355

NUR355 Children and Young People Assessment 1 - Research paper (50 marks)

Criterion High Distinction (HD) Distinction (D) Credit (CR) Pass (PP) Fail (NN) Identifies an issue relevant to child development, injury or illness (10 marks)

The paper has clearly identified an issue relevant to childhood development, injury and/or illness. The discussion includes an exceptional understanding of child development through a succinct and comprehensive description of the identified issue. The work clearly shows the significance to public health.

The paper has identified an issue relevant to childhood development, injury and/or illness. The discussion demonstrates sound knowledge and understanding of child development in relation to the identified issue, with a clear link to public health.

The paper has identified an issue related to childhood development injury and/or illness. The discussion demonstrates knowledge and understanding of child development and the links to public health.

The paper has referred to an issue related to childhood development injury and/or injury however concepts are a little vague. The discussion demonstrates limited knowledge and understanding of child development and the links to public health.

The paper does not identify an issue relevant to child development, injury, or illness. The paper fails to demonstrate understanding of child development, or the relationship of the issue to public health.

Explains the health and resource implications of the identified issue using data sets and high- level evidence (16 marks)

The work provides a succinct and comprehensive explanation of the health and resource implications clearly linked to the chosen topic. The discussion seamlessly integrates appropriate high-level data.

The work provides detailed explanation of health and resource implications, making good links to most aspects relevant to the chosen topic. The discussion integrates quality data relevant to the identified issue.

The work provides clear explanation of health and resource implications related to the chosen topic. There is a good attempt to support the discussion with appropriate data.

The work describes health and resource implications related to the chosen topic, but more detail needed. Data has been used to support the discussion, but this was limited in places or lower level evidence used.

The paper has not explained the health and resource implications of the identified issue. The discussion lacks support from high-level evidence and data.

Identifies and critiques evidence- based strategies to promote or address the chosen issue  (16 marks)

The paper provides an exceptional critique of a relevant strategy or strategies to address the chosen issue. Ideas and concepts are well supported with highest possible level of evidence.

The paper provides a good critique of a relevant strategy or strategies to address the chosen issue. Most ideas and concepts are supported with highest possible level of evidence.

The work describes and explains a relevant strategy or strategies which address the chosen issue. Most ideas and concepts are supported, but higher quality evidence could be used to support the discussion.

The work describes a strategy or strategies to address the chosen issue. Some ideas and concepts are supported, but greater use of evidence needed to support the discussion.

The work has not identified or examined evidence-based strategies to promote or address the chosen issue.  Discussion not supported by evidence or poor-quality evidence used to support the discussion.

Adheres to academic writing principles  (8 marks)

Presented an excellent discussion. The paper demonstrates clear and concise written expression with a succinct, logical structure. There is no spelling, grammatical and/or terminology errors. Accurately used the SoN Harvard referencing style throughout.

Presented a well-structured discussion. Clear written expression with a logical flow. There are some minor spelling, grammatical and/or terminology errors. Minor errors in the SoN Harvard referencing style.

Presented a clear discussion in an appropriate academic style with a mostly logical flow. There are occasional minor spelling, grammatical and/or terminology errors, but this does not interfere with understanding. Harvard referencing style has been used throughout, but there are some errors either in-text or in the reference list.

Discussion is presented quite well, but expression is sometimes unclear and unnecessary words used. There are several spelling, grammatical and/or terminology errors that at times interfere with understanding. Harvard referencing style used throughout, but there are errors either in-text or in the reference list.

The paper does not adhere to academic writing principles. There are frequent spelling, grammatical and/or terminology errors. There is inconsistent or incorrect referencing style and/or the incorrect referencing style has been used.