Due Date
Submit your completed application by Sunday 11:59 p.m. MT of Week 3 as directed.
Requirements
1. The Descriptive Study Paper is worth 50 points and will be graded on use of citations, use of Standard English grammar, sentence structure, and overall organization based on the required components as summarized in the directions and grading criteria and rubric.
2. Create your exercise using Microsoft Word (a part of Microsoft Office), which is the required format for all Chamberlain University documents. You can tell that the document is saved as a MS Word document because it will end in .docx.
3. Follow the directions and grading criteria closely. Any questions about your assignment may be posted under the Q & A Forum.
4. The length of the exercise is to be no less than three pages and no greater than five pages, excluding title page and reference pages.
5. APA format is required with both a title page and reference page. Use the required components of the review as Level 1 headings (upper and lower case, centered, boldface):
Note: Introduction—Write an introduction but do not use "Introduction" as a heading in accordance with the rules put forth in the Publication manual of the American Psychological Association.
Preparing Your Descriptive Study Paper
For the purpose of this exercise:
Write a one- to two-page summary answering the following questions:
· What is meant by the term health disparities?
· What do you think could be done about health disparity from the societal and public health points of view?
· The prevalence of hypertension has remained essentially unchanged for nearly a decade.
In a one- to two-page paper, propose a descriptive epidemiologic study to explore the reasons for this phenomenon.
Post questions about this assignment to the Q & A Forum.
Rubric
Descriptive Study Paper Grading Rubric
|
Descriptive Study Paper Grading Rubric
|
|
Criteria
|
Ratings
|
Pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Introduction:
Introduces the purpose of the exercise—to gain an understanding of various concepts of epidemiology.
|
|
3.0 pts
Meets All Criteria
Short introduction related to the purpose of the paper.
|
2.0 pts
Meets Most Criteria
Partially addresses the purpose of the paper.
|
1.0 pts
Partially Meets Criteria
Minimal introduction of the purpose of the paper.
|
0.0 pts
Does Not Meet Criteria
No introduction of the purpose of the paper.
|
|
3.0 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Health Disparity:
Assesses what health disparities are.
|
|
9.0 pts
Meets All Criteria
Excellent assessment of what health disparities are.
|
7.0 pts
Meets Most Criteria
Partial assessment of what health disparities are.
|
6.0 pts
Partially Meets Criteria
Minimal assessment of what health disparities are.
|
0.0 pts
Does Not Meet Criteria
No assessment of what health disparities are.
|
|
9.0 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Points of View:
Speculates as to what could be done about health disparities from the societal and public health points of view.
|
|
9.0 pts
Meets All Criteria
Excellent speculation as to what could be done about health disparities from the societal and public health points of view.
|
7.0 pts
Meets Most Criteria
Partial speculation as to what could be done about health disparities from the societal and public health points of view.
|
6.0 pts
Partially Meets Criteria
Minimal speculation as to what could be done about health disparities from the societal and public health points of view.
|
0.0 pts
Does Not Meet Criteria
No speculation as to what could be done about health disparities from the societal and public health points of view.
|
|
9.0 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Descriptive Epidemiology:
Infers why the prevalence of hypertension has remained essentially unchanged for nearly a decade.
|
|
6.0 pts
Meets All Criteria
Excellent inference why the prevalence of hypertension has remained essentially unchanged for nearly a decade.
|
5.0 pts
Meets Most Criteria
Partial inference why the prevalence of hypertension has remained essentially unchanged for nearly a decade.
|
4.0 pts
Partially Meets Criteria
Minimal inference why the prevalence of hypertension has remained essentially unchanged for nearly a decade.
|
0.0 pts
Does Not Meet Criteria
No inference why the prevalence of hypertension has remained essentially unchanged for nearly a decade.
|
|
6.0 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Descriptive Epidemiology Study Recommendation
Proposes a descriptive epidemiologic study to explore the reasons for the prevalence of the hypertension phenomenon.
|
|
12.0 pts
Meets All Criteria
Excellent selection of a descriptive epidemiologic study to explore the reasons for the prevalence of the hypertension phenomenon
|
10.0 pts
Meets Most Criteria
Partial selection of a descriptive epidemiologic study to explore the reasons for the prevalence of the hypertension phenomenon
|
9.0 pts
Partially Meets Criteria
Minimal selection of a descriptive epidemiologic study to explore the reasons for the prevalence of the hypertension phenomenon
|
0.0 pts
Does Not Meet Criteria
No selection of a descriptive epidemiologic study to explore the reasons for the prevalence of the hypertension phenomenon
|
|
12.0 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Summary:
Provides a summation of thoughts and understanding of various concepts of epidemiology.
|
|
3.0 pts
Meets All Criteria
Excellent summation of the various concepts of epidemiology
|
2.0 pts
Meets Most Criteria
Brief summation of the various concepts of epidemiology
|
1.0 pts
Partially Meets Criteria
Minimal summation of the various concepts of epidemiology
|
0.0 pts
Does Not Meet Criteria
No summation of the various concepts of epidemiology
|
|
3.0 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Clarity of Writing:
Use of standard English grammar and sentence structure. No spelling errors or typographical errors. Organized around the required components using appropriate headers.
|
|
5.0 pts
Meets All Criteria
Excellent use of standard English showing original thought; no spelling or grammar errors; well organized with proper flow of meaning
|
4.0 pts
Meets Most Criteria
Some evidence of own expression and competent use of language; no more than three spelling or grammar errors; well-organized thoughts and concepts
|
3.0 pts
Partially Meets Criteria
Language needs development. Four spelling and/or grammar errors; poorly organized thoughts and concepts
|
0.0 pts
Does Not Meet Criteria
Language needs development. Five or more spelling and/or grammar errors; fails to have organized thoughts and concepts
|
|
5.0 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome APA Format:
All information taken from another source, even if summarized, must be appropriately cited in the manuscript and listed in the references using APA format. 1.Document setup 2.Title and reference pages Citations in the text and references
|
|
3.0 pts
Meets All Criteria
APA format correct with no errors
|
2.0 pts
Meets Most Criteria
One to two minor errors in APA format OR one or two citations are missing
|
1.0 pts
Partially Meets Criteria
APA formatting contains multiple errors (three or more) and/or several citations are missing
|
0.0 pts
Does Not Meet Criteria
APA formatting not present and citations are not included
|
|
3.0 pts
|
|
Total Points: 50.0
|