Assignment: Decision Tree for Neurological and Musculoskeletal Disorders
Catherine2
ASSIGNMENTRUBRICDETAILSFORNURS6521.htmlRubric Detail
Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric's layout.
Content
Name: NURS_6521_Week8_Assignment_Rubric
| Excellent | Good | Fair | Poor | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Briefly summarize the patient case study you were assigned, including each of the three decisions you took for the patient presented. Be specific. | Points: Points Range: 18 (18%) - 20 (20%) The response accurately and thoroughly summarizes in detail the patient case study assigned, including specific and complete details on each of the three decisions made for the patient presented. Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 16 (16%) - 17 (17%) The response accurately summarizes the patient case study assigned, including details on each of the three decisions made for the patient presented. Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 14 (14%) - 15 (15%) The response inaccurately or vaguely summarizes the patient case study assigned, including details on each of the three decisions made for the patient presented. Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) - 13 (13%) The response inaccurately and vaguely summarizes the patient case study assigned, including details on each of the three decisions made for the patient presented, or is missing. Feedback: |
| Based on the decisions you recommended for the patient case study, explain whether you believe the decisions provided were supported by the evidence-based literature. Be specific and provide examples. Be sure to support your response with evidence and references from outside resources. | Points: Points Range: 23 (23%) - 25 (25%) The response accurately and thoroughly explains in detail how the decisions recommended for the patient case study are supported by the evidence-based literature. The response includes specific and relevant outside reference examples that fully support the explanation provided. Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 20 (20%) - 22 (22%) The response accurately explains how the decisions recommended for the patient case study are supported by the evidence-based literature. The response includes relevant outside reference examples that lend support for the explanation provided that are accurate. Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 18 (18%) - 19 (19%) The response inaccurately or vaguely explains how the decisions recommended for the patient case study are supported by the evidence-based literature. The response includes inaccurate or vague outside reference examples that may or may not lend support for the explanation provided or are misaligned to the explanation provided. Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) - 17 (17%) The response inaccurately and vaguely explains how the decisions recommended for the patient case study are supported by the evidence-based literature, or is missing. The response includes inaccurate and vague outside reference examples that do not lend support for the explanation provided, or is missing. Feedback: |
| What were you hoping to achieve with the decisions you recommended for the patient case study you were assigned? Support your response with evidence and references from outside resources. | Points: Points Range: 18 (18%) - 20 (20%) The response accurately and thorough explains in detail what they were hoping to achieve with the decisions recommend for the patient case study assigned. The response includes specific and relevant outside reference examples that fully support the explanation provided. Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 16 (16%) - 17 (17%) The response accurately explains what they were hoping to achieve with the decisions recommended for the patient case study assigned. The response includes relevant outside reference examples that lend support for the explanation provided that are accurate. Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 14 (14%) - 15 (15%) The response inaccurately or vaguely explains what they were hoping to achieve with the decisions recommended for the patient case study assigned. The response includes inaccurate or vague outside reference examples that may or may not lend support for the explanation provided or are misaligned to the explanation provided. Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) - 13 (13%) The response inaccurately and vaguely explains what they were hoping to achieve with the decisions recommended for the patient case study assigned, or is missing. The response includes inaccurate and vague outside reference examples that do not lend support for the explanation provided, or is missing. Feedback: |
| Explain any difference between what you expected to achieve with each of the decisions and the results of the decisions in the exercise. Describe whether they were different. Be specific and provide examples. | Points: Points Range: 18 (18%) - 20 (20%) The response accurately and clearly explains in detail any differences between what they expected to achieve with each of the decisions and the results of the decisions in the exercise. The response provides specific, accurate, and relevant examples that fully support whether there were differences between the decisions made and the decisions available in the exercise. Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 16 (16%) - 17 (17%) The response accurately explains any differences between what they expected to achieve with each of the decisions and the results of the decisions in the exercise. The response provides accurate examples that support whether there were differences between the decisions made and the decisions available in the exercise. Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 14 (14%) - 15 (15%) The response inaccurately or vaguely explains any differences between what they expected to achieve with each of the decisions and the results of the decisions in the exercise. The response provides inaccurate or vague examples that may or may not support whether there were differences between the decisions made and the decisions available in the exercise. Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) - 13 (13%) vaguely explains in detail any differences between what they expected to achieve with each of the decisions and the results of the decisions in the exercise, or is missing. The response provides inaccurate and vague examples that do not support whether there were differences between the decisions made and the decisions available in the exercise, or is missing. Feedback: |
| Written Expression and Formatting - Paragraph Development and Organization: Paragraphs make clear points that support well developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused--neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. | Points: Points Range: 5 (5%) - 5 (5%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity. Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 4 (4%) - 4 (4%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time. Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 3.5 (3.5%) - 3.5 (3.5%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%–79% of the time. Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) - 3 (3%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity less than 60% of the time. Feedback: |
| Written Expression and Formatting - English writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation | Points: Points Range: 5 (5%) - 5 (5%) Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 4 (4%) - 4 (4%) Contains a few (1–2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 3.5 (3.5%) - 3.5 (3.5%) Contains several (3–4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) - 3 (3%) Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding Feedback: |
