,
methods, or best practices that could be implemented to create a more
effective meeting.
11/29/25, 1:42 PM
Page 3 of 10about:srcdoc
Communication Processes to Improve Group Dynamics and Meeting
E!ectiveness
14 points
Criteria Description
Communication Processes to Improve Group Dynamics and Meeting
Effectiveness
5. Target 14 points
The action plan concisely describes communication processes that can
improve group dynamics and meeting effectiveness and demonstrates a deep
understanding of communication processes.
4. Acceptable 11.9 points
The action plan thoroughly describes communication processes that can
improve group dynamics and meeting effectiveness and demonstrates a
strong understanding of communication processes.
3. Approaching 10.5 points
The action plan includes a general description of the communication
processes with little emphasis about how to improve group dynamics and
meeting effectiveness.
2. Insufficient 9.1 points
The action plan does not clearly describe the communication process and
shows little emphasis about how to improve group dynamics and meeting
effectiveness.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
The action plan does not describe how communication processes can improve
group dynamics or meeting effectiveness.
11/29/25, 1:42 PM
Page 4 of 10about:srcdoc
Roles and Responsibilities 14 points
Criteria Description
Roles and Responsibilities
5. Target 14 points
The action plan describes how the group can be structured differently to
clarify roles and responsibilities through thought-provoking means. The action
plan describes detailed strategies that can be implemented to improve group
dynamics.
4. Acceptable 11.9 points
The action plan thoughtfully and clearly describes how the group can be
structured differently to clarify roles and responsibilities. The action plan
clearly describes strategies that can be implemented to improve group
dynamics.
3. Approaching 10.5 points
The action plan includes a general description of how the group can be
structured differently to clarify roles and responsibilities. The action plan
describes strategies that can be implemented to improve group dynamics.
2. Insufficient 9.1 points
The action plan does not clearly describe how the group can be structured
differently to clarify roles and responsibilities and is missing information. The
action plan includes few strategies that can be implemented to improve group
dynamics.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
The action plan does not describe how the group can be structured differently
to clarify roles and responsibilities and is missing information. The action plan
does not describe strategies that can be implemented to improve group
dynamics.
11/29/25, 1:42 PM
Page 5 of 10about:srcdoc
Evaluation and Application 14 points
Criteria Description
Evaluation and Application
5. Target 14 points
The action plan expertly evaluates each group using the stages of group
development discussed in the textbook. The action plan uses detailed
information from the textbook to describe how the stages can be applied and
includes citations.
4. Acceptable 11.9 points
The action plan succinctly evaluates each group using the stages of group
development discussed in the textbook. The action plan uses information
from the textbook to describe how the stages can be applied and includes
citations.
3. Approaching 10.5 points
The action plan includes some evaluation of each group using the stages of
group development discussed in the textbook. The action plan uses
information from the textbook to describe how the stages can be applied.
2. Insufficient 9.1 points
The action plan is unclear and uses little evaluation of each group using the
stages of group development discussed in the textbook. The action plan
incorporates little information from the textbook about how the stages can be
applied.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
The action plan is unclear and does not evaluate each group using the stages
of group development discussed in the textbook. The action plan does not
incorporate information from the textbook about how the stages can be
applied.
11/29/25, 1:42 PM
Page 6 of 10about:srcdoc
Thesis, Position, or Purpose 7 points
Criteria Description
Communicates reason for writing and demonstrates awareness of audience.
5. Target 7 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is clearly communicated throughout and
clearly directed to a specific audience.
4. Acceptable 5.95 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is adequately presented. An awareness of the
appropriate audience is demonstrated.
3. Approaching 5.25 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is discernable in most aspects but is
occasionally weak or unclear. There is limited awareness of the appropriate
audience.
2. Insufficient 4.55 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is unfocused or confused. There is very little
awareness of the intended audience.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is not discernible. No awareness of the
appropriate audience is evident.
11/29/25, 1:42 PM
Page 7 of 10about:srcdoc
Development, Structure, and Conclusion 8 points
Criteria Description
Advances position or purpose throughout writing; conclusion aligns to and
evolves from development.
5. Target 8 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is logically advanced throughout. The
progression of ideas is coherent and unified. A clear and logical conclusion
aligns to the development of the purpose.
4. Acceptable 6.8 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is advanced in most aspects. Ideas clearly
build on each other. Conclusion aligns to the development of the purpose.
3. Approaching 6 points
Limited advancement of thesis, position, or purpose is discernable. There are
inconsistencies in organization or the relationship of ideas. Conclusion is
simplistic and not fully aligned to the development of the purpose.
2. Insufficient 5.2 points
Writing lacks logical progression of the thesis, position, or purpose. Some
organization is attempted, but ideas are disconnected. Conclusion is unclear
and not supported by the overall development of the purpose.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
No advancement of the thesis, position, or purpose is evident. Connections
between paragraphs are missing or inappropriate. No conclusion is offered.
11/29/25, 1:42 PM
Page 8 of 10about:srcdoc
Evidence 5 points
Criteria Description
Selects and integrates evidence to support and advance position/purpose;
considers other perspectives.
