HEALTH CARE TIMELINE

1 Unsatisfactory 59.00%

2 Less Than Satisfactory 65.00%

3 Satisfactory 75.00%

4 Good  85.00%

5 Excellent  100.00%

70.0 %Content

35.0 %Current And Significant Dates Added To Timeline from 1988 Onward

Not included.

Current and significant dates are incorporated into the timeline from 1988 onward, but the information provided is incomplete, inaccurate, or otherwise deficient.

Current and significant dates are incorporated into the timeline from 1988 onward, but minimal detail or support is provided for one or more components.

Current and significant dates are incorporated into the timeline from 1988 onward in full. The submission provides appropriate support.

Current and significant dates are incorporated into the timeline from 1988 onward comprehensively. Level of detail is appropriate.

35.0 %Description For Each Significant Date And Event Added To The Timeline

Not included.

A description for each significant date and event added to the timeline is present, but the information provided is incomplete, inaccurate, or otherwise deficient.

A description for each significant date and event added to the timeline is present, but minimal detail or support is provided for one or more components.

A description for each significant date and event added to the timeline is present in full. The submission provides appropriate support.

A description for each significant date and event added to the timeline is present comprehensively. Level of detail is appropriate.

20.0 %Organization and Effectiveness

7.0 %Theme Development and Purpose

Submission lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.

Submission is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.

Theme of the submission is apparent and appropriate to purpose.

Theme of the submission is clear, descriptive and appropriate to the purpose.

Submission is comprehensive and the purpose and all elements are clear and thorough.

8.0 %Argument Logic and Construction

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 progression. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.

Clear and convincing argument presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.

5.0 %Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.

Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.

Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.

Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.

10.0 %Format

5.0 %Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)

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.

5.0 %Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)

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.

100 %Total Weightage