Epidemiology Paper

profileKKmp
ApplyRubricsWeek2.docx

Apply Rubrics

Epidemiology Paper Part One: Descriptive Method 

 

1 Unsatisfactory 0.00%

2 Less Than Satisfactory 74.00%

3 Satisfactory 79.00%

4 Good 87.00%

5 Excellent 100.00%

70.0 %Content

 

20.0 %Demonstrates an Understanding of Descriptive Epidemiology and Its Relationship to Nursing Science and Public Health Nursing

Paper does not demonstrate an understanding of descriptive epidemiology or its relationship to nursing science and public health nursing.

Paper shows a vague understanding of descriptive epidemiology, but does not demonstrate an understanding of the relationship to nursing science and public health nursing.

Paper illustrates a general understanding of descriptive epidemiology, and shows a general relationship to nursing science and public health nursing, but lacks a clear understanding of data collection, conditions, or distribution and determinants in relationship to disease in populations.

Paper illustrates a theoretical understanding of descriptive epidemiology through an accurate discussion of distribution and disease determinants in populations. Paper demonstrates the functional relationship between descriptive epidemiology and nursing science and public health nursing.

Paper illustrates a theoretical and conceptual understanding of descriptive epidemiology and offers insight into using specific conditions (outcomes of exposure, person, place, etc.) to identify specific patterns. Paper shows the significant relationship between descriptive epidemiology and contemporary nursing science and public health nursing.

20.0 %Uses Contemporary Theories, Concepts, and Examples That Demonstrate an Ability to Identify, Analyze, and Apply Descriptive Epidemiology

Paper does not use contemporary theories, concepts, or examples as support or in the analysis of the paper.

Paper uses some aspects of contemporary theories and concepts throughout the paper, but no relevant examples are used. Overall, the concepts and theories used are incomplete or inaccurate and do not support the analysis or application of descriptive epidemiology.

Paper uses contemporary theories and concepts throughout the paper, and general examples are used for support. Overall, the concepts and theories used are very general and offer only minor support of the analysis or application of descriptive epidemiology presented in the paper.

Paper uses contemporary theories and concepts throughout the paper. Accurate and strong examples are used for support. Overall, the concepts and theories provide support of the analysis and application of descriptive epidemiology presented in the paper.

Paper uses contemporary theories and concepts throughout the paper. Accurate and strong examples are used for support. Overall, the concepts and theories provide support of the analysis and application of descriptive epidemiology presented in the paper.

20.0 %Demonstrates Knowledge of Health Disparities and the Variables Contributing to Health Disparity or At-Risk Populations

Paper does not demonstrate knowledge of health disparities, or of the variables contributing to health disparity or at-risk populations.

Paper demonstrates a rudimentary knowledge of the concept of health disparities, but does not demonstrate knowledge of the dimensions of disparity in a realistic setting, or of the variables contributing to the disparity or at-risk populations.

Paper demonstrates general knowledge of the dimensions of health disparities that occur in a realistic setting and identifies some general variables contributing to the disparity and the at-risk populations.

Paper demonstrates knowledge of the dimensions of health disparities that occur in a realistic setting and identifies specific variables contributing to health disparities and at-risk populations.

Paper demonstrates keen knowledge and unbiased insight pertaining to the dimensions of health disparities that occur in a realistic setting. Paper identifies significant variables from a broad spectrum that contribute to health disparities and at-risk populations.

10.0 %Six to Eight Additional Scholarly Research Sources With In-Text Citations

None of the required elements (minimum of six topic-related scholarly research sources and six in-text citations) are present.

Not all required elements are present. One or more elements are missing and/or included sources are not scholarly research or topic-related.

All required elements are present. Scholarly research sources are topic-related, but the source and quality of one or more references is questionable.

All required elements are present. Scholarly research sources are topic-related and obtained from reputable, professional sources.

All required elements are present. Scholarly research sources are topic-related, and obtained from highly respected, professional, original sources.

20.0 %Organization and Effectiveness

 

7.0 %Thesis Development and Purpose

Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.

Thesis and/or main claim are insufficiently developed and/or vague; purpose is not clear.

Thesis and/or main claim are apparent and appropriate to purpose.

Thesis and/or main claim are clear and forecast the development of the paper. It is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.

Thesis and/or main claim are comprehensive. The essence of the paper is contained within the thesis. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.

8.0 %Argument Logic and Construction

Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.

Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.

Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.

Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.

Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.

5.0 %Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are used.

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) and/or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.

Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.

Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.

Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.

10.0 %Format

 

5.0 %Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)

Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.

Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent.

Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.

Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style.

All format elements are correct.

5.0 %Research Citations (in-text citations for paraphrasing and direct quotes, and reference page listing and formatting, as appropriate to assignment and style)

No reference page is included. No citations are used.

Reference page is present. Citations are inconsistently used.

Reference page is included and lists sources used in the paper. Sources are appropriately documented, although some errors may be present.

Reference page is present and fully inclusive of all cited sources. Documentation is appropriate and citation style is usually correct.

In-text citations and a reference page are complete and correct. The documentation of cited sources is free of error.

100 %Total Weightage