5. Target 5 points
Specific and appropriate evidence is included. Relevant perspectives of others
are clearly considered.
4. Acceptable 4.25 points
Relevant evidence that includes other perspectives is used.
3. Approaching 3.75 points
Evidence is used but is insufficient or of limited relevance. Simplistic
explanation or integration of other perspectives is present.
2. Insufficient 3.25 points
Evidence is limited or irrelevant. The interpretation of other perspectives is
superficial or incorrect.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Evidence to support the thesis, position, or purpose is absent. The writing
relies entirely on the perspective of the writer.
11/29/25, 1:42 PM
Page 9 of 10about:srcdoc
Mechanics of Writing 5 points
Criteria Description
Includes spelling, capitalization, punctuation, grammar, language use, sentence
structure, etc.
5. Target 5 points
No mechanical errors are present. Appropriate language choice and sentence
structure are used throughout.
4. Acceptable 4.25 points
Few mechanical errors are present. Suitable language choice and sentence
structure are used.
3. Approaching 3.75 points
Occasional mechanical errors are present. Language choice is generally
appropriate. Varied sentence structure is attempted.
2. Insufficient 3.25 points
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors are present. Inconsistencies in
language choice or sentence structure are recurrent.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Errors in grammar or syntax are pervasive and impede meaning. Incorrect
language choice or sentence structure errors are found throughout.
11/29/25, 1:42 PM
Page 10 of 10about:srcdoc
Format/Documentation 5 points
Criteria Description
Uses appropriate style, such as APA, MLA, etc., for college, subject, and level;
documents sources using citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc.,
appropriate to assignment and discipline.
5. Target 5 points
No errors in formatting or documentation are present.
4. Acceptable 4.25 points
Appropriate format and documentation are used with only minor errors.
3. Approaching 3.75 points
Appropriate format and documentation are used, although there are some
obvious errors.
2. Insufficient 3.25 points
Appropriate format is attempted, but some elements are missing. Frequent
errors in documentation of sources are evident.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Appropriate format is not used. No documentation of sources is provided.
Total 100 points
© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
**## Rubric-CommunityCareApplicationCommunicationandGroupDynamics.pdf**
11/29/25, 1:42 PM
Page 1 of 10about:srcdoc
Community Care Application: Communication and Group Dynamics –
Rubric
Identifying E!ectiveness 14 points
Criteria Description
Identifying Effectiveness
5. Target 14 points
The action plan clearly identifies three major events that caused this meeting
to be considered ineffective with a comprehensive rationale about why it was
ineffective.
4. Acceptable 11.9 points
The action plan clearly identifies three major events that caused this meeting
to be considered ineffective with a clear rationale about why it was ineffective.
3. Approaching 10.5 points
The action plan identifies three major events that caused this meeting to be
considered ineffective with a basic rationale about why it was ineffective.
2. Insufficient 9.1 points
The action plan does not identify at least three major events that caused this
meeting to be considered ineffective and the rationale is flawed.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
The action plan does not identify three major events that caused this meeting
to be considered ineffective and the rationale is not included.
Collapse All
11/29/25, 1:42 PM
Page 2 of 10about:srcdoc
Meeting Best Practices 14 points
Criteria Description
Meeting Best Practices
5. Target 14 points
The action plan thoroughly describes the meeting guidelines, methods, or
best practices that could be implemented to create a more effective meeting.
4. Acceptable 11.9 points
The action plan skillfully describes the meeting guidelines, methods, or best
practices that could be implemented to create a more effective meeting.
3. Approaching 10.5 points
The action plan provides a basic description of the meeting guidelines,
methods, or best practices that could be implemented to create a more
effective meeting.
2. Insufficient 9.1 points
The action does not clearly describe the meeting guidelines, methods, or best
practices that could be implemented to create a more effective meeting.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
The action omits information and does not describe the meeting guidelines,
methods, or best practices that could be implemented to create a more
effective meeting.
11/29/25, 1:42 PM
Page 3 of 10about:srcdoc
Communication Processes to Improve Group Dynamics and Meeting
E!ectiveness
14 points
Criteria Description
Communication Processes to Improve Group Dynamics and Meeting
Effectiveness
5. Target 14 points
The action plan concisely describes communication processes that can
improve group dynamics and meeting effectiveness and demonstrates a deep
understanding of communication processes.
4. Acceptable 11.9 points
The action plan thoroughly describes communication processes that can
improve group dynamics and meeting effectiveness and demonstrates a
strong understanding of communication processes.
3. Approaching 10.5 points
The action plan includes a general description of the communication
processes with little emphasis about how to improve group dynamics and
meeting effectiveness.
2. Insufficient 9.1 points
The action plan does not clearly describe the communication process and
shows little emphasis about how to improve group dynamics and meeting
effectiveness.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
The action plan does not describe how communication processes can improve
group dynamics or meeting effectiveness.
11/29/25, 1:42 PM
Page 4 of 10about:srcdoc
Roles and Responsibilities 14 points
Criteria Description
Roles and Responsibilities
5. Target 14 points
The action plan describes how the group can be structured differently to
clarify roles and responsibilities through thought-provoking means. The action
plan describes detailed strategies that can be implemented to improve group
dynamics.
