Policy ana... assgnm

HSC510 Final Paper Rubric

A B C D F 0

Criteria 20 points 17 points 15 points 13 points 11 points 0 points

Describes a policy- relevant problem and background (MHS PO5)

Clearly and fully describes the problem, including background to include a detailed explanation of the symptoms, magnitude, and consequences of the problem. -Identifies and describes plausible policy-level intervention for problem including comprehensive summary of major interventions already attempted and their strengths and weaknesses. -Uses detail to build an insightful, clear, and complete picture of stakeholder perspective.

Describes the problem, including background information that summarizes the symptoms, magnitude, and consequences of the problem. - Summary of major interventions already attempted is clear and concise with strengths and weaknesses included however minor details are missing. - The perspectives held by stakeholders are described however minor details are missing that would have helped to build a clear and complete picture.

Defines the problem; background information provided is superficial and only includes minimal details to explain symptoms, magnitude, and consequences of the problem. -Summary of major interventions already attempted is clear however significant details are missing

-The perspectives held by the stakeholders are briefly described; the description includes irrelevant details and/or insufficient details necessary to build a clear and complete picture.

A policy-relevant problem is identified; however, there is little to no description provided. - Summary of major interventions already attempted related to the issue is unclear and not concise.

- The perspectives held

by the stakeholders are vaguely described and difficult to understand.

A problem is identified however it is not policy-related therefore inapplicable.

This portion of the assignment is not addressed/ Did not submit assignment/ Does not adhere to Academic Honesty Policy

25 points 21 points 19 points 16 points 13 points 0 points

Analyze policy-level interventions (MHS PO5)

Describes in-depth 4 or more policy alternatives. Description is detailed, comprehensive, and includes strengths and weaknesses of each alternative. -Clearly and fully describes evaluation criteria for policy alternatives including expected outcomes -Provides a comprehensive compare/contrast for implementing the various alternatives. -Clearly describes institutional capacity of implementation of policy alternatives.

2-3 descriptions of policy alternatives are provided with strengths and weaknesses included however minor details are missing.

-Describes evaluation criteria for alternatives with expected outcomes however minor points require further development. -Provides a compare & contrast for alternatives however is not in-depth and requires more development. - Basic description of institutional capacity of implementation of policy alternatives.

Describes fewer than 2 policy alternatives. Description is superficial and unclear; strengths are weaknesses are included however not for all policy alternatives discussed. -Evaluation criteria is described however expected outcomes are unclear and need additional information. -Compare/contrast is present for all policy alternatives however is superficial and vague. -- Description of institutional capacity of implementation alternatives is missing pertinent details.

Description of policy alternatives is not clear or concise; strengths and weaknesses are not included. -Evaluation criteria contains significant gaps; expected outcomes are missing. -Compare/contrast does not include all policy alternatives originally identified. - Description of institutional capacity of implementation alternatives is unclear.

Policy alternative is defined with no further detail. -Evaluation criteria does not fit with policy alternative defined. -Compare/contrast is not applicable to policy alternative identified. - Description of institutional capacity of implementation alternatives does not apply to policy alternative identified.

This portion of the assignment is not addressed/ Did not submit assignment/ Does not adhere to Academic Honesty Policy

30 points 26 points 23 points 20 points 15 points 0 points

Recommend alternative policy (MHS PO5)

Superiority of recommended alternative policy is clearly described and explained. -Strategies for implementing policy alternative are described in detail. -Evaluation plan to determine success of policy is clearly and concisely described.

Superiority of recommended alternative policy is described and explained; minor points need further development. -Strategies for implementing policy alternative are superficially described. -Evaluation plan to determine success of policy is explained however missing minor details.

Superiority of recommended alternative policy is described however no explanation included. -Strategies for implementing policy alternative are identified but unclear.

-Evaluation plan to determine success of policy is identified but has no explanation.

Superiority of recommended alternative policy is superficially described with no explanation. -Strategies for implementing policy alternative are not clearly identified.

-Evaluation plan to determine success of policy is not clearly identified.

Superiority of recommended alternative policy is not clearly described. -Strategies for implementing policy alternative are not applicable.

-Evaluation plan to determine success of policy does not apply.

This portion of the assignment is not addressed/ Did not submit assignment/ Does not adhere to Academic Honesty Policy

10 points 8 points 7 points 6 points 5 points 0 points

Sources & Evidence

Clearly applies scholarly, credible and relevant sources of evidence to develop ideas related to topic. Student clearly and consistently differentiates own thoughts from those of others at all times.

Applies scholarly, credible and relevant sources of evidence to develop ideas related to the topic. In general, student differentiates own thoughts from those of others.

In general, identifies credible and relevant sources of evidence. Student does not clearly differentiate own thoughts from those of others in several places.

Sources identified are relevant, but at least some are not credible. Student does not clearly differentiate own thoughts from those of others in several places.

If sources of evidence are identified sources are not credible. Student does not differentiate own thoughts from those of others in many places.

No sources used/ Did not submit assignment/ Does not adhere to Academic Honesty Policy

10 points 8 points 7 points 6 points 5 points 0 points

Syntax & Mechanics

Uses proper grammar, spelling, and punctuation. There are a few minor errors, which do not interfere with meaning.

Generally uses proper grammar, spelling, and punctuation. There are a few errors that interfere with meaning.

There are many grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with meaning.

There are major grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that make it extremely difficult to read and understand.

Uses proper grammar, spelling, and punctuation. There are a few minor errors, which do not interfere with meaning

Did not submit assignment/ Does not adhere to Academic Honesty Policy

5 points 3 points 1 point 0 points

APA Formatting

APA formatting, per assignment directions, is used correctly in all aspects of the paper.

APA formatting, per assignment directions, is used, there are a few minor formatting errors (e.g., minor errors in reference page, cover page title or paper number missing, etc.).

APA formatting is seldom used correctly.

Did not submit assignment/ Does not adhere to Academic Honesty Policy