Instructions for this discussion board:

In this week’s video entitled “Why 30 is not the New 20”, Meg Jay makes a pretty important statement: “80% of life’s defining moments occur before the age of 35”.  She goes on to emphasize the value and importance of really grasping on to the 20’s and taking full advantage of this time.

This week, we have also talked quite a bit about the idea of “emerging adulthood”, a term coined by researcher Jeffrey Arnett, as a unique developmental period that a smaller (often privileged) portion of societies are allowed to experience.  Indeed, we can think of lots of pop culture references that portray the college years as a time of freedom from responsibility or, as Meg Jay states, “developmental down time”.  If emerging adulthood is actually a developmental period, it should come with a set of unique developmental tasks or milestones to reach.

Before you participate in this discussion board, please complete the following tasks:

1. Read and watch the content above on development in early adulthood.

2. Watch the videos above in which Meg Jay and Jeffrey Arnett talk about development in the 20’s.  Pay close attention to how Meg Jay describes the role of the 20’s in a person’s life. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vhhgI4tSMwc

 

In your initial post (DUE Thursday, 6/18 by 11:59PM):

1. Locate the discussion forum, “Week 5 Discussion: Emerging Adulthood“(see instructions for finding your group discussion board below).  Create a thread and in your initial post, answer the following questions: Given everything that you now know about early adulthood, what do you think is the most important developmental task or milestone for a person to accomplish in their 20’s?  Why is this important?  What long-term impact will it have?  What supports would help a young adult accomplish this task?   Be sure to link your responses back to the course material!  Your experiences are a valuable reference point, but your post must also reflect what you have learned in this course.  Posts with no reference to course content will lose points.

You must also provice at least two thoughtful, respectful responses to your peers (DUE Sunday, 6/21 by 11:59PM).  This is your opportunity to discuss, so there are not strict guidelines for what you must include in your response.  However, responses must ADD TO THE DISCUSSION.  “I agree!” or “Cool idea!” or “That’s dumb!” will not earn you points.  Things that may prompt discussion are comments that include ideas like the reasons for similarities/differences between posts, the potential real-world application of your classmates’ ideas, and links to other course content (including lectures and videos).  

Please remember that late posts will not earn any credit, so be sure to be mindful of the course deadlines and to make sure that your post showed up in the discussion and that it is in the correct forum.  This is your responsibility.

 

Here is some general information about discussion board requirements:

Each discussion consists of three posts as follows:

1. Your original post in response to the instructor’s thread/post. (Due Thursday)

2. Response posts to two of your peers. (Due Sunday)

GRADING

Your discussion participation is graded using the rubric below. This rubric also shows on your Group discussion board page. Don’t forget to use it to maximize your contribution!

 

Component	Unacceptable 0 Points	Emerging 4 – 6 Points	Good 7 – 8 Points	Excellent 9 – 10 Points
Original Post 10 points possible (Due Thursday)	No post within the allotted timeframe	Post is less than 100 words; argumentation is weak with scant or no course references; multiple typos and/or poor sentence structure	Post is between 100 and 149 words; argument is moderately articulated but course references are not strong; writing is not well constructed; some typos or awkward sentence structure (doesn’t look proof-read)	Post is at least 150 words; it reflects a thoughtful/ creative/ insightful argument; includes direct course reference; writing is coherent and organized with good grammatical structure
Component	Unacceptable 0 Points	Emerging 1 point per post	Good 2 points per post	Excellent 3 points per post
2 Peer Responses  3 points possible per response  (Due Sunday)	No responses posted; post is rude or inappropriate	Post is less than 30 words; post is either merely supportive or merely antagonistic without support for agreement or disagreement	Post is between 30 – 49 words; response is not well constructed, i.e., “totally, I agree” without supporting reasons; repeats original post instead of building upon it	YOU MUST ADD SOMETHING TO THE DISCUSSION (not repeat); Post is at least 50 words; it is respectful and thoughtful; it builds on the original post; does NOT say the same thing the posts right above it say; it’s well written