4. Acceptable 11.9 points
The action plan thoughtfully and clearly describes how the group can be
structured differently to clarify roles and responsibilities. The action plan
clearly describes strategies that can be implemented to improve group
dynamics.
3. Approaching 10.5 points
The action plan includes a general description of how the group can be
structured differently to clarify roles and responsibilities. The action plan
describes strategies that can be implemented to improve group dynamics.
2. Insufficient 9.1 points
The action plan does not clearly describe how the group can be structured
differently to clarify roles and responsibilities and is missing information. The
action plan includes few strategies that can be implemented to improve group
dynamics.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
The action plan does not describe how the group can be structured differently
to clarify roles and responsibilities and is missing information. The action plan
does not describe strategies that can be implemented to improve group
dynamics.
11/29/25, 1:42 PM
Page 5 of 10about:srcdoc
Evaluation and Application 14 points
Criteria Description
Evaluation and Application
5. Target 14 points
The action plan expertly evaluates each group using the stages of group
development discussed in the textbook. The action plan uses detailed
information from the textbook to describe how the stages can be applied and
includes citations.
4. Acceptable 11.9 points
The action plan succinctly evaluates each group using the stages of group
development discussed in the textbook. The action plan uses information
from the textbook to describe how the stages can be applied and includes
citations.
3. Approaching 10.5 points
The action plan includes some evaluation of each group using the stages of
group development discussed in the textbook. The action plan uses
information from the textbook to describe how the stages can be applied.
2. Insufficient 9.1 points
The action plan is unclear and uses little evaluation of each group using the
stages of group development discussed in the textbook. The action plan
incorporates little information from the textbook about how the stages can be
applied.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
The action plan is unclear and does not evaluate each group using the stages
of group development discussed in the textbook. The action plan does not
incorporate information from the textbook about how the stages can be
applied.
11/29/25, 1:42 PM
Page 6 of 10about:srcdoc
Thesis, Position, or Purpose 7 points
Criteria Description
Communicates reason for writing and demonstrates awareness of audience.
5. Target 7 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is clearly communicated throughout and
clearly directed to a specific audience.
4. Acceptable 5.95 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is adequately presented. An awareness of the
appropriate audience is demonstrated.
3. Approaching 5.25 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is discernable in most aspects but is
occasionally weak or unclear. There is limited awareness of the appropriate
audience.
2. Insufficient 4.55 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is unfocused or confused. There is very little
awareness of the intended audience.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is not discernible. No awareness of the
appropriate audience is evident.
11/29/25, 1:42 PM
Page 7 of 10about:srcdoc
Development, Structure, and Conclusion 8 points
Criteria Description
Advances position or purpose throughout writing; conclusion aligns to and
evolves from development.
5. Target 8 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is logically advanced throughout. The
progression of ideas is coherent and unified. A clear and logical conclusion
aligns to the development of the purpose.
4. Acceptable 6.8 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is advanced in most aspects. Ideas clearly
build on each other. Conclusion aligns to the development of the purpose.
3. Approaching 6 points
Limited advancement of thesis, position, or purpose is discernable. There are
inconsistencies in organization or the relationship of ideas. Conclusion is
simplistic and not fully aligned to the development of the purpose.
2. Insufficient 5.2 points
Writing lacks logical progression of the thesis, position, or purpose. Some
organization is attempted, but ideas are disconnected. Conclusion is unclear
and not supported by the overall development of the purpose.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
No advancement of the thesis, position, or purpose is evident. Connections
between paragraphs are missing or inappropriate. No conclusion is offered.
11/29/25, 1:42 PM
Page 8 of 10about:srcdoc
Evidence 5 points
Criteria Description
Selects and integrates evidence to support and advance position/purpose;
considers other perspectives.
5. Target 5 points
Specific and appropriate evidence is included. Relevant perspectives of others
are clearly considered.
4. Acceptable 4.25 points
Relevant evidence that includes other perspectives is used.
3. Approaching 3.75 points
Evidence is used but is insufficient or of limited relevance. Simplistic
explanation or integration of other perspectives is present.
2. Insufficient 3.25 points
Evidence is limited or irrelevant. The interpretation of other perspectives is
superficial or incorrect.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Evidence to support the thesis, position, or purpose is absent. The writing
relies entirely on the perspective of the writer.
11/29/25, 1:42 PM
Page 9 of 10about:srcdoc
Mechanics of Writing 5 points
Criteria Description
Includes spelling, capitalization, punctuation, grammar, language use, sentence
structure, etc.
5. Target 5 points
No mechanical errors are present. Appropriate language choice and sentence
structure are used throughout.
4. Acceptable 4.25 points
Few mechanical errors are present. Suitable language choice and sentence
structure are used.
3. Approaching 3.75 points
Occasional mechanical errors are present. Language choice is generally
appropriate. Varied sentence structure is attempted.
2. Insufficient 3.25 points
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors are present. Inconsistencies in
language choice or sentence structure are recurrent.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Errors in grammar or syntax are pervasive and impede meaning. Incorrect
language choice or sentence structure errors are found throughout.
11/29/25, 1:42 PM
Page 10 of 10about:srcdoc
Format/Documentation 5 points
Criteria Description
Uses appropriate style, such as APA, MLA, etc., for college, subject, and level;
documents sources using citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc.,
appropriate to assignment and discipline.
5. Target 5 points
No errors in formatting or documentation are present.
4. Acceptable 4.25 points
Appropriate format and documentation are used with only minor errors.
3. Approaching 3.75 points
Appropriate format and documentation are used, although there are some
obvious errors.
2. Insufficient 3.25 points
Appropriate format is attempted, but some elements are missing. Frequent
errors in documentation of sources are evident.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Appropriate format is not used. No documentation of sources is provided.
Total 100 points
© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
**## CommunityCareApplicationAssignment.docx**
Access the "Allied Health Community." Read the Community Care Scenario for this course and complete the following assignment:
Write an action plan of 500 to 700 words detailing how the group dynamics and communication between group members can be improved. Include the following:
1. Identify three major events that occurred that caused this meeting be considered ineffective.
2. What meeting guidelines, methods, or best practices can be implemented to create a more effective meeting? (Consider what could have been implemented prior to the meeting, at the beginning of the meeting, during the meeting, and at the end of the meeting.)
3. Describe communication processes that can improve group dynamics and meeting effectiveness.
4. Describe how this group can be structured differently to clarify roles and responsibilities. Describe strategies that can be implemented to improve the group dynamics.
5. Evaluate each group using the Stages of Group Development discussed in Chapter 16 in your textbook. Using this information, describe how these stages can be applied in this situation.
**## Community-Care-Scenario455.pdf**
COMMUNITY CARE Scenario
Type of Care Provided
Scenario
Care provided in this capacity is done through clinics such as 24-hour urgent care centers and minute
clinics provided through local pharmacies or community locations. These facilities increase access to
care at affordable rates and in convenient locations.
It was time for the team meeting. This was the fourth time the team at the community clinic was meet-
ing to try and come to consensus regarding a problem that arose with a patient. The personalities of the
group made the meetings interesting. John was a bit of a bully. Connie had a unique way of looking at
things and did not seem to be in harmony with the rest of the group. Lucia was easily intimidated, and
it seemed that John was aware of this and took advantage of her feelings. Sally was the social butterfly
of the group and wanted to keep everyone happy. Walt typically slipped into the meeting and spent the
time browsing his Facebook account. The others would come in, sit down, and only speak when asked
a direct question. The boss was frustrated that the team had yet to come up with a consensus.
Just before the meeting began, Lucia began feeling anxious when John came in. She had been working
on an alternative plan, had developed handouts, and was ready to make a suggestion at this meeting.
Seeing John, she began to have second thoughts about bringing up her idea since the last time John
had shot her down. She was hoping that the boss would see that she was interested in helping the
group and that he might consider her for a promotion that was soon to be determined. Sally came in and
checked in with each of the group members to see how they and their families were doing, what every-
one’s plans were for the weekend, and other “nurturing” type questions.
The meeting began. John stood up and said, “We all know the reason we are meeting. Some people in
this group just cannot see the big picture. There needs to be compromise in order for us to move for-
ward. We all know who these people are and I hope they can come on board so we can be out of here
by noon.” The boss, appearing a bit irritated at this outburst, said, “John, that is not the purpose of this
meeting. We need to determine the best solution for our patient.” John immediately countered that this
was the fourth meeting, yet the problem continued. Connie proposed that maybe someone had a sug-
gestion as to how the problem could be solved. John said something barely audible under his breath,
but no suggestions came forth.
Sally pointed out that today was Teresa’s birthday and that everyone should sing happy birthday for her.
John stood up saying, “You are kidding, right?” and walked to the back of the room. They all sang to
Teresa and then a round table discussion began so everyone could share their ideas. When it came to
Lucia, she slid her handouts under her laptop and said that she had nothing to add as all her ideas had
already been mentioned.
The meeting came to an end without a solution. The boss was visibly upset as he threw his papers down
on the table and gave the group an ultimatum, “Have a solution on my desk in 24 hours or we will be
discussing solutions to our lack of consensus.”
**## Rubric-CommunityCareApplicationCommunicationandGroupDynamics.pdf**
11/29/25, 1:42 PM
Page 1 of 10about:srcdoc
Community Care Application: Communication and Group Dynamics –
Rubric
Identifying E!ectiveness 14 points
Criteria Description
Identifying Effectiveness
5. Target 14 points
The action plan clearly identifies three major events that caused this meeting
to be considered ineffective with a comprehensive rationale about why it was
ineffective.
4. Acceptable 11.9 points
The action plan clearly identifies three major events that caused this meeting
to be considered ineffective with a clear rationale about why it was ineffective.
3. Approaching 10.5 points
The action plan identifies three major events that caused this meeting to be
considered ineffective with a basic rationale about why it was ineffective.
2. Insufficient 9.1 points
The action plan does not identify at least three major events that caused this
meeting to be considered ineffective and the rationale is flawed.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
The action plan does not identify three major events that caused this meeting
to be considered ineffective and the rationale is not included.
Collapse All
11/29/25, 1:42 PM
Page 2 of 10about:srcdoc
Meeting Best Practices 14 points
Criteria Description
Meeting Best Practices
5. Target 14 points
The action plan thoroughly describes the meeting guidelines, methods, or
best practices that could be implemented to create a more effective meeting.
4. Acceptable 11.9 points
The action plan skillfully describes the meeting guidelines, methods, or best
practices that could be implemented to create a more effective meeting.
3. Approaching 10.5 points
The action plan provides a basic description of the meeting guidelines,
methods, or best practices that could be implemented to create a more
effective meeting.
2. Insufficient 9.1 points
The action does not clearly describe the meeting guidelines, methods, or best
practices that could be implemented to create a more effective meeting.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
The action omits information and does not describe the meeting guidelines,
methods, or best practices that could be implemented to create a more
effective meeting.
11/29/25, 1:42 PM
Page 3 of 10about:srcdoc
Communication Processes to Improve Group Dynamics and Meeting
E!ectiveness
14 points
Criteria Description
Communication Processes to Improve Group Dynamics and Meeting
Effectiveness
5. Target 14 points
The action plan concisely describes communication processes that can
improve group dynamics and meeting effectiveness and demonstrates a deep
understanding of communication processes.
4. Acceptable 11.9 points
The action plan thoroughly describes communication processes that can
improve group dynamics and meeting effectiveness and demonstrates a
strong understanding of communication processes.
3. Approaching 10.5 points
The action plan includes a general description of the communication
processes with little emphasis about how to improve group dynamics and
meeting effectiveness.
2. Insufficient 9.1 points
The action plan does not clearly describe the communication process and
shows little emphasis about how to improve group dynamics and meeting
effectiveness.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
The action plan does not describe how communication processes can improve
group dynamics or meeting effectiveness.
11/29/25, 1:42 PM
Page 4 of 10about:srcdoc
Roles and Responsibilities 14 points
Criteria Description
Roles and Responsibilities
5. Target 14 points
The action plan describes how the group can be structured differently to
clarify roles and responsibilities through thought-provoking means. The action
plan describes detailed strategies that can be implemented to improve group
dynamics.
4. Acceptable 11.9 points
The action plan thoughtfully and clearly describes how the group can be
structured differently to clarify roles and responsibilities. The action plan
clearly describes strategies that can be implemented to improve group
dynamics.
3. Approaching 10.5 points
The action plan includes a general description of how the group can be
structured differently to clarify roles and responsibilities. The action plan
describes strategies that can be implemented to improve group dynamics.
2. Insufficient 9.1 points
The action plan does not clearly describe how the group can be structured
differently to clarify roles and responsibilities and is missing information. The
action plan includes few strategies that can be implemented to improve group
dynamics.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
The action plan does not describe how the group can be structured differently
to clarify roles and responsibilities and is missing information. The action plan
does not describe strategies that can be implemented to improve group
dynamics.
11/29/25, 1:42 PM
Page 5 of 10about:srcdoc
Evaluation and Application 14 points
Criteria Description
Evaluation and Application
5. Target 14 points
The action plan expertly evaluates each group using the stages of group
development discussed in the textbook. The action plan uses detailed
information from the textbook to describe how the stages can be applied and
includes citations.
4. Acceptable 11.9 points
The action plan succinctly evaluates each group using the stages of group
development discussed in the textbook. The action plan uses information
from the textbook to describe how the stages can be applied and includes
citations.
3. Approaching 10.5 points
The action plan includes some evaluation of each group using the stages of
group development discussed in the textbook. The action plan uses
information from the textbook to describe how the stages can be applied.
2. Insufficient 9.1 points
The action plan is unclear and uses little evaluation of each group using the
stages of group development discussed in the textbook. The action plan
incorporates little information from the textbook about how the stages can be
applied.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
The action plan is unclear and does not evaluate each group using the stages
of group development discussed in the textbook. The action plan does not
incorporate information from the textbook about how the stages can be
applied.
11/29/25, 1:42 PM
Page 6 of 10about:srcdoc
Thesis, Position, or Purpose 7 points
Criteria Description
Communicates reason for writing and demonstrates awareness of audience.
5. Target 7 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is clearly communicated throughout and
clearly directed to a specific audience.
4. Acceptable 5.95 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is adequately presented. An awareness of the
appropriate audience is demonstrated.
3. Approaching 5.25 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is discernable in most aspects but is
occasionally weak or unclear. There is limited awareness of the appropriate
audience.
2. Insufficient 4.55 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is unfocused or confused. There is very little
awareness of the intended audience.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is not discernible. No awareness of the
appropriate audience is evident.
11/29/25, 1:42 PM
Page 7 of 10about:srcdoc
Development, Structure, and Conclusion 8 points
Criteria Description
Advances position or purpose throughout writing; conclusion aligns to and
evolves from development.
5. Target 8 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is logically advanced throughout. The
progression of ideas is coherent and unified. A clear and logical conclusion
aligns to the development of the purpose.
4. Acceptable 6.8 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is advanced in most aspects. Ideas clearly
build on each other. Conclusion aligns to the development of the purpose.
3. Approaching 6 points
Limited advancement of thesis, position, or purpose is discernable. There are
inconsistencies in organization or the relationship of ideas. Conclusion is
simplistic and not fully aligned to the development of the purpose.
2. Insufficient 5.2 points
Writing lacks logical progression of the thesis, position, or purpose. Some
organization is attempted, but ideas are disconnected. Conclusion is unclear
and not supported by the overall development of the purpose.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
No advancement of the thesis, position, or purpose is evident. Connections
between paragraphs are missing or inappropriate. No conclusion is offered.
11/29/25, 1:42 PM
Page 8 of 10about:srcdoc
Evidence 5 points
Criteria Description
Selects and integrates evidence to support and advance position/purpose;
considers other perspectives.
5. Target 5 points
Specific and appropriate evidence is included. Relevant perspectives of others
are clearly considered.
4. Acceptable 4.25 points
Relevant evidence that includes other perspectives is used.
3. Approaching 3.75 points
Evidence is used but is insufficient or of limited relevance. Simplistic
explanation or integration of other perspectives is present.
2. Insufficient 3.25 points
Evidence is limited or irrelevant. The interpretation of other perspectives is
superficial or incorrect.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Evidence to support the thesis, position, or purpose is absent. The writing
relies entirely on the perspective of the writer.
11/29/25, 1:42 PM
Page 9 of 10about:srcdoc
Mechanics of Writing 5 points
Criteria Description
Includes spelling, capitalization, punctuation, grammar, language use, sentence
structure, etc.
5. Target 5 points
No mechanical errors are present. Appropriate language choice and sentence
structure are used throughout.
4. Acceptable 4.25 points
Few mechanical errors are present. Suitable language choice and sentence
structure are used.
3. Approaching 3.75 points
Occasional mechanical errors are present. Language choice is generally
appropriate. Varied sentence structure is attempted.
2. Insufficient 3.25 points
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors are present. Inconsistencies in
language choice or sentence structure are recurrent.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Errors in grammar or syntax are pervasive and impede meaning. Incorrect
language choice or sentence structure errors are found throughout.
11/29/25, 1:42 PM
Page 10 of 10about:srcdoc
Format/Documentation 5 points
Criteria Description
Uses appropriate style, such as APA, MLA, etc., for college, subject, and level;
documents sources using citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc.,
appropriate to assignment and discipline.
5. Target 5 points
No errors in formatting or documentation are present.
4. Acceptable 4.25 points
Appropriate format and documentation are used with only minor errors.
3. Approaching 3.75 points
Appropriate format and documentation are used, although there are some
obvious errors.
2. Insufficient 3.25 points
Appropriate format is attempted, but some elements are missing. Frequent
errors in documentation of sources are evident.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Appropriate format is not used. No documentation of sources is provided.
Total 100 points
© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
**## CommunityCareApplicationAssignment.docx**
Access the "Allied Health Community." Read the Community Care Scenario for this course and complete the following assignment:
Write an action plan of 500 to 700 words detailing how the group dynamics and communication between group members can be improved. Include the following:
1. Identify three major events that occurred that caused this meeting be considered ineffective.
2. What meeting guidelines, methods, or best practices can be implemented to create a more effective meeting? (Consider what could have been implemented prior to the meeting, at the beginning of the meeting, during the meeting, and at the end of the meeting.)
3. Describe communication processes that can improve group dynamics and meeting effectiveness.
4. Describe how this group can be structured differently to clarify roles and responsibilities. Describe strategies that can be implemented to improve the group dynamics.
5. Evaluate each group using the Stages of Group Development discussed in Chapter 16 in your textbook. Using this information, describe how these stages can be applied in this situation.
**## Community-Care-Scenario455.pdf**
COMMUNITY CARE Scenario
Type of Care Provided
Scenario
Care provided in this capacity is done through clinics such as 24-hour urgent care centers and minute
clinics provided through local pharmacies or community locations. These facilities increase access to
care at affordable rates and in convenient locations.
It was time for the team meeting. This was the fourth time the team at the community clinic was meet-
ing to try and come to consensus regarding a problem that arose with a patient. The personalities of the
group made the meetings interesting. John was a bit of a bully. Connie had a unique way of looking at
things and did not seem to be in harmony with the rest of the group. Lucia was easily intimidated, and
it seemed that John was aware of this and took advantage of her feelings. Sally was the social butterfly
of the group and wanted to keep everyone happy. Walt typically slipped into the meeting and spent the
time browsing his Facebook account. The others would come in, sit down, and only speak when asked
a direct question. The boss was frustrated that the team had yet to come up with a consensus.
Just before the meeting began, Lucia began feeling anxious when John came in. She had been working
on an alternative plan, had developed handouts, and was ready to make a suggestion at this meeting.
Seeing John, she began to have second thoughts about bringing up her idea since the last time John
had shot her down. She was hoping that the boss would see that she was interested in helping the
group and that he might consider her for a promotion that was soon to be determined. Sally came in and
checked in with each of the group members to see how they and their families were doing, what every-
one’s plans were for the weekend, and other “nurturing” type questions.
The meeting began. John stood up and said, “We all know the reason we are meeting. Some people in
this group just cannot see the big picture. There needs to be compromise in order for us to move for-
ward. We all know who these people are and I hope they can come on board so we can be out of here
by noon.” The boss, appearing a bit irritated at this outburst, said, “John, that is not the purpose of this
meeting. We need to determine the best solution for our patient.” John immediately countered that this
was the fourth meeting, yet the problem continued. Connie proposed that maybe someone had a sug-
gestion as to how the problem could be solved. John said something barely audible under his breath,
but no suggestions came forth.
Sally pointed out that today was Teresa’s birthday and that everyone should sing happy birthday for her.
John stood up saying, “You are kidding, right?” and walked to the back of the room. They all sang to
Teresa and then a round table discussion began so everyone could share their ideas. When it came to
Lucia, she slid her handouts under her laptop and said that she had nothing to add as all her ideas had
already been mentioned.
The meeting came to an end without a solution. The boss was visibly upset as he threw his papers down
on the table and gave the group an ultimatum, “Have a solution on my desk in 24 hours or we will be
discussing solutions to our lack of consensus.”
**## Rubric-CommunityCareApplicationCommunicationandGroupDynamics.pdf**
11/29/25, 1:42 PM
Page 1 of 10about:srcdoc
Community Care Application: Communication and Group Dynamics –
Rubric
Identifying E!ectiveness 14 points
Criteria Description
Identifying Effectiveness
5. Target 14 points
The action plan clearly identifies three major events that caused this meeting
to be considered ineffective with a comprehensive rationale about why it was
ineffective.
4. Acceptable 11.9 points
The action plan clearly identifies three major events that caused this meeting
to be considered ineffective with a clear rationale about why it was ineffective.
3. Approaching 10.5 points
The action plan identifies three major events that caused this meeting to be
considered ineffective with a basic rationale about why it was ineffective.
2. Insufficient 9.1 points
The action plan does not identify at least three major events that caused this
meeting to be considered ineffective and the rationale is flawed.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
The action plan does not identify three major events that caused this meeting
to be considered ineffective and the rationale is not included.
Collapse All
11/29/25, 1:42 PM
Page 2 of 10about:srcdoc
Meeting Best Practices 14 points
Criteria Description
Meeting Best Practices
5. Target 14 points
The action plan thoroughly describes the meeting guidelines, methods, or
best practices that could be implemented to create a more effective meeting.
4. Acceptable 11.9 points
The action plan skillfully describes the meeting guidelines, methods, or best
practices that could be implemented to create a more effective meeting.
3. Approaching 10.5 points
The action plan provides a basic description of the meeting guidelines,
methods, or best practices that could be implemented to create a more
effective meeting.
2. Insufficient 9.1 points
The action does not clearly describe the meeting guidelines, methods, or best
practices that could be implemented to create a more effective meeting.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
The action omits information and does not describe the meeting guidelines,
methods, or best practices that could be implemented to create a more
effective meeting.
11/29/25, 1:42 PM
Page 3 of 10about:srcdoc
Communication Processes to Improve Group Dynamics and Meeting
E!ectiveness
14 points
Criteria Description
Communication Processes to Improve Group Dynamics and Meeting
Effectiveness
5. Target 14 points
The action plan concisely describes communication processes that can
improve group dynamics and meeting effectiveness and demonstrates a deep
understanding of communication processes.
4. Acceptable 11.9 points
The action plan thoroughly describes communication processes that can
improve group dynamics and meeting effectiveness and demonstrates a
strong understanding of communication processes.
3. Approaching 10.5 points
The action plan includes a general description of the communication
processes with little emphasis about how to improve group dynamics and
meeting effectiveness.
2. Insufficient 9.1 points
The action plan does not clearly describe the communication process and
shows little emphasis about how to improve group dynamics and meeting
effectiveness.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
The action plan does not describe how communication processes can improve
group dynamics or meeting effectiveness.
11/29/25, 1:42 PM
Page 4 of 10about:srcdoc
Roles and Responsibilities 14 points
Criteria Description
Roles and Responsibilities
5. Target 14 points
The action plan describes how the group can be structured differently to
clarify roles and responsibilities through thought-provoking means. The action
plan describes detailed strategies that can be implemented to improve group
dynamics.
4. Acceptable 11.9 points
The action plan thoughtfully and clearly describes how the group can be
structured differently to clarify roles and responsibilities. The action plan
clearly describes strategies that can be implemented to improve group
dynamics.
3. Approaching 10.5 points
The action plan includes a general description of how the group can be
structured differently to clarify roles and responsibilities. The action plan
describes strategies that can be implemented to improve group dynamics.
2. Insufficient 9.1 points
The action plan does not clearly describe how the group can be structured
differently to clarify roles and responsibilities and is missing information. The
action plan includes few strategies that can be implemented to improve group
dynamics.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
The action plan does not describe how the group can be structured differently
to clarify roles and responsibilities and is missing information. The action plan
does not describe strategies that can be implemented to improve group
dynamics.
