YULE-DECISION

Rubric Details

• Introduction Introduce the overall concepts that will be described in the paper 
 9% of total result
 
 
 ExcellentClear and concise introduction of the concepts to be presented in the paper
 
 9 
 
 
 SatisfactoryMostly clear but somewhat generic introduction of the concepts to presented in the paper
 
 6.75
 
 
 UnsatisfactoryVague, unclear or no introduction of concepts to be presented in the paper
 
 4.5
 
 
 PoorDoes not meet standard
 
 2.25
 
 
 


• Background/Significance Identification and description of an issue in nursing that impacts all levels of nursing practice from bedside, nurse management to advanced practice with a good background and significance 
 9% of total result



 
 ExcellentIdentifies, describes and demonstrates a sophisticated understanding of the nursing issue/problem as it relates to all levels of nursing practice with a specific and strong background and significance to nursing
 
 9 
 
 
 SatisfactoryIdentifies, describes and demonstrates an acceptable understanding of the nursing issue/problem as it relates to all levels of nursing practice illustrating some but not explicit background and significance of the topic to nursing
 
 6.75
 
 
 UnsatisfactoryIdentifies, describes and demonstrates an incomplete and vague understanding of the nursing issue/problem as it relates to all levels of nursing practice with a vague and unclear background and significance.
 
 4.5
 
 
 PoorDoes not meet standard
 
 2.25
 
 
 


• Literature Review Provides a thorough analysis of the literature about the identified problem that incorporates the main causes of the problem, the implications, the impact, and current suggested ways the identified

problem is being addressed in practice and/or theory. Minimum 2 current EBP -studies used.
 9% of total result
 
 
 ExcellentClear and thorough analysis and review of the existing literature on the identified problem as it relates to nursing. The literature review comprehensively examines the causes, implications, impact, and current ways the identified problem is being addressed in practice and/or theory. Minimum 2 current EBP -studies used.
 
 9 
 
 
 SatisfactoryMostly clear but somewhat vague review of existing literature of the identified problem as it relates to nursing. The literature review mostly but not comprehensively examines the causes, implications, impact, and current ways the identified problem is being addressed in practice and/or theory. Minimum 2 current EBP -studies used.
 
 6.75
 
 
 UnsatisfactoryUnclear, vague or failure to review existing literature of the identified problem as it relates to nursing. The literature review is unclear, incompletely or fails to examine the causes, implications, impact, and current ways the identified problem is being addressed in practice and/or theory. Minimum 1 current EBP -studies used.
 
 4.5
 
 
 PoorDoes not meet standard
 
 2.25
 
 


• Detailed description of minimally 2 decision making approaches/models and how they are used in practice that is well supported by the literature. This section describes how the various levels of nursing practice will apply the three selected decision-making models to address the identified problem which is clearly linked to the literature review.
 9% of total result
 
 
 ExcellentClear, detailed, and comprehensive description of the minimally 2 chosen decision-making approaches/models and how they are used in practice that is well supported by the provided literature. This presents a clear, comprehensive discussion of how the various levels of nursing practice will apply the decision-making approaches in practice to address the selected problem that demonstrates a clear link to the literature review.
 
 9 
 
 
 SatisfactoryMostly clear but somewhat vague description of minimally 2 decision-making approaches/models and how they are used in practice that is mostly but not well supported by the provided literature. This section also presents a somewhat unclear discussion of how the various levels of nursing practice will apply the three decision making models to address the selected problem. There is some link to the literature review.
 
 6.75
 
 
 UnsatisfactoryVague, unclear or failure to provide a description of three decision making approaches/models and how they are used in practice that is minimally or not well supported by the provided

literature. This section also presents an unclear and or failure to discuss how the various levels of nursing practice will apply the three decision making models to address the selected problem. There is failure or unclear link to the literature review.
 
 4.5
 
 
 PoorDoes not meet standard
 
 2.25
 
 
 


• Prioritize the best decision-making approach to the selected problem. Make sure to provide a clear and well- supported rationale for the choice of the selected model. This section should compare and contrast the three decision making models as they would be used to address the identified problem with a detailed discussion of the limitations and benefits of each model to address the problem from all levels of nursing practice.
 9% of total result
 
 
 ExcellentPrioritizes one of the three selected decision-making approaches/models to address the identified problem. This includes a detailed and clear comparison and contrast of the three models with a comprehensive discussion of the limitations and benefits of each model in addressing the identified problem with a clear and insightful rationale for the choice of the prioritized model provided.
 
 9 
 
 


SatisfactoryPrioritizes one of the three selected decision-making approaches/models to address the identified problem. This includes a somewhat detailed and clear comparison and contrast of the three models with a somewhat unclear discussion of the limitations and benefits of each model in addressing the identified problem with a largely insightful but somewhat vague rationale for the choice of the prioritized model provided.
 
