Assigment .Apa seven . All instructions attached.

butterflyl

NRS-445Rubric-Benchmark-EthicalConductofScholarlyActivities.pdf

Home >Nursing homework help >Assigment .Apa seven . All instructions attached.

Benchmark - Ethical Conduct of Scholarly Activities - Rubric

Case 1: Respect for Person 16.8 points

Criteria Description

Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of respect

for person, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement

manager to adhere to ethical principles in respect for person.

5. Target 16.8 points

Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of

respect for person, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality

improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in respect for person, is

thorough.

4. Acceptable 14.95 points

Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of

respect for person, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality

improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in respect for person, is

detailed.

3. Approaching 13.27 points

Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of

respect for person, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality

improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in respect for person, is

present.

2. Insufficient 12.6 points

Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of

respect for person, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality

improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in respect for person, is

inaccurate or incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of

respect for person, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality

improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in respect for person, is not

present.

Collapse All

© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

https://www.gce.com/

Case 1: Bene�cence 16.8 points

Criteria Description

Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of

beneficence, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement

manager to adhere to ethical principles in beneficence.

5. Target 16.8 points

Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of

beneficence, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement

manager to adhere to ethical principles in beneficence, is thorough.

4. Acceptable 14.95 points

Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of

beneficence, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement

manager to adhere to ethical principles in beneficence, is detailed.

3. Approaching 13.27 points

Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of

beneficence, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement

manager to adhere to ethical principles in beneficence, is present.

2. Insufficient 12.6 points

Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of

beneficence, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement

manager to adhere to ethical principles in beneficence, is inaccurate or incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of

beneficence, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement

manager to adhere to ethical principles in beneficence, is not present.

https://www.gce.com/

Case 1: Justice 16.8 points

Criteria Description

Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of justice,

as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere

to ethical principles in justice.

5. Target 16.8 points

Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of

justice, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager

to adhere to ethical principles in justice, is thorough.

4. Acceptable 14.95 points

Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of

justice, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager

to adhere to ethical principles in justice, is detailed.

3. Approaching 13.27 points

Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of

justice, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager

to adhere to ethical principles in justice, is present.

2. Insufficient 12.6 points

Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of

justice, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager

to adhere to ethical principles in justice, is inaccurate or incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of

justice, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager

to adhere to ethical principles in justice, is not present.

https://www.gce.com/

Case 2: Respect for Person 16.8 points

Criteria Description

Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of respect

for person, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement

manager to adhere to ethical principles in respect for person.

5. Target 16.8 points

Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of

respect for person, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality

improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in respect for person, is

thorough.

4. Acceptable 14.95 points

Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of

respect for person, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality

improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in respect for person, is

detailed.

3. Approaching 13.27 points

Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of

respect for person, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality

improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in respect for person, is

present.

2. Insufficient 12.6 points

Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of

respect for person, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality

improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in respect for person, is

inaccurate or incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of

respect for person, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality

improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in respect for person, is not

present.

https://www.gce.com/

Case 2: Bene�cence 16.8 points

Criteria Description

Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of

beneficence, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement

manager to adhere to ethical principles in beneficence.

5. Target 16.8 points

Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of

beneficence, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement

manager to adhere to ethical principles in beneficence, is thorough.

4. Acceptable 14.95 points

Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of

beneficence, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement

manager to adhere to ethical principles in beneficence, is detailed.

3. Approaching 13.27 points

Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of

beneficence, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement

manager to adhere to ethical principles in beneficence, is present.

2. Insufficient 12.6 points

Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of

beneficence, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement

manager to adhere to ethical principles in beneficence, is inaccurate or incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of

beneficence, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement

manager to adhere to ethical principles in beneficence, is not present.

https://www.gce.com/

Case 2: Justice 16.8 points

Criteria Description

Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of justice,

as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere

to ethical principles in justice.

5. Target 16.8 points

Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of

justice, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager

to adhere to ethical principles in justice, is thorough.

4. Acceptable 14.95 points

Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of

justice, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager

to adhere to ethical principles in justice, is detailed.

3. Approaching 13.27 points

Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of

justice, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager

to adhere to ethical principles in justice, is present.

