Can this be done by 10:00am 6/28/2019

Discussion: Social Change Vision: Community, Professional, and Academic
At Walden University, we believe knowledge is most valuable when put to use for the greater good, and we’re deeply committed to improving human and social conditions by creating and applying ideas in order to advance society as a whole. 
—Walden University (2011, para 2)
This quote identifies Walden’s commitment to focusing resources on making positive changes at all levels of society in order to improve the social conditions in which people live. Many social change efforts begin as small, community-based projects. For instance, a community that is struggling with teen drug use and violence might join together to build an after school youth center to help combat the issue. Social change efforts such as this one are often a motivating factor for individuals joining the helping professions. In the helping professions, this drive for social change is often a strong value, both personally and professionally.
For this Discussion, review Walden’s mission, and focus on the social change aspect. Think about how this aspect of the mission relates to your personal and professional life. Then, reflect on social issues and social change efforts within your own community. Consider how these efforts might impact your professional goals and motivate you to be an agent of change.
By Day 4
Post a description of your vision for social change. Include how your personal vision complements Walden University’s vision and mission, as well as how Walden University might help you achieve your professional and academic goals. Then, describe a social change effort that is currently going on in your community or an effort you think needs to take place in your community. Explain how this effort may impact your personal and professional goals—and ignite your passion to be part of the helping professions.

Rubric:

55 (55%) – 60 (60%)Initial post is original, thought-provoking, in-depth, and demonstrates quality research. Posting stimulates critical inquiry and investigation. Relevance of the topic is demonstrated.

Initial post is made in a timely manner (allowing adequate time for colleagues to respond).44 (44%) – 54 (54%)Initial post is acceptable but does not consistently demonstrate higher-order thinking. Relevance of the topic is cursorily examined.

Initial post is made late in the timeline of the week (allowing limited time for colleagues to respond).0 (0%) – 43 (43%)Initial post is vague, incomplete, or demonstrates a low-level of thinking.

Initial post is made so that colleagues have inadequate time to respond.Follow-Up Response(s) Postings18 (18%) – 20 (20%)Response demonstrates a critical and thoughtful understanding of the topic and brings the Discussion to a higher level of inquiry and investigation. Response demonstrates meaningful defense of viewpoint.

Responds to one or more colleagues in a timely manner (allowing ample time for colleagues to read and benefit from the postings).15 (15%) – 17 (17%)Response demonstrates a basic understanding of the topic and brings the Discussion to a higher level of inquiry. Some demonstration of defense of argument is present.

Responds to one or more colleagues but posts responses late in the timeline of the week.0 (0%) – 14 (14%)Response demonstrates a lack of understanding of the topic. No higher-order thinking is demonstrated.

Does not post a response. Or the response is too minimum to be considered a significant response.Adherence to
Grammar and
Style Guidelines18 (18%) – 20 (20%)Clear, unambiguous writing that includes proper sentence structure, idea development, paragraph development, and grammar.

Adherence to APA style and reference requirements.15 (15%) – 17 (17%)Relatively clear writing that includes proper sentence structure, reasonable idea and paragraph development, and few grammatical errors.

Adherence to APA style and reference requirements with only a few exceptions.0 (0%) – 14 (14%)Unclear, poorly developed writing that lacks proper sentence structure and idea and paragraph development. Numerous grammatical errors.

Little adherence to APA style and reference requirements.Total Points: 100
Name: HUMN_6000_Discussion_Rubric