 6.75
 
 
 UnsatisfactoryFails to prioritize or limitedly selects one of the three decision-making approaches/models to address the identified problem. This fails to include or only limitedly includes a comparison and contrast of the three models with little or no discussion of the limitations and/or benefits of each model to address the identified problem with a vague and unclear rationale for the choice of the prioritized model provided.
 
 4.5
 
 
 PoorDoes not meet standard
 
 2.25
 
 
 


• Identify a possible funding source that addresses your topic (so this does not necessarily need to be tied to your decision-making approach though it could be, but it does certainly need to be tied to how you plan to address the problem. This can be at a local, state, or national level.
 9% of total result
 



 ExcellentIntegrated and full descriptions of an appropriate funding source that addresses your chosen topic. The description includes real-world examples of fundings sources that include either a state, local or federal source.
 
 9 
 
 
 SatisfactorySomewhat integrated but not full description of an appropriate funding source that addresses your chosen topic. The description includes mostly real-world examples of potential fundings sources at either the state, local or national level.
 
 6.75
 
 
 UnsatisfactoryLimited to no description of an appropriate funding source that addresses the chosen topic. The description fails to include or limitedly includes a real-world example of a potential funding source at the local, state, or federal level.
 
 4.5
 
 
 PoorDoes not meet standard
 
 2.25
 
 
 


• Conclusion/Summary 
 9% of total result
 
 
 ExcellentSummarizes the key points made throughout the paper in a succinct but comprehensive manner



 9 
 
 
 SatisfactorySomewhat summarizes the key points made throughout the paper in a mostly clear but not entirely comprehensive manner
 
 6.75
 
 
 UnsatisfactoryVague and unclear summary of the key points made throughout the paper that is not succinct or comprehensive.
 
 4.5
 
 
 PoorDoes not meet standard
 
 2.25
 
 
 


• Topic used was approved The following topics are NOT allowed and will not be approved: shortage and nurse turnover, nurse staffing ratios, unit closures, and restructuring, use of contract employees (i.e., registry and travel nurse).
 9% of total result
 
 
 ExcellentTopic used was approved
 
 9 
 
 
 Satisfactory.



 6.75
 
 
 Unsatisfactory.
 
 4.5
 
 
 PoorTopic used was not approved
 
 2.25
 
 
 


• Writing Mechanics: Language and direction of the paper follows the assignment outline and is clear and easy to follow.
 9% of total result
 
 
 ExcellentDemonstrates clarity, conciseness and correctness. writing is free of grammar and spelling errors. The assignment outline was followed and guides the paper content appropriately
 
 9 
 
 
 SatisfactorySomewhat concise and clear grammar and spelling used. Guidelines was mostly used to guide the paper content. Some spelling and grammar issues (less than 3-4 errors within paper)
 
 6.75
 
 
 UnsatisfactoryMany deficiencies in grammar, spelling, or failure to

follow the assignment guidelines. Writing has frequent spelling and grammar errors
 
 4.5
 
 
 PoorDoes not meet standard
 
 2.25
 
 
 


• Page limit has been maintained: minimum 6 pages, maximum 8 pages [not counting cover page and reference pages]
 9% of total result
 
 
 ExcellentPage limit has been maintained: minimum 6 pages, maximum 8 pages [not counting cover page and reference pages]
 
 9 
 
 
 SatisfactoryPage limit has been not been maintained: 1 page less 6 pages, exceeded the maximum 8 pages by one page [not counting cover page and reference pages]
 
 6.75
 
 
 UnsatisfactoryPage limit has been not been maintained: 1.5 pages less 6 pages, exceeded the maximum 8 pages by 1.5 pages [not counting cover page and reference pages]
 
 4.5



 
 Poor.
 
 2.25
 
 
 


• APA formatting (paper is formatted per APA 7th edition guidelines including font, level of headings, appropriate number of references, in-text and reference list citations)
 10% of total result
 
 
 ExcellentAPA formatting is followed throughout the paper with correct citations and includes at least 10 scholarly references that are correctly APA 7th ed. citations. All of these were published in the past five years. References clearly and thoroughly support the cited text within the paper. The paper is developed using APA-approved heading within the paper.
 
 10 
 
 
 SatisfactoryAPA formatting is mostly followed throughout the paper with mostly correct citations with at least 8 to 9 scholarly but not required 10 with ALL of the references within the past 5 years and/or 2-3 incorrect APA 7th ed. referencing or formatting. References support the cited text within the paper. The paper is developed using an introduction APA-approved heading- but no headings within the rest of the paper.
 
 7.5
 
 
 UnsatisfactoryMultiple errors in APA formatting throughout the paper

identified. Fewer than 8 scholarly references provided with less than 8 of the references in the past 5 years and/or > 3 to 4 errors in APA 7th ed referencing and formatting. References fail to support the cited text within the paper. The APA formatting was not developed to the graduate level- no subheadings, etc..
 
 5 
 
 
 PoorDoes not meet standard
 
 2.5