Capstone Research Companion

Patasor

rubric.html

Home >Nursing homework help >Capstone Research Companion

Rubric Detail

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

Content

Name: NURS_6600_Week_5_Assignment_Rubric

	Excellent	Good	Fair	Poor
Write a 4- to 6-page scholarly paper in which you formulate a detailed plan for the problem or issue you are examining at your practicum site. Your paper should include the following: Title. The title includes the name of your project and follows the Uniform-Guidelines format. Introduction. The introduction includes the purpose of the paper, the goal of the project, and the name of the project. It also outlines the structure of the paper.	Points: Points Range: 15 (15%) - 16 (16%) The response clearly identifies the title and follows the Uniform-Guidelines format. The response clearly, accurately, and with specific detail states the purpose of the paper, the goal of the project, and the name of the project. It also clearly, accurately, and thoroughly outlines the structure of the paper. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 13 (13%) - 14 (14%) The response identifies the title and follows the Uniform-Guidelines format. The response accurately states the purpose of the paper, the goal of the project, and the name of the project. It also accurately outlines the structure of the paper. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 12 (12%) - 12 (12%) The response identifies the title but does not follow the Uniform-Guidelines format. The response vaguely or inaccurately states the purpose of the paper, the goal of the project, and the name of the project. It also vaguely or inaccurately outlines the structure of the paper. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) - 11 (11%) The response does not identify the title. The response vaguely and inaccurately states the purpose of the paper, the goal of the project, and the name of the project, or these elements are missing. The response vaguely and inaccurately outlines the structure of the paper, or the outline is missing. Feedback:
Goal statement. A goal statement identifies what you expect to accomplish, the focus area, and the population. It introduces the project and conveys, in broad terms, how you plan to solve a particular problem or issue. Project objectives. Project objectives delineate your strategy for reaching the goal and the steps you will follow to complete the project. You must include two or three measurable objectives that use Application-level or higher verbs from Bloom’s Taxonomy.	Points: Points Range: 15 (15%) - 16 (16%) The goal statement clearly, accurately, and with specific detail identifies expectations for what to accomplish, the focus area, and the population. It introduces the project and conveys clearly and accurately, in broad terms, a plan to solve a particular problem or issue. Project objectives clearly, accurately, and with specific detail delineate a strategy for reaching the goal and the steps to follow to complete the project. The response includes two or three measurable objectives that use Application-level or higher verbs from Bloom’s Taxonomy. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 13 (13%) - 14 (14%) The goal statement vaguely and inaccurately identifies expectations for what to accomplish, the focus area, and the population. The goal statement vaguely and inaccurately introduces the project and conveys a plan to solve a particular problem or issue, or the goal statement is missing. The response does not include project objectives or they do not delineate a strategy for reaching the goal, nor do they convey the steps to follow to complete the project. The response includes no measurable objectives and/or they do not use Application-level or higher verbs from Bloom’s Taxonomy. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 12 (12%) - 12 (12%) The goal statement vaguely or inaccurately identifies expectations for what to accomplish, the focus area, and the population. It vaguely or inaccurately introduces the project and conveys a plan to solve a particular problem or issue. Project objectives vaguely or inaccurately delineate a strategy for reaching the goal and the steps to follow to complete the project. The response includes fewer than two measurable objectives that may not use Application-level or higher verbs from Bloom’s Taxonomy. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) - 11 (11%) The goal statement vaguely and inaccurately identifies expectations for what to accomplish, the focus area, and the population. The goal statement vaguely and inaccurately introduces the project and conveys a plan to solve a particular problem or issue, or the goal statement is missing. The response does not include project objectives or they do not delineate a strategy for reaching the goal, nor do they convey the steps to follow to complete the project. The response includes no measurable objectives and/or they do not use Application-level or higher verbs from Bloom’s Taxonomy. Feedback:
Evidence-based review of the literature for project justification. This review provides evidence-based support for your identified problem, project methods, and evaluation. The literature should be directed toward justifying the project, not focus on potential solutions. You must include a review of your specialization’s professional-practice standards and guidelines related to your project and a minimum of five scholarly references for this section of the paper.	Points: Points Range: 15 (15%) - 16 (16%) The review clearly, accurately, and with specific detail provides evidence-based support for the identified problem, project methods, and evaluation. The literature clearly justifies the project and includes a clear, accurate, and specific review of the specialization’s professional-practice standards and guidelines related to the project. The response contains a minimum of five scholarly references for this section of the paper. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 13 (13%) - 14 (14%) The review accurately provides evidence-based support for the identified problem, project methods, and evaluation. The literature justifies the project and includes an accurate review of the specialization’s professional-practice standards and guidelines related to the project. The response contains a minimum of five scholarly references for this section of the paper. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 12 (12%) - 12 (12%) The review vaguely or inaccurately provides evidence-based support for the identified problem, project methods, and evaluation. The literature vaguely justifies the project and may include a review of the specialization’s professional-practice standards and guidelines related to the project. The response contains fewer than five but more than two scholarly references for this section of the paper. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) - 11 (11%) The review does not provides evidence-based support for the identified problem, project methods, and/or evaluation. The literature does not justify the project and/or does not include a review of the specialization’s professional-practice standards and/or guidelines related to the project. The response contains fewer than three scholarly references for this section of the paper. Feedback:
Methodology. This section addresses in detail how you will accomplish the project objectives. Include, as relevant, the who, when, where, and how of each objective. Resources. Identify and justify the human, physical, and/or technical resources you will need to complete this project. Note that for this assignment, you do not have to address the financial aspects of your plan.	Points: Points Range: 15 (15%) - 16 (16%) The response clearly, accurately, and with specific detail addresses how to accomplish the project objectives, including, as relevant, the who, when, where, and how of each objective. The response clearly, accurately, and with specific detail identifies and justifies the human, physical, and/or technical resources needed to complete the project. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 13 (13%) - 14 (14%) The response accurately addresses how to accomplish the project objectives, including, as relevant, the who, when, where, and how of each objective. The response accurately identifies and justifies the human, physical, and/or technical resources needed to complete the project. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 12 (12%) - 12 (12%) The response vaguely or inaccurately addresses how to accomplish the project objectives, including the who, when, where, and how of each objective. The response vaguely or inaccurately identifies and justifies the human, physical, and/or technical resources needed to complete the project. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) - 11 (11%) The response vaguely and inaccurately addresses how to accomplish the project objectives, or methodology is missing. The response does not include the who, when, where, and/or how of each objective. The response vaguely and inaccurately identifies and justifies the human, physical, and/or technical resources needed to complete the project, or resources are missing. Feedback:
Formative evaluation. Describe how and when you will conduct a formative evaluation of your project. Explain how you will use the evaluation results and how you will determine if the project is proceeding as planned. Summative evaluation. Describe how and when you will conduct a summative evaluation of your project. Explain how you will use the evaluation results. Timeline. Create a graphic timeline representing significant stages of your project. Provide a narrative to help your Faculty understand the timeline. Include the timeline in an Appendix to your Practicum Project Plan.	Points: Points Range: 15 (15%) - 16 (16%) The response clearly, accurately, and with specific detail describes how and when to conduct a formative evaluation of the project and clearly, accurately, and with specific detail explains how to use the evaluation results and how to determine if the project is proceeding as planned. The response clearly, accurately, and with specific detail describes how and when to conduct a summative evaluation of the project and clearly, accurately, and with specific detail explains how to use the evaluation results. The response includes a clear, accurate, and detailed graphic timeline representing significant stages of the project and provides a clear, accurate, and detailed narrative to help the Faculty understand the timeline. The response includes the timeline in an Appendix to the Practicum Project Plan. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 13 (13%) - 14 (14%) The response accurately describes how and when to conduct a formative evaluation of the project and accurately explains how to use the evaluation results and how to determine if the project is proceeding as planned. The response accurately describes how and when to conduct a summative evaluation of the project and accurately explains how to use the evaluation results. The response includes an accurate graphic timeline representing significant stages of the project and provides an accurate narrative to help the Faculty understand the timeline. The response includes the timeline in an Appendix to the Practicum Project Plan. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 12 (12%) - 12 (12%) The response vaguely or inaccurately describes how and when to conduct a formative evaluation of the project and vaguely or inaccurately explains how to use the evaluation results and how to determine if the project is proceeding as planned. The response vaguely or inaccurately describes how and when to conduct a summative evaluation of the project and vaguely or inaccurately explains how to use the evaluation results. The response includes a vague or inaccurate graphic timeline representing significant stages of the project and provides a vague or inaccurate narrative. The response includes the timeline in an Appendix to the Practicum Project Plan. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) - 11 (11%) The response vaguely and inaccurately describes how and when to conduct a formative evaluation of the project and vaguely and inaccurately explains how to use the evaluation results and how to determine if the project is proceeding as planned, or these elements are missing. The response vaguely and inaccurately describes how and when to conduct a summative evaluation of the project and vaguely and inaccurately explains how to use the evaluation results, or these elements are missing. The response includes a vague and inaccurate timeline that does not represent significant stages of the project, or the timeline is missing. The response provides a vague and inaccurate narrative, or the narrative is missing. The timeline may not be located in an Appendix. Feedback:
References. References should be formatted in APA Style and reflect current nursing/health literature (i.e., published within the past 5 years).	Points: Points Range: 5 (5%) - 5 (5%) References are formatted correctly in APA Style and reflect current nursing/health literature. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 4 (4%) - 4 (4%) References are mostly formatted correctly in APA Style and reflect mostly current nursing/health literature. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 3.5 (3.5%) - 3.5 (3.5%) References are formatted somewhat correctly in APA Style and reflect somewhat current nursing/health literature. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) - 3 (3%) References are not formatted correctly in APA Style and do not reflect current nursing/health literature, or references are missing. 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. Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment are stated yet are brief and not descriptive. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 3.5 (3.5%) - 3.5 (3.5%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60–79% of the time. Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment are vague or off topic. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) - 3 (3%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion are 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: 3.5 (3.5%) - 3.5 (3.5%) Contains several (3 or 4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) - 3 (3%) 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 formatting errors. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 3.5 (3.5%) - 3.5 (3.5%) Contains several (3 or 4) APA formatting errors. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) - 3 (3%) Contains many (≥5) APA formatting errors. Feedback:

Show Descriptions Show Feedback

Write a 4- to 6-page scholarly paper in which you formulate a detailed plan for the problem or issue you are examining at your practicum site. Your paper should include the following: Title. The title includes the name of your project and follows the Uniform-Guidelines format. Introduction. The introduction includes the purpose of the paper, the goal of the project, and the name of the project. It also outlines the structure of the paper.--

Levels of Achievement: Excellent 15 (15%) - 16 (16%)

The response clearly identifies the title and follows the Uniform-Guidelines format.

The response clearly, accurately, and with specific detail states the purpose of the paper, the goal of the project, and the name of the project. It also clearly, accurately, and thoroughly outlines the structure of the paper. Good 13 (13%) - 14 (14%)

The response identifies the title and follows the Uniform-Guidelines format.

The response accurately states the purpose of the paper, the goal of the project, and the name of the project. It also accurately outlines the structure of the paper. Fair 12 (12%) - 12 (12%)

The response identifies the title but does not follow the Uniform-Guidelines format.

The response vaguely or inaccurately states the purpose of the paper, the goal of the project, and the name of the project. It also vaguely or inaccurately outlines the structure of the paper. Poor 0 (0%) - 11 (11%)

The response does not identify the title.

The response vaguely and inaccurately states the purpose of the paper, the goal of the project, and the name of the project, or these elements are missing. The response vaguely and inaccurately outlines the structure of the paper, or the outline is missing. Feedback:

Goal statement. A goal statement identifies what you expect to accomplish, the focus area, and the population. It introduces the project and conveys, in broad terms, how you plan to solve a particular problem or issue. Project objectives. Project objectives delineate your strategy for reaching the goal and the steps you will follow to complete the project. You must include two or three measurable objectives that use Application-level or higher verbs from Bloom’s Taxonomy.--

Levels of Achievement: Excellent 15 (15%) - 16 (16%)

The goal statement clearly, accurately, and with specific detail identifies expectations for what to accomplish, the focus area, and the population. It introduces the project and conveys clearly and accurately, in broad terms, a plan to solve a particular problem or issue.

Project objectives clearly, accurately, and with specific detail delineate a strategy for reaching the goal and the steps to follow to complete the project. The response includes two or three measurable objectives that use Application-level or higher verbs from Bloom’s Taxonomy. Good 13 (13%) - 14 (14%)

The goal statement vaguely and inaccurately identifies expectations for what to accomplish, the focus area, and the population. The goal statement vaguely and inaccurately introduces the project and conveys a plan to solve a particular problem or issue, or the goal statement is missing.

The response does not include project objectives or they do not delineate a strategy for reaching the goal, nor do they convey the steps to follow to complete the project. The response includes no measurable objectives and/or they do not use Application-level or higher verbs from Bloom’s Taxonomy. Fair 12 (12%) - 12 (12%)

The goal statement vaguely or inaccurately identifies expectations for what to accomplish, the focus area, and the population. It vaguely or inaccurately introduces the project and conveys a plan to solve a particular problem or issue.

Project objectives vaguely or inaccurately delineate a strategy for reaching the goal and the steps to follow to complete the project. The response includes fewer than two measurable objectives that may not use Application-level or higher verbs from Bloom’s Taxonomy. Poor 0 (0%) - 11 (11%)

Evidence-based review of the literature for project justification. This review provides evidence-based support for your identified problem, project methods, and evaluation. The literature should be directed toward justifying the project, not focus on potential solutions. You must include a review of your specialization’s professional-practice standards and guidelines related to your project and a minimum of five scholarly references for this section of the paper.--

Levels of Achievement: Excellent 15 (15%) - 16 (16%)

The review clearly, accurately, and with specific detail provides evidence-based support for the identified problem, project methods, and evaluation. The literature clearly justifies the project and includes a clear, accurate, and specific review of the specialization’s professional-practice standards and guidelines related to the project.

The response contains a minimum of five scholarly references for this section of the paper. Good 13 (13%) - 14 (14%)

The review accurately provides evidence-based support for the identified problem, project methods, and evaluation. The literature justifies the project and includes an accurate review of the specialization’s professional-practice standards and guidelines related to the project.

The response contains a minimum of five scholarly references for this section of the paper. Fair 12 (12%) - 12 (12%)

The review vaguely or inaccurately provides evidence-based support for the identified problem, project methods, and evaluation. The literature vaguely justifies the project and may include a review of the specialization’s professional-practice standards and guidelines related to the project.

The response contains fewer than five but more than two scholarly references for this section of the paper. Poor 0 (0%) - 11 (11%)

The review does not provides evidence-based support for the identified problem, project methods, and/or evaluation. The literature does not justify the project and/or does not include a review of the specialization’s professional-practice standards and/or guidelines related to the project.

The response contains fewer than three scholarly references for this section of the paper. Feedback:

Methodology. This section addresses in detail how you will accomplish the project objectives. Include, as relevant, the who, when, where, and how of each objective. Resources. Identify and justify the human, physical, and/or technical resources you will need to complete this project. Note that for this assignment, you do not have to address the financial aspects of your plan.--

Levels of Achievement: Excellent 15 (15%) - 16 (16%)

The response clearly, accurately, and with specific detail addresses how to accomplish the project objectives, including, as relevant, the who, when, where, and how of each objective.

The response clearly, accurately, and with specific detail identifies and justifies the human, physical, and/or technical resources needed to complete the project.

Good 13 (13%) - 14 (14%)

The response accurately addresses how to accomplish the project objectives, including, as relevant, the who, when, where, and how of each objective.

The response accurately identifies and justifies the human, physical, and/or technical resources needed to complete the project. Fair 12 (12%) - 12 (12%)

The response vaguely or inaccurately addresses how to accomplish the project objectives, including the who, when, where, and how of each objective.

The response vaguely or inaccurately identifies and justifies the human, physical, and/or technical resources needed to complete the project. Poor 0 (0%) - 11 (11%)

The response vaguely and inaccurately addresses how to accomplish the project objectives, or methodology is missing. The response does not include the who, when, where, and/or how of each objective.

The response vaguely and inaccurately identifies and justifies the human, physical, and/or technical resources needed to complete the project, or resources are missing. Feedback:

Formative evaluation. Describe how and when you will conduct a formative evaluation of your project. Explain how you will use the evaluation results and how you will determine if the project is proceeding as planned. Summative evaluation. Describe how and when you will conduct a summative evaluation of your project. Explain how you will use the evaluation results. Timeline. Create a graphic timeline representing significant stages of your project. Provide a narrative to help your Faculty understand the timeline. Include the timeline in an Appendix to your Practicum Project Plan.--

Levels of Achievement: Excellent 15 (15%) - 16 (16%)

The response clearly, accurately, and with specific detail describes how and when to conduct a formative evaluation of the project and clearly, accurately, and with specific detail explains how to use the evaluation results and how to determine if the project is proceeding as planned.

The response clearly, accurately, and with specific detail describes how and when to conduct a summative evaluation of the project and clearly, accurately, and with specific detail explains how to use the evaluation results.

The response includes a clear, accurate, and detailed graphic timeline representing significant stages of the project and provides a clear, accurate, and detailed narrative to help the Faculty understand the timeline. The response includes the timeline in an Appendix to the Practicum Project Plan.

Good 13 (13%) - 14 (14%)

The response accurately describes how and when to conduct a formative evaluation of the project and accurately explains how to use the evaluation results and how to determine if the project is proceeding as planned.

The response accurately describes how and when to conduct a summative evaluation of the project and accurately explains how to use the evaluation results.

The response includes an accurate graphic timeline representing significant stages of the project and provides an accurate narrative to help the Faculty understand the timeline. The response includes the timeline in an Appendix to the Practicum Project Plan. Fair 12 (12%) - 12 (12%)

The response vaguely or inaccurately describes how and when to conduct a formative evaluation of the project and vaguely or inaccurately explains how to use the evaluation results and how to determine if the project is proceeding as planned.

The response vaguely or inaccurately describes how and when to conduct a summative evaluation of the project and vaguely or inaccurately explains how to use the evaluation results.

The response includes a vague or inaccurate graphic timeline representing significant stages of the project and provides a vague or inaccurate narrative. The response includes the timeline in an Appendix to the Practicum Project Plan. Poor 0 (0%) - 11 (11%)

The response vaguely and inaccurately describes how and when to conduct a formative evaluation of the project and vaguely and inaccurately explains how to use the evaluation results and how to determine if the project is proceeding as planned, or these elements are missing.

The response vaguely and inaccurately describes how and when to conduct a summative evaluation of the project and vaguely and inaccurately explains how to use the evaluation results, or these elements are missing.

The response includes a vague and inaccurate timeline that does not represent significant stages of the project, or the timeline is missing. The response provides a vague and inaccurate narrative, or the narrative is missing. The timeline may not be located in an Appendix. Feedback:

References. References should be formatted in APA Style and reflect current nursing/health literature (i.e., published within the past 5 years).--

Levels of Achievement: Excellent 5 (5%) - 5 (5%) References are formatted correctly in APA Style and reflect current nursing/health literature. Good 4 (4%) - 4 (4%) References are mostly formatted correctly in APA Style and reflect mostly current nursing/health literature. Fair 3.5 (3.5%) - 3.5 (3.5%) References are formatted somewhat correctly in APA Style and reflect somewhat current nursing/health literature. Poor 0 (0%) - 3 (3%) References are not formatted correctly in APA Style and do not reflect current nursing/health literature, or references are missing. 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.--

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.

Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment are stated yet are brief and not descriptive. Fair 3.5 (3.5%) - 3.5 (3.5%)

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60–79% of the time.

Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment are vague or off topic. Poor 0 (0%) - 3 (3%)

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion are 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 3.5 (3.5%) - 3.5 (3.5%) Contains several (3 or 4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. Poor 0 (0%) - 3 (3%) 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 formatting errors. Fair 3.5 (3.5%) - 3.5 (3.5%) Contains several (3 or 4) APA formatting errors. Poor 0 (0%) - 3 (3%) Contains many (≥5) APA formatting errors. Feedback:

Total Points: 100