Theory Paper Big Tank ONLY
nellamas
GradingRubricforTheoryDescriptionEvaluationPaper_11120182.docx
1
N 5327: Exploration of Science and Theories for Nursing
Grading Rubric for Description & Evaluation of Theory Paper
|
Criteria |
Levels of Achievement |
||||
|
|
Excellent/ Outstanding 90-100% |
Above Average 80-89% |
Average/ Acceptable 70-79% |
Below Average/ Not Acceptable 60-69% |
Failing <60% |
|
Introduction (0 points total) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
· Identification of concept of interest · Discussion of reason for choosing concept · Identification of theory that utilizes concept · Identification of what to expect in paper. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Theory Description (30 points total) Description of theory using original source or as close to the original source as possible. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
· Brief discussion of theory origins, scope/level of theory and how the theory relates to the concept of interest (8 pts) |
Clear, correct discussion of origins of theory, scope/level of theory, and how the theory relates to the concept of interest (8 pts) |
Limited discussion of origins of theory, scope/level of theory, and how the theory relates to the concept of interest (7 pts) |
Identified origins of theory, scope/level of theory, and how the theory relates to the concept of interest with minimal discussion in 1-2 areas (6 pts) |
Identified origins of theory, scope/level of theory, and how the theory relates to the concept of interest incorrectly (5 pts) |
Origins of theory, scope/level of theory, and how the theory relates to the concept of interest not discussed or poorly discussed (0 pts) |
|
· Identification of major theory concepts (minimum of 3 concepts) (6 pts) |
Correctly identifies all major concepts (6 pts) |
Identifies some (50- 75%) of major concepts (5 pts) |
Identifies few (25-50%) of major concepts (4.5 pts) |
Incorrectly identified concepts (4 pts) |
Concepts not identified (0 pts) |
|
· Brief discussion of relationships among main concepts (propositions) within the theory (6 pts) |
Clear, correct discussion of relationships (6 pts) |
Limited discussion of all relationships (5 pts) |
Limited discussion of some relationships (4.5 pts) |
Incorrectly identified relationships (4 pts) |
Relationships not discussed (0 pts) |
|
· Theoretical definitions of two concepts. One definition must be that of the concept of interest. (6 pts) |
Correctly defined two concepts (6 pts) |
Correctly defined one of two concepts (5 pts) |
Incorrectly defined both concepts (4.5 pts) |
Incorrectly defined only one concept (4 pts) |
No theoretical definitions (0 pts) |
|
· Use of original sources (or as close as possible) to describe theory (4 pts) |
Used 5 or more sources, with one original source (4 pts) |
Used more than 4 sources, one source close to original (3.5 pts) |
Used more than 3 sources, one source close to original (3 pts) |
Textbooks were only source (2.5 pts) |
No sources used (0 pts) |
|
Application to Research (20 points total) Discussion of use of the theory by researchers in two published, original sources as a framework to support their research. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Research Study #1 (10 points) |
|
||||
|
· Brief discussion of purpose of the study (2 pts) |
Clear, correct discussion of purpose (2 pts) |
Limited discussion of purpose (1.75 pts) |
Identified purpose without discussion (1.5 pts) |
Identified purpose incorrectly (1 pt) |
No purpose identified (0 pts) |
|
· Brief discussion of how the concept of interest was used in their study (4 pts) |
Clear, correct discussion of use of concept (4 pts) |
Correct, limited discussion (3.5 pts) |
Identified use without discussion (3 pts) |
Incorrect identification of use of concept (2.5 pts) |
No discussion of concept use (0 pts) |
|
· Brief discussion of how researchers operationally defined the concept of interest (4 pts) |
Clear, correct discussion operational definition (4 pts) |
Correct, limited discussion of operational definition (3.5 pts) |
Identified definition without discussion (3 pts) |
Incorrect operational definition (2.5 pts) |
No operational definition (0 pts) |
|
Research Study #2 (10 points) |
|
||||
|
· Brief discussion of purpose of the study (2 pts) |
Clear, correct discussion of purpose (2 pts) |
Limited discussion of purpose (1.75 pts) |
Identified purpose without discussion (1.5 pts) |
Identified purpose incorrectly (1 pt) |
No purpose identified (0 pts) |
|
· Brief discussion of how the concept of interest was used in their study (4 pts) |
Clear, correct discussion of use of concept (4 pts) |
