| Course Code | Class Code | Assignment Title | Total Points |
| HLT-490V | HLT-490V-O500 | Research Questions and Theory or Model | 100.0 |
| Criteria | Percentage | Unsatisfactory (0.00%) | Less Than Satisfactory (65.00%) | Satisfactory (75.00%) | Good (85.00%) | Excellent (100.00%) | Comments | Points Earned |
| Content | 70.0% |
| Research Questions | 15.0% | Fewer than two questions are proposed. The questions proposed are not research questions or fail to further study on the selected health care problem or issue. | Only two research questions are proposed. The proposed questions are vague and do not appear to encourage further study on the selected health care problem or issue. | Three research questions are proposed. At least two of the questions encourage further study on the selected health care problem or issue. Some information or revision is needed. | Three research questions are proposed. Overall, the questions encourage further study on the selected health care problem or issue. | Three well-written research questions are proposed. The questions are insightful and encourage further study on the selected health care problem or issue. |
| Parameters for Developing Ethical Research Questions | 15.0% | Parameters for developing ethical research questions and potential ethical considerations for the proposed questions are not discussed. | Parameters for developing ethical research questions and potential ethical considerations for the proposed questions are incomplete. | Parameters for developing ethical research questions for the selected topic and potential ethical considerations for the proposed questions are outlined. Some information or support is needed. The narrative demonstrates a general understanding of the ethical aspects of developing research questions. | Parameters for developing ethical research questions and potential ethical considerations for the proposed questions are discussed. The narrative demonstrates an understanding of the ethical aspects of developing research questions. | Specific parameters for developing ethical research questions for the selected topic and potential ethical considerations for the proposed questions are thoroughly discussed. The narrative demonstrates a strong understanding of the ethical aspects of developing research questions. |
| Theory or Model | 20.0% | A theory or model to assist with the proposed evidence-based practice intervention, including why the theory or model is best for the proposed evidence-based intervention, is not discussed. | A theory or model to assist with the proposed evidence-based practice intervention, including why the theory or model is best for the proposed evidence-based intervention, is only partially discussed. | A theory or model to assist with the proposed evidence-based practice intervention, including why the theory or model is best for the proposed evidence-based intervention, is outlined. Some information or support is needed. | A theory or model to assist with the proposed evidence-based practice intervention, including why the theory or model is best for the proposed evidence-based intervention, is discussed. Minor detail or support is needed for accuracy or clarity. | A theory or model to assist with the proposed evidence-based practice intervention, including why the theory or model is best for the proposed evidence-based intervention, is detailed. The narrative is well supported. |
| Application of Theory or Model to Implementation of Intervention | 20.0% | How the theory or model will be applied in the implementation of the evidence-based intervention is not discussed. | How the theory or model will be applied in the implementation of the evidence-based intervention is only partially discussed. | A discussion for how the theory or model will be applied in the implementation of the evidence-based intervention is presented. Some information or support is needed. | A discussion for how the theory or model will be applied in the implementation of the evidence-based intervention is presented. The narrative has adequate support and rationale. | A detailed discussion for how the theory or model will be applied in the implementation of the evidence-based intervention is presented in a logical and well-supported narrative. |
| Organization, Effectiveness, and Format | 30.0% |
| Thesis Development and Purpose | 7.0% | Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim. | Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear. | Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose. | Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose. | Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear. |
| Argument Logic and Construction | 8.0% | Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources. | Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility. | Argument is orderly but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis. | Argument shows logical progression. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative. | Clear and convincing argument presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative. |
| Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) | 5.0% | Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used. | Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied. | Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed. | Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech. | Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English. |
| Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) | 5.0% | Template is not used appropriately, or documentation format is rarely followed correctly. | Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent. | Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present. