Assignment: Case Study Analysis

yemisij

NURS6501ASSIGNMENTWK10RUBRICDETAILS.html

Home >Nursing homework help >Assignment: Case Study Analysis

Rubric Detail

Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric's layout.

Content

Name: NURS_6501_Module7_Case Study_Assignment_Rubric

	Excellent	Good	Fair	Poor
Develop a 1- to 2-page case study analysis, examining the patient symptoms presented in the case study. Be sure to address the following as it relates to the case you were assigned (omit section that does not pertain to your case, faculty will give full points for that section): Explain the factors that affect fertility (STDs)	Points: Points Range: 23 (23%) - 25 (25%) The response accurately and thoroughly describes the patient symptoms. The response includes accurate, clear, and detailed explanations of the processes related to women's and men's health, infections, and hematologic disorders and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 20 (20%) - 22 (22%) The response describes the patient symptoms. The response includes accurate, explanations of the processes related to women's and men's health, infections, and hematologic disorders and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 18 (18%) - 19 (19%) The response describes the patient symptoms in a manner that is vague or inaccurate. The response includes explanations of the processes related to women's and men's health, infections, and hematologic disorders, with explanations that are vague or based on inappropriate evidence/research. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) - 17 (17%) The response describes the patient symptoms in a manner that is vague and inaccurate, or the description is missing. The response does not include explanations of the processes related to women's and men's health, infections, and hematologic disorders, or the explanations are vague or based on inappropriate evidence/research. Feedback:
Explain why inflammatory markers rise in STD/PID	Points: Points Range: 18 (18%) - 20 (20%) The response includes an accurate, complete, detailed, and specific analysis of the concepts and principles of pathophysiology across the life span and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 16 (16%) - 17 (17%) The response includes an accurate explanation of how the highlighted processes interact to affect the patient and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 14 (14%) - 15 (15%) The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of how the highlighted processes interact to affect the patient, with explanations that are based on inappropriate evidence/research. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) - 13 (13%) The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of how the highlighted processes interact to affect the patient, with explanations that are based on inappropriate or missing evidence/research. Feedback:
Explain why prostatitis and infection happen. Also explain the causes of systemic reaction.	Points: Points Range: 18 (18%) - 20 (20%) The response includes an accurate, complete, detailed, and specific explanation of how the highlighted processes interact to affect the patient and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 16 (16%) - 17 (17%) The response includes an accurate explanation of how the highlighted processes interact to affect the patient and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 14 (14%) - 15 (15%) The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of how the highlighted processes interact to affect the patient, with explanations that are based on inappropriate evidence/research. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) - 13 (13%) The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of how the highlighted processes interact to affect the patient, with explanations that are based on inappropriate or missing evidence/research. Feedback:
Explain why a patient would need a splenectomy after a diagnosis of ITP.	Points: Points Range: 5 (5%) - 10 (10%) The response includes an accurate, complete, detailed, and specific explanation of racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 4 (4%) - 4 (4%) The response includes an accurate explanation of racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 3 (3%) - 3 (3%) The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning, and/or explanations are based on inappropriate evidence/research. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) - 2 (2%) The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning, or the explanations are based on inappropriate or no evidence/research. Feedback:
Explain anemia and the different kinds of anemia (i.e., micro and macrocytic).	Points: Points Range: 5 (5%) - 10 (10%) The response includes an accurate, complete, detailed, and specific explanation of racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 4 (4%) - 4 (4%) The response includes an accurate explanation of racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 3 (3%) - 3 (3%) The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning, and/or explanations are based on inappropriate evidence/research. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) - 2 (2%) The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning, or the explanations are based on inappropriate or no evidence/research. Feedback:
Written Expression and Formatting - Paragraph Development and Organization: Paragraphs make clear points that support well-developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused—neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement and introduction are provided that delineate all required criteria.	Points: Points Range: 5 (5%) - 5 (5%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion are provided that delineate all required criteria. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 4 (4%) - 4 (4%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time. The purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment are stated, yet are brief and not descriptive. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 3 (3%) - 3 (3%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%-79% of the time. The purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment are vague or off topic. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) - 2 (2%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time. No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion were provided. Feedback:
Written Expression and Formatting - English Writing Standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation	Points: Points Range: 5 (5%) - 5 (5%) Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 4 (4%) - 4 (4%) Contains a few (1 or 2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 3 (3%) - 3 (3%) Contains several (3 or 4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) - 2 (2%) Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader's understanding. Feedback:
Written Expression and Formatting - The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, running heads, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list.	Points: Points Range: 5 (5%) - 5 (5%) Uses correct APA format with no errors. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 4 (4%) - 4 (4%) Contains a few (1 or 2) APA format errors. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 3 (3%) - 3 (3%) Contains several (3 or 4) APA format errors. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) - 2 (2%) Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors. Feedback:

Show Descriptions Show Feedback

Develop a 1- to 2-page case study analysis, examining the patient symptoms presented in the case study. Be sure to address the following as it relates to the case you were assigned (omit section that does not pertain to your case, faculty will give full points for that section): Explain the factors that affect fertility (STDs)--

Levels of Achievement: Excellent 23 (23%) - 25 (25%) The response accurately and thoroughly describes the patient symptoms. The response includes accurate, clear, and detailed explanations of the processes related to women's and men's health, infections, and hematologic disorders and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. Good 20 (20%) - 22 (22%) The response describes the patient symptoms. The response includes accurate, explanations of the processes related to women's and men's health, infections, and hematologic disorders and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. Fair 18 (18%) - 19 (19%) The response describes the patient symptoms in a manner that is vague or inaccurate. The response includes explanations of the processes related to women's and men's health, infections, and hematologic disorders, with explanations that are vague or based on inappropriate evidence/research. Poor 0 (0%) - 17 (17%) The response describes the patient symptoms in a manner that is vague and inaccurate, or the description is missing. The response does not include explanations of the processes related to women's and men's health, infections, and hematologic disorders, or the explanations are vague or based on inappropriate evidence/research. Feedback:

Explain why inflammatory markers rise in STD/PID--

Levels of Achievement: Excellent 18 (18%) - 20 (20%) The response includes an accurate, complete, detailed, and specific analysis of the concepts and principles of pathophysiology across the life span and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. Good 16 (16%) - 17 (17%) The response includes an accurate explanation of how the highlighted processes interact to affect the patient and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. Fair 14 (14%) - 15 (15%) The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of how the highlighted processes interact to affect the patient, with explanations that are based on inappropriate evidence/research. Poor 0 (0%) - 13 (13%) The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of how the highlighted processes interact to affect the patient, with explanations that are based on inappropriate or missing evidence/research. Feedback:

Explain why prostatitis and infection happen. Also explain the causes of systemic reaction.--

Levels of Achievement: Excellent 18 (18%) - 20 (20%) The response includes an accurate, complete, detailed, and specific explanation of how the highlighted processes interact to affect the patient and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. Good 16 (16%) - 17 (17%) The response includes an accurate explanation of how the highlighted processes interact to affect the patient and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. Fair 14 (14%) - 15 (15%) The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of how the highlighted processes interact to affect the patient, with explanations that are based on inappropriate evidence/research. Poor 0 (0%) - 13 (13%) The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of how the highlighted processes interact to affect the patient, with explanations that are based on inappropriate or missing evidence/research. Feedback:

Explain why a patient would need a splenectomy after a diagnosis of ITP.--

Levels of Achievement: Excellent 5 (5%) - 10 (10%) The response includes an accurate, complete, detailed, and specific explanation of racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. Good 4 (4%) - 4 (4%) The response includes an accurate explanation of racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. Fair 3 (3%) - 3 (3%) The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning, and/or explanations are based on inappropriate evidence/research. Poor 0 (0%) - 2 (2%) The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning, or the explanations are based on inappropriate or no evidence/research. Feedback:

Explain anemia and the different kinds of anemia (i.e., micro and macrocytic).--

Written Expression and Formatting - Paragraph Development and Organization: Paragraphs make clear points that support well-developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused—neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement and introduction are provided that delineate all required criteria.--

Levels of Achievement: Excellent 5 (5%) - 5 (5%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion are provided that delineate all required criteria. Good 4 (4%) - 4 (4%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time. The purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment are stated, yet are brief and not descriptive. Fair 3 (3%) - 3 (3%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%-79% of the time. The purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment are vague or off topic. Poor 0 (0%) - 2 (2%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time. No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion were provided. Feedback:

Written Expression and Formatting - English Writing Standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation--

Levels of Achievement: Excellent 5 (5%) - 5 (5%) Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors. Good 4 (4%) - 4 (4%) Contains a few (1 or 2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. Fair 3 (3%) - 3 (3%) Contains several (3 or 4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. Poor 0 (0%) - 2 (2%) Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader's understanding. Feedback:

Written Expression and Formatting - The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, running heads, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list.--

Levels of Achievement: Excellent 5 (5%) - 5 (5%) Uses correct APA format with no errors. Good 4 (4%) - 4 (4%) Contains a few (1 or 2) APA format errors. Fair 3 (3%) - 3 (3%) Contains several (3 or 4) APA format errors. Poor 0 (0%) - 2 (2%) Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors. Feedback:

Total Points: 100