| Course Code | Class Code | Assignment Title | Total Points |
| DNP-820 | DNP-820-O501 | Critical Appraisal of Practice Guidelines | 103.0 |
| Criteria | Percentage | Unsatisfactory (0.00%) | Less Than Satisfactory (74.00%) | Satisfactory (79.00%) | Good (87.00%) | Excellent (100.00%) | Comments | Points Earned |
| Content | 70.0% |
| Discuss a practice guideline in which you might have questioned the recommendations. | 20.0% | Discussion of the practice is not presented. | Discussion of the practice is presented but incomplete. | Discussion of the practice is presented but at a cursory level. | Discussion of the practice is clearly presented and convincing. Sources cited are from current scholarly but some outdated sources. | Discussion of the practice is clearly presented and perceptive. Sources cited are from current scholarly sources. |
| Create a table for each domain (similar to the one shown in the manual) and add domain scores and an overall guideline assessment. | 25.0% | A table with each domain is not presented. | A table with each domain is presented but incomplete. | A table with each domain is presented but at a cursory level. | A table with each domain is clearly presented. Scores are present for each domain and justification is beyond surface understanding. | A table with each domain is clearly presented. Scores are present for each domain and justification is insightful. |
| Create a table for the overall guideline assessment. | 25.0% | A table for the overall guideline assessment is not presented. | A table for the overall guideline assessment is presented but incomplete. | A table for the overall guideline assessment is presented but at a cursory level. | A table for the overall guideline assessment is clearly presented and convincing. | A table for the overall guideline assessment is clearly presented and perceptive. |
| Organization and Effectiveness | 20.0% |
| Thesis Development and Purpose | 7.0% | 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 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. |
| Argument Logic and Construction | 8.0% | 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 is present. All sources are authoritative. |
| Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) | 5.0% | 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), sentence structure, and/or word choice are present. | Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used. | Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used. | Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English. |
| Format | 10.0% |
| Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) | 5.0% | 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. |
| Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) | 5.0% | 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. |
| Total Weightage | 100% |
iabepdadm
DNP-820-Module3Rubric.xlsx