Correct, limited discussion (3.5 pts) |
Identified use without discussion (3 pts) |
Incorrect identification of use of concept (2.5 pts) |
No discussion of concept use (0 pts) |
|
· Brief discussion of how researchers operationally defined the concept of interest (4 pts) |
Clear, correct discussion operational definition (4 pts) |
Correct, limited discussion of operational definition (3.5 pts) |
Identified definition without discussion (3 pts) |
Incorrect operational definition (2.5 pts) |
No operational definition (0 pts) |
|
Application to Practice (20 points total) Discussion of how the theory might be used to support nursing practice (clinical, education, or administration). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
· Brief discussion of purpose of practice application (5 pts) |
Clear, correct discussion (5 pts) |
Correct, limited discussion (4 pts) |
Identified purpose without discussion (3.5 pts) |
Purpose does not fit with theory (3 pts) |
No purpose identified (0 pts) |
|
· Brief discussion of how concept of interest might be operationally defined in practice (5 pts) |
Clear, correct discussion operational definition (5 pts) |
Correct, limited discussion of operational definition (4 pts) |
Identified definition without discussion (3.5 pts) |
Incorrect operational definition (3 pts) |
No operational definition (0 pts) |
|
· Example of how theoretical and operational definitions of concept of interest might be used in your future practice or research (5 pts) |
Clear, correct discussion of use of theoretical and operational definitions of concept (5 pts) |
Correct, limited discussion of use of definitions (4 pts) |
Correct discussion of use of theoretical or conceptual definition (not both) (3.5 pts) |
Incorrect discussion of use of definitions (3 pts) |
No discussion of use of definitions (0 pts) |
|
· Identification of potential practice question based on the propositions of the theory (5 pts) |
Clearly stated practice question congruent with theory proposition (5 pts) |
Vague practice question congruent with proposition (4 pts) |
Practice question with limited fit with proposition (3.5 pts) |
Practice question with no fit with proposition (3 pts) |
No practice question (0 pts) |
|
Theory Evaluation (20 points total) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
· Brief discussion of whether/how the theory appears to be accurate/valid (based on empirical testing of theory) (4 pts) |
Clear, correct discussion (4 pts) |
Correct, limited discussion (3.5 pts) |
Stated without discussion (3 pts) |
Incorrect discussion (2.5 pts) |
No discussion of accuracy/validity (0 pts) |
|
· Brief discussion of generalizability of the theory (3 pts) |
Clear, correct discussion (3 pts) |
Correct, limited discussion (2.5 pts) |
Stated without discussion (2 pts) |
Incorrect discussion (1.5 pts) |
No discussion (0 pts) |
|
· Summary of strengths and weaknesses of the theory (4 pts) |
Clear, correct summary (4 pts) |
Correct, limited summary (3.5 pts) |
Stated without summary (3 pts) |
Incorrect identification (2.5 pts) |
No identification (0 pts) |
|
· Brief discussion of whether/how the theory is congruent with current nursing standards and current nursing interventions or therapeutics (3 pts) |
Clear, correct discussion (3.0 pts) |
Correct, limited discussion (2.5 pts) |
Stated without discussion (2 pts) |
Incorrect discussion (1.5 pts) |
No discussion (0 pts) |
|
· Brief explanation of whether/how the theory is relevant socially and cross-culturally (3 pts) |
Clear, correct explanation (3.0 pts) |
Correct, limited explanation (2.5 pts) |
Stated without explanation (2 pts) |
Incorrect explanation (1.5 pts) |
No explanation (0 pts) |
|
· Brief description of how the theory might contribute to the discipline of nursing (3 pts) |
Clear, correct description (3.0 pts) |
Correct, limited description (2.5) |
Stated without discussion (2) |
Incorrect description (1.5) |
No description (0 pts) |
|
Summary |
|
|
|
|
|
|
APA Style & Format (10 points total) · Style includes: Professional and orderly presentation of ideas (precision and clarity). Grammar, spelling and punctuation. Minimal use of direct quotes (1-2 max.) · Format includes: Proper use of title page (using specified format), spacing, font, margins, and headings. Appropriate citation of sources in text and reference list. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
· Up to 0.5 points will be deducted for each type of grammar, spelling, punctuation, or format error. |
0-2 types of errors (9-10 pts) |
3-4 types of errors (8 pts) |
5-6 types of errors (7 pts) |
7-8 types of errors (6 pts) |
> 8 types of errors (5 or less pts) |
