Personal Learning Styles According to VARK Questionnaire

1

Unsatisfactory

0.00%

2

Less than Satisfactory

75.00%

3

Satisfactory

79.00%

4

Good

89.00%

5

Excellent

100.00%

80.0 %

Content

20.0 %

Personal Learning Styles According to VARK Questionnaire

Personal learning style content is missing. Personal learning style presented is not reflective of VARK questionnaire.

Personal learning style according to the VARK questionnaire is identified, but summary is incomplete.

Personal learning style according to the VARK questionnaire is identified and basic summary is provided.

Personal learning style according to the VARK questionnaire is identified and described.

Personal learning style according to the VARK questionnaire is identified and described in detail. Summary offers examples that display personal insight or reflection.

20.0 %

Preferred Learning Strategies

Personal learning strategy content is missing.

Personal learning strategy is partially described. A comparison of current preferred learning styles and VARK identified learning styles is incomplete.

Personal learning strategy is summarized. A comparison of current preferred learning styles and VARK identified learning styles is generally described.

Personal learning strategy is described. A comparison of current preferred learning styles and VARK identified learning styles is presented.

Personal learning strategy is clearly described. A comparison of current preferred learning styles and VARK identified learning styles is detailed. Overall discussion demonstrates insight into preferred learning strategies and how these support preferred learning styles.

20.0 %

Learning Styles (Effect on educational performance and importance of identifying learning styles for learners as an educator)

Importance of learning styles for a learner, and importance of educator identifying individual learning styles and preferences when working with learners, is not presented.

Importance of learning styles for a learner, and importance of educator identifying individual learning styles and preferences when working with learners, is partially presented. The importance of learning styles for learners participating in healthy promotion, and identifying them as an educator, is unclear. There are inaccuracies.

Importance of learning styles for a learner, and importance of educator identifying individual learning styles and preferences when working with learners, is generally discussed. The importance of learning styles for learners participating in healthy promotion, and identifying them as an educator, is generally established. There are minor inaccuracies. More rationale or evidence is needed for support.

Importance of learning styles for a learner, and importance of educator identifying individual learning styles and preferences when working with learners, is discussed. The importance of learning styles for learners participating in healthy promotion, and identifying them as an educator, is established. Some rationale or evidence is needed for support.

Importance of learning styles for a learner, and importance of educator identifying individual learning styles and preferences when working with learners, is thoroughly discussed. The importance of learning styles for learners participating in healthy promotion, and identifying them as an educator, is clearly established. Strong rationale and evidence support discussion.

20.0 %

Learning Styles and Health Promotion (learning styles and importance to achieving desired outcome for learners, learning styles and effect on behavioral change, accommodation of different learning styles in health promotion)

Understanding the learning styles of individuals participating in health promotion, the correlation to behavioral change and achieving desired outcomes, and the accommodation of different learning styles is not discussed.

Understanding the learning styles of individuals participating in health promotion and the correlation to behavioral change and achieving desired outcomes is partially presented; a correlation has not been established. Accommodation of different learning styles is incomplete. There are inaccuracies.

Understanding the learning styles of individuals participating in a health promotion, and the correlation to behavioral change and achieving desired outcomes is generally presented; a general correlation has been established. More rationale or evidence is needed to fully establish correlation. Accommodation of different learning styles is summarized.

Understanding the learning styles of individuals participating in a health promotion, and the correlation to behavioral change and achieving desired outcomes is discussed; a correlation has been established. Accommodation of different learning styles is discussed. Some detail or minor support is needed.

Understanding the learning styles of individuals participating in a health promotion, and the correlation to behavioral change and achieving desired outcomes is discussed in detail. A strong correlation has been established. Accommodation of different learning styles is discussed. The narrative demonstrates insight into the importance of learning styles to health promotion and behavioral outcomes.

15.0 %

Organization and Effectiveness

5.0 %

Thesis Development and Purpose

Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.

Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.

Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.

Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.

Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.

15.0 %

Organization and Effectiveness

5.0 %

Argument Logic and Construction

Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.

Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.

Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.

Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.

Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.

15.0 %

Organization and Effectiveness

5.0 %

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, or word choice are present.

Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used.

Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used.

Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.

5.0 %

Format

2.0 %

Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)

Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.

Template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent.

Template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.

Template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style.

All format elements are correct.

5.0 %

Format

3.0 %

Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)

Sources are not documented.

Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.

Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.