Society Handbook

Society Handbook: Research Journal

The Society Research Handbook/Journal is a crucial element of student learning in this course. The Journal will be used as an area to note observations, discoveries, reflections, analysis and thoughts throughout the course.

The following elements MUST be in the Journal:

The journal must be in the form of a booklet with a cover page.
A Table of Contents outlining the organization of the Journal must be present.
A Minimum of 10 Separate 1 Page Reflective Journal Entries (1 every 2 weeks) from class discussions. There will also be four mandatory entries which will be explained by the instructor.
A discussion of Four current events from either the Newspaper or a magazine complete with a copy of the article accompanying your entry. Be sure the article pertains to issues we have discussed in class.
The journal entries must reflect significant insight into the subjects we discussed by reflecting on key issues, using specific examples, and asking important, well thought out questions.
The Journal will be collected on Wednesday, December 21/05.
At the end of the assignment you should have completed
- 10 journal entries of your choice
- 4 mandatory entries as assigned by instructor
- 4 entries based on a current event from a newspaper or magazine (your choice)

Evaluation Rubric:

Level	Criteria and Indicators
Highly Recommended (5)	The writer has adopted a central vision that is clear throughout the elements of the Handbook: course work, culminating activities and reflection. All the elements were succinct and accessible. The journal elements were self-explanatory, clearly focused and well organized. The visual layout adds to the understanding of the Journal layout. The Journal is exciting and shows clear insights into the course material and situations that arose from the students participation. The student made references to specific topics and situations that arose during the course. This culminating activity is authentic and demonstrates a high level of student learning.
Recommend (4)	It is a good model but does not meet all the criteria stated above. An element is missing or depth within the elements are missing. If improved upon it would meet the expectations listed in the criteria above. It could be that the Handbook was not appealing, the writer was not clear or the vision was not clear. The main materials might have been poorly labelled but the ideas are fundamentally very good.
Recommend with Reservations (3)	This is an apprehensive recommendation. If funding is an issue this Handbook would be over-looked. It is a good Handbook, with a clear vision using good examples, but seems to be incoherent. Some elements of the Handbook needs further examination or clarification. The writer needs to work more effectively and given more time this design would move up a category.
Review again after Changes (2)	This model is flawed. The writer did not transfer their research or ideas into a working Handbook. There was a lack of vision for the Handbook. Given more formative feedback the designers would have been more successful in creating a working Handbook. This Handbook requires a second viewing.
Do Not Use (1)	This does not meet the expectations set out in the culminating activity. The Handbook is incomplete and does not fulfill the criterion outlined. The writer did not have a vision. The writer overlooked major elements of the activity. The writer did not appeal to their endorser. A great deal of work is required to be considered for recommendation.