International HRM Group Discussion Team 3: Participating Team Members: 1. John Smith 2. Emily Johnson Non-Participating Team Members: 1. Sarah Davis 2. Michael Brown First Website

This is the link to the source that the assignment should be in reference of :    https://eapm.org
International HRM Group Discussion
Students,
This term, this assignment must be completed with your Group.
Please visit the International HRM Web-based Resources page within Canvas.
With your team (or individually – see above to verify how the discussion is assigned this term), surf as many of the links as you like.
Select a minimum of two and then have only one team member hit reply to this discussion.
This will enable you to type directly into the discussion (although you should always type in Word first then run spell/grammar/punctuation/syntax checks first, then copy and paste into the reply post).
Do not upload a file. Doing so will warrant an irreversible zero for you (and your team if this is a team project this term).
Write your team number at the top of your post. Follow it with your participating team member names. Then write the names of any non-participating team member names, unfortunately they will have earned an irreversible zero, per the syllabus. No exceptions, no extensions, this is a group project, group activities do not qualify for makeups.
Begin an enumerated Header with First Website, then write 3 bullet points on what you learned from the first website you chose to discuss.
Begin an enumerated Header with Second Website, then write 3 bullet points about what you learned from the second website you chose to discuss.
Regarding what to type in the bullet points:
Being brief here and not showing in-depth research into each site you chose will warrant an “incomplete”. Sentences can be as long as you deem necessary, but should not be so short that they do not show proof of understanding/insight/knowledge (run-on sentences are not recommended). You may type paragraphs in each bullet.
Think of them as mini-essays that help you make a clear, focused point. Though there is no word length requirement, it would probably take 200-300 words to make a clear and compelling explanation of what you learned.
Just be sure not to have less than three bullets per website you reference.
Note: Please remember that you will complete items 1-7 within the same discussion reply with your group, as a post, not as a file upload or an external link. Uploading a file will likewise warrant a zero for the team. 
Entering separate (or more than one) replies (by different members of the same team or by the same team member) will warrant a zero for the team, (as instructor has no way of knowing which reply your team wishes to be graded as the final submission), per the syllabus.
When the grade for the assignment is set to “complete/incomplete”, there will be no partial credit.
Work with your team (during terms when this assignment is a group project), be communicative, participative and know that if they work ahead of schedule and without you, your zero will remain irreversible, as this assignment opens the first day of the term.
Rubric:
The discussion post will be graded according to the following rubric (some terms may use this rubric to base the grade of “complete” or “incomplete” – in those cases, there is no partial credit):
1-2 = a simple and unoriginal point that simply restates or rewords someone else’s point.
3-5 = a somewhat original take on an aspect or application of the material.
6-8 = an original point that presents a new angle on the material and is competently tied to the text material.
9-10 = a very original point that also reflects an advanced understanding of the material, contains no grammatical/punctuation/spelling mistakes as well as is competently tied to the text material and contains at least one link to an outside source, like an article, a post, or otherwise accredited and verifiable (not our lectures, PowerPoints or our textbook).