Assignment 5-1

1 Unsatisfactory 0.00%

2 Less than Satisfactory 65.00%

3 Satisfactory 75.00%

4 Good 85.00%

5 Excellent 100.00%

60.0 %Content

30.0 %Submission of Final Evidence-Based Practice Proposal Based on Papers Presented Throughout the Course

Student does not attach previous papers developed into a complete proposal.

Proposal does not include all of the previous papers or those included are not corrected versions, or focus of the proposal has been somewhat changed from the original focus. Transitions between sections of the proposal are mostly vague or incomplete.

Student presents a basic proposal that includes all previous papers, including changes as indicated. Student makes basic, logical transitions to connect the ideas between the papers that contribute to flow.

Student presents a well-developed proposal that includes all previous papers, including changes as indicated. Student makes clear, logical transitions to connect the ideas between the papers that contribute to understandability.

Student presents a well-developed proposal that includes all previous papers and changes as indicated. Student makes clear, logical transitions to connect the ideas between the papers that contribute to an insightful, scholarly proposal.

25.0 %Relevancy of Problem/Solution to Patient Care or Quality of Practice

Problem/Solution is poorly or not described; no relevance to patient-care or quality of practice given; no correlated references. Subject knowledge is not demonstrated.

Problem/Solution is presented such that the reader cannot clearly see the correlation between the problem and a solution with potential for impact on the problem; is vague or incomplete. Solution does not seem to be supported by the evidence that was previously submitted and contains vague relevance to patient-care or quality of service. Subject knowledge is unclear and/or inconsistent.

Submission presents a basic solution such that the reader can see its correlation to the problem and how it might have the proposed impact. Solution is supported by the previously submitted evidence and references; is basically relevant to patient-care or quality of service. Some subject knowledge is evident.

Submission presents a solution such that the reader clearly understands how it will likely have a positive impact. Solution is supported by the previously submitted evidence as well as with references, examples, and explanations. Submission demonstrates clear relevancy to patient-care or quality of service. Subject knowledge appears to be good.

Solution is presented such that the reader is convinced it is the best choice and will have the greatest impact. Solution is supported by the previously submitted evidence as well as references, examples, explanations, and personal insight. Relevancy to patient care or quality of service is very well outlined. Solution demonstrates thorough subject knowledge and understanding.

5.0 %Research Sources (Sources are appropriate, relevant, etc. Also, sources meet assignment quantity and type specifications, including evidence-based resources.)

Sources are not used or cited as required in the assignment instructions. Uses noncredible sources.

Source relevance is vague or inconsistent. Does not include evidenced-based resources.

Source relevance is mostly applicable and appropriate. Includes references from evidence-based resources.

Source relevance is applicable and appropriate in all instances. Includes references from evidence-based resources.

Source relevance is applicable and appropriate in all instances as well as sparking interest in the reader to pursue further investigation. Includes references from evidence-based resources.

30.0 %Organization and Effectiveness

10.0 %Thesis Development and Purpose

Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.

Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.

Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.

Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.

Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.

10.0 %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 progression. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.

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

10.0 %Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

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

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

Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they 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 %Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)

Sources are not documented.

Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.

Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.

100 %Total Weightage