| Written Expression and Formatting - The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, running head, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list. | Points: Points Range: 5 (5%) - 5 (5%) Uses correct APA format with no errors Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 4 (4%) - 4 (4%) Contains a few (1–2) APA format errors Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 3.5 (3.5%) - 3.5 (3.5%) Contains several (3–4) APA format errors Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) - 3 (3%) Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors Feedback: |
Briefly summarize the patient case study you were assigned, including each of the three decisions you took for the patient presented. Be specific.--
Levels of Achievement: Excellent 18 (18%) - 20 (20%) The response accurately and thoroughly summarizes in detail the patient case study assigned, including specific and complete details on each of the three decisions made for the patient presented. Good 16 (16%) - 17 (17%) The response accurately summarizes the patient case study assigned, including details on each of the three decisions made for the patient presented. Fair 14 (14%) - 15 (15%) The response inaccurately or vaguely summarizes the patient case study assigned, including details on each of the three decisions made for the patient presented. Poor 0 (0%) - 13 (13%) The response inaccurately and vaguely summarizes the patient case study assigned, including details on each of the three decisions made for the patient presented, or is missing. Feedback:Based on the decisions you recommended for the patient case study, explain whether you believe the decisions provided were supported by the evidence-based literature. Be specific and provide examples. Be sure to support your response with evidence and references from outside resources.--
Levels of Achievement: Excellent 23 (23%) - 25 (25%) The response accurately and thoroughly explains in detail how the decisions recommended for the patient case study are supported by the evidence-based literature. The response includes specific and relevant outside reference examples that fully support the explanation provided. Good 20 (20%) - 22 (22%) The response accurately explains how the decisions recommended for the patient case study are supported by the evidence-based literature. The response includes relevant outside reference examples that lend support for the explanation provided that are accurate. Fair 18 (18%) - 19 (19%) The response inaccurately or vaguely explains how the decisions recommended for the patient case study are supported by the evidence-based literature. The response includes inaccurate or vague outside reference examples that may or may not lend support for the explanation provided or are misaligned to the explanation provided. Poor 0 (0%) - 17 (17%) The response inaccurately and vaguely explains how the decisions recommended for the patient case study are supported by the evidence-based literature, or is missing. The response includes inaccurate and vague outside reference examples that do not lend support for the explanation provided, or is missing. Feedback:What were you hoping to achieve with the decisions you recommended for the patient case study you were assigned? Support your response with evidence and references from outside resources.--
Levels of Achievement: Excellent 18 (18%) - 20 (20%) The response accurately and thorough explains in detail what they were hoping to achieve with the decisions recommend for the patient case study assigned. The response includes specific and relevant outside reference examples that fully support the explanation provided. Good 16 (16%) - 17 (17%) The response accurately explains what they were hoping to achieve with the decisions recommended for the patient case study assigned. The response includes relevant outside reference examples that lend support for the explanation provided that are accurate. Fair 14 (14%) - 15 (15%) The response inaccurately or vaguely explains what they were hoping to achieve with the decisions recommended for the patient case study assigned. The response includes inaccurate or vague outside reference examples that may or may not lend support for the explanation provided or are misaligned to the explanation provided. Poor 0 (0%) - 13 (13%) The response inaccurately and vaguely explains what they were hoping to achieve with the decisions recommended for the patient case study assigned, or is missing. The response includes inaccurate and vague outside reference examples that do not lend support for the explanation provided, or is missing. Feedback:Explain any difference between what you expected to achieve with each of the decisions and the results of the decisions in the exercise. Describe whether they were different. Be specific and provide examples.--
Levels of Achievement: Excellent 18 (18%) - 20 (20%) The response accurately and clearly explains in detail any differences between what they expected to achieve with each of the decisions and the results of the decisions in the exercise. The response provides specific, accurate, and relevant examples that fully support whether there were differences between the decisions made and the decisions available in the exercise. Good 16 (16%) - 17 (17%) The response accurately explains any differences between what they expected to achieve with each of the decisions and the results of the decisions in the exercise. The response provides accurate examples that support whether there were differences between the decisions made and the decisions available in the exercise. Fair 14 (14%) - 15 (15%) The response inaccurately or vaguely explains any differences between what they expected to achieve with each of the decisions and the results of the decisions in the exercise. The response provides inaccurate or vague examples that may or may not support whether there were differences between the decisions made and the decisions available in the exercise. Poor 0 (0%) - 13 (13%) vaguely explains in detail any differences between what they expected to achieve with each of the decisions and the results of the decisions in the exercise, or is missing. The response provides inaccurate and vague examples that do not support whether there were differences between the decisions made and the decisions available in the exercise, or is missing. Feedback:Written Expression and Formatting - Paragraph Development and Organization: Paragraphs make clear points that support well developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused--neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance.--
Levels of Achievement: Excellent 5 (5%) - 5 (5%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity. Good 4 (4%) - 4 (4%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time. Fair 3.5 (3.5%) - 3.5 (3.5%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%–79% of the time. Poor 0 (0%) - 3 (3%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity less than 60% of the time. Feedback:Written Expression and Formatting - English writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation--
Levels of Achievement: Excellent 5 (5%) - 5 (5%) Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors Good 4 (4%) - 4 (4%) Contains a few (1–2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors Fair 3.5 (3.5%) - 3.5 (3.5%) Contains several (3–4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors Poor 0 (0%) - 3 (3%) Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding Feedback:Written Expression and Formatting - The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, running head, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list.--
Levels of Achievement: Excellent 5 (5%) - 5 (5%) Uses correct APA format with no errors Good 4 (4%) - 4 (4%) Contains a few (1–2) APA format errors Fair 3.5 (3.5%) - 3.5 (3.5%) Contains several (3–4) APA format errors Poor 0 (0%) - 3 (3%) Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors Feedback:| Total Points: 100 |
|---|
Name: NURS_6521_Week8_Assignment_Rubric