2. Insufficient 12.6 points

Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of

justice, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager

to adhere to ethical principles in justice, is inaccurate or incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of

justice, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager

to adhere to ethical principles in justice, is not present.

https://www.gce.com/

Ethical Principles, Christian Worldview, and Nursing Practice 11.2 points

Criteria Description

Discussion of how the ethical principles of the Belmont Report align with the Christian

worldview and with personal nursing practice.

5. Target 11.2 points

Discussion of how the ethical principles of the Belmont Report align with the

Christian worldview and with personal nursing practice is thorough.

4. Acceptable 9.97 points

Discussion of how the ethical principles of the Belmont Report align with the

Christian worldview and with personal nursing practice is detailed.

3. Approaching 8.85 points

Discussion of how the ethical principles of the Belmont Report align with the

Christian worldview and with personal nursing practice is present.

2. Insufficient 8.4 points

Discussion of how the ethical principles of the Belmont Report align with the

Christian worldview and with personal nursing practice is inaccurate or incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Discussion of how the ethical principles of the Belmont Report align with the

Christian worldview and with personal nursing practice is not present.

https://www.gce.com/

Demonstration of Professional Aptitude for Ethical Conduct (B) (B) 14 points

Criteria Description

Overall demonstration of professional aptitude for application of ethical research

guidelines, ethical behaviors, and advocacy for the protection of participants in

scholarly initiatives and scholarly practice-based projects. (C.4.3) (C4.3)

5. Target 14 points

The learner clearly demonstrates professional aptitude for application of ethical

research guidelines, ethical behaviors, and advocacy for the protection of

participants in scholarly initiatives and scholarly practice-based projects. Rationale

is appropriate for the assignment criteria and nursing content and provides strong

support for both factual and subjective responses throughout.

4. Acceptable 12.46 points

The learner demonstrates professional aptitude for application of ethical research

guidelines, ethical behaviors, and advocacy for the protection of participants in

scholarly initiatives and scholarly practice-based projects. Rationale is appropriate

for the assignment criteria and nursing content and provides support for both

factual and subjective responses throughout.

3. Approaching 11.06 points

The learner demonstrates adequate professional aptitude for application of ethical

research guidelines, ethical behaviors, and advocacy for the protection of

participants in scholarly initiatives and scholarly practice-based projects. Rationale

is mostly appropriate for the assignment criteria and nursing content and provides

general support for both factual and subjective responses throughout.

2. Insufficient 10.5 points

The learner inconsistently demonstrates professional aptitude in the application of

ethical research guidelines, ethical behaviors, and advocacy for the protection of

participants in scholarly initiatives and scholarly practice-based projects. Rationale

is lacking and does not reflect the assignment criteria and nursing content in many

scenarios. Overall, support for both factual and subjective responses is lacking.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

The learner does not demonstrate professional aptitude in the application of ethical

research guidelines, ethical behaviors, and advocacy for the protection of

participants in scholarly initiatives and scholarly practice-based projects. Rationale

is not appropriate or does not reflect the assignment criteria and nursing content.

Support for both factual and subjective responses is not provided.

https://www.gce.com/

Mechanics of Writing 8.4 points

Criteria Description

Includes spelling, capitalization, punctuation, grammar, language use, sentence

structure, etc.

5. Target 8.4 points

No mechanical errors are present. Appropriate language choice and sentence

structure are used throughout.

4. Acceptable 7.48 points

Few mechanical errors are present. Suitable language choice and sentence

structure are used.

3. Approaching 6.64 points

Occasional mechanical errors are present. Language choice is generally

appropriate. Varied sentence structure is attempted.

2. Insufficient 6.3 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors are present. Inconsistencies in language

choice or sentence structure are recurrent.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Errors in grammar or syntax are pervasive and impede meaning. Incorrect language

choice or sentence structure errors are found throughout.

https://www.gce.com/

Format/Documentation 5.6 points

Criteria Description

Uses appropriate style, such as APA, MLA, etc., for college, subject, and level;

documents sources using citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc.,

appropriate to assignment and discipline.

5. Target 5.6 points

No errors in formatting or documentation are present.

4. Acceptable 4.98 points

Appropriate format and documentation are used with only minor errors.

3. Approaching 4.42 points

Appropriate format and documentation are used, although there are some obvious

errors.

2. Insufficient 4.2 points

Appropriate format is attempted, but some elements are missing. Frequent errors

in documentation of sources are evident.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Appropriate format is not used. No documentation of sources is provided.

Total 140 points

https://www.gce.com/