11/29/25, 1:42 PM
Page 5 of 10about:srcdoc
Evaluation and Application 14 points
Criteria Description
Evaluation and Application
5. Target 14 points
The action plan expertly evaluates each group using the stages of group
development discussed in the textbook. The action plan uses detailed
information from the textbook to describe how the stages can be applied and
includes citations.
4. Acceptable 11.9 points
The action plan succinctly evaluates each group using the stages of group
development discussed in the textbook. The action plan uses information
from the textbook to describe how the stages can be applied and includes
citations.
3. Approaching 10.5 points
The action plan includes some evaluation of each group using the stages of
group development discussed in the textbook. The action plan uses
information from the textbook to describe how the stages can be applied.
2. Insufficient 9.1 points
The action plan is unclear and uses little evaluation of each group using the
stages of group development discussed in the textbook. The action plan
incorporates little information from the textbook about how the stages can be
applied.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
The action plan is unclear and does not evaluate each group using the stages
of group development discussed in the textbook. The action plan does not
incorporate information from the textbook about how the stages can be
applied.
11/29/25, 1:42 PM
Page 6 of 10about:srcdoc
Thesis, Position, or Purpose 7 points
Criteria Description
Communicates reason for writing and demonstrates awareness of audience.
5. Target 7 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is clearly communicated throughout and
clearly directed to a specific audience.
4. Acceptable 5.95 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is adequately presented. An awareness of the
appropriate audience is demonstrated.
3. Approaching 5.25 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is discernable in most aspects but is
occasionally weak or unclear. There is limited awareness of the appropriate
audience.
2. Insufficient 4.55 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is unfocused or confused. There is very little
awareness of the intended audience.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is not discernible. No awareness of the
appropriate audience is evident.
11/29/25, 1:42 PM
Page 7 of 10about:srcdoc
Development, Structure, and Conclusion 8 points
Criteria Description
Advances position or purpose throughout writing; conclusion aligns to and
evolves from development.
5. Target 8 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is logically advanced throughout. The
progression of ideas is coherent and unified. A clear and logical conclusion
aligns to the development of the purpose.
4. Acceptable 6.8 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is advanced in most aspects. Ideas clearly
build on each other. Conclusion aligns to the development of the purpose.
3. Approaching 6 points
Limited advancement of thesis, position, or purpose is discernable. There are
inconsistencies in organization or the relationship of ideas. Conclusion is
simplistic and not fully aligned to the development of the purpose.
2. Insufficient 5.2 points
Writing lacks logical progression of the thesis, position, or purpose. Some
organization is attempted, but ideas are disconnected. Conclusion is unclear
and not supported by the overall development of the purpose.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
No advancement of the thesis, position, or purpose is evident. Connections
between paragraphs are missing or inappropriate. No conclusion is offered.
11/29/25, 1:42 PM
Page 8 of 10about:srcdoc
Evidence 5 points
Criteria Description
Selects and integrates evidence to support and advance position/purpose;
considers other perspectives.
5. Target 5 points
Specific and appropriate evidence is included. Relevant perspectives of others
are clearly considered.
4. Acceptable 4.25 points
Relevant evidence that includes other perspectives is used.
3. Approaching 3.75 points
Evidence is used but is insufficient or of limited relevance. Simplistic
explanation or integration of other perspectives is present.
2. Insufficient 3.25 points
Evidence is limited or irrelevant. The interpretation of other perspectives is
superficial or incorrect.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Evidence to support the thesis, position, or purpose is absent. The writing
relies entirely on the perspective of the writer.
11/29/25, 1:42 PM
Page 9 of 10about:srcdoc
Mechanics of Writing 5 points
Criteria Description
Includes spelling, capitalization, punctuation, grammar, language use, sentence
structure, etc.
5. Target 5 points
No mechanical errors are present. Appropriate language choice and sentence
structure are used throughout.
4. Acceptable 4.25 points
Few mechanical errors are present. Suitable language choice and sentence
structure are used.
3. Approaching 3.75 points
Occasional mechanical errors are present. Language choice is generally
appropriate. Varied sentence structure is attempted.
2. Insufficient 3.25 points
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors are present. Inconsistencies in
language choice or sentence structure are recurrent.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Errors in grammar or syntax are pervasive and impede meaning. Incorrect
language choice or sentence structure errors are found throughout.
11/29/25, 1:42 PM
Page 10 of 10about:srcdoc
Format/Documentation 5 points
Criteria Description
Uses appropriate style, such as APA, MLA, etc., for college, subject, and level;
documents sources using citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc.,
appropriate to assignment and discipline.
5. Target 5 points
No errors in formatting or documentation are present.
4. Acceptable 4.25 points
Appropriate format and documentation are used with only minor errors.
3. Approaching 3.75 points
Appropriate format and documentation are used, although there are some
obvious errors.
2. Insufficient 3.25 points
Appropriate format is attempted, but some elements are missing. Frequent
errors in documentation of sources are evident.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Appropriate format is not used. No documentation of sources is provided.
Total 100 points
© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
– 1
– 2
– 3