Revision 2

Gracenana
DNPProjectI-Section2Rubric2.pdf

DNP Project I: Section 2 Proposal

Completion of this assignment will result in a contribution to the final DNP project proposal. During designated weeks, sections of the project will be submitted in their final form. The student will receive feedback up to a total of 2 times for each section prior to final submission of that section. If the submitted work does not require further revision after the first or second submission, these attempts will be graded, respectively. On the third submission of each section, it will be considered a final submission and will be graded accordingly based on the following rubric. In order to progress to DNP Project II, the academic mentor and course instructor must approve the final submission of the DNP project proposal at the end of the term, and the student must achieve a passing grade (minimum 83%) in DNP Project I.

Criterion Excellent (100-93%)

Proficient (92- 87%)

Meets Standards (86-83%)

Needs Improvement (82-75%)

Unsatisfactory (75% or less)

Search methods (60 points)

Clear and concise description of search methods utilized for review of literature. Search terms, articles available and articles selected clearly explained. Criteria of inclusion and exclusion of studies in the literature review clearly justified.

Search methods are explored at a proficient level but content development requires further revision to meet excellent standards.

Search methods meet minimum passing standards but requires further revision in a few areas to meet excellent standards.

Search methods needs improvement as content development requires further revision in most areas.

Poorly developed search methods or not developed at all.

Review Synthesis (60 points)

Synthesis of pertinent available literature is well developed and accurate. A brief description of review

Synthesis of available literature is formed at a proficient level but content

Synthesis of available literature meets minimum passing standards but

Synthesis of available literature needs improvement as content development

Poorly developed Synthesis of available literature or not developed at all.

approach includes discussion of types of studies reviewed and chosen, and themes identified. The project topic is systematically described in the context of broader relevant scholarly literature. Best practice standard as it relates to current evidence around the project problem is distinguished and the gap in quality is clearly delineated.

development requires further revision to meet excellent standards.

requires further revision in a few areas to meet excellent standards.

requires further revision in most areas.

Literature Theme Development (60 points)

Comprehensive and accurate theme identification developed from currently available, pertinent literature. Discussion includes

Literature theme development is explored at a proficient level but content development requires further

Literature theme development meets minimum passing standards but

Literature theme development needs improvement as content development

Poorly developed literature theme development or not developed at all.

relevant background, what is currently understood, discussion of national guidelines relevant to the quality gap, and contextual information describing any suboptimal care that negatively impacts quality at the project site.

revision to meet excellent standards.

requires further revision in a few areas to meet excellent standards.

requires further revision in most areas.

Review of Study Methods (60 points)

Main methods and techniques in relevant scholarly literature are clearly identified. This can be done in one section or it can be explained with each study explored.

Review of study methods are explored at a proficient level but content development requires further revision to meet excellent standards.

Review of study methods meets minimum passing standards but requires further revision in a few areas to meet excellent standards.

Review of study methods needs improvement as content development requires further revision in most areas.

Poorly developed review of study methods or not developed at all.

Organization (20 points)

Concise and well

organized writing.

Ideas are described

clearly and are

presented in a logical

sequence.

Clear organization of

main points.

Ideas are described

clearly and are

presented in a logical

sequence.

Clear organization of

main points but some

areas may stray from

logical sequence.

Writing lacks logical

organization.

Poorly organized, ideas

are not developed

adequately in the paper

and lack unity.

Does not meet basic writing standards of organization.

Ideas and arguments

are fully supported and

developed through

evidence.

Headings are used

appropriately to

indicate new content

areas.

Support and

development of ideas is

present but one or

more areas lack

evidence.

Headings are used

appropriately to

indicate new content

areas.

Paragraph structure is

appropriate with logical

transitions.

Support of ideas

present but is not

consistent.

Use of headings is not

consistent.

Minimal paragraph

structure issues.

Paragraphs headings

are not used

appropriately.

Major paragraph

structure issues.

Writing Style (30 points)

Sentence structure

clear, with smooth

transitions, correct

grammar and

punctuation. No

spelling errors. Uses

standard English

language.

Word choice is correct,

precise and

unambiguous.

Overall sentence

structure is clear, with

smooth transitions

Less than 3 grammar,

punctuation or spelling

errors.

Introduction has a clear

statement addressing

the topic.

Overall sentence

structure is clear, with

smooth transitions

Less than 5 grammar,

punctuation or spelling

errors.

Introduction has a clear

statement addressing

the topic.

Spelling, punctuation,

and grammatical errors

create distraction,

making reading difficult;

fragments, comma

splices, run-ons evident.

Errors are frequent.

Clear bias is evident.

Writing style does not meet basic standards for English language.

Introduction has a clear

statement addressing

the topic.

Body paragraphs have

topic sentences that are

logical and fully

developed.

Paragraph structure is

appropriate with logical

transitions.

Writing does not reveal

discriminatory bias.

Unity of the paper

clearly leads the reader

to the conclusion and

stirs thought regarding

the topic.

Body paragraphs have

topic sentences that are

logical and fully

developed.

Paragraph structure is

appropriate with logical

transitions.

Writing does not reveal

discriminatory bias.

Unity of the paper

clearly leads the reader

to the conclusion.

Minimal paragraph

structure issues.

Transitions evident but

not used throughout

Writing does not reveal

discriminatory bias.

Ideas lack unity

APA (35 points)

References are current

and are cited

appropriately

throughout paper.

References are current

and are cited

appropriately

throughout paper.

References are current

and are cited

appropriately

throughout paper.

References are not

current and/ or are not

appropriately cited.

APA standards grossly not met.

Paper is formatted per

APA style guide with no

APA errors.

Paper is formatted per

APA style guide with

less than 3 APA errors.

Paper is formatted per

APA style guide with

less than 5 APA errors.

Paper is not consistent

with APA formatting

guide.

There is evidence of

plagiarism. (Please

refer to plagiarism

policy, points

deducted for first

offense. Further

action as dictated per

policy.)

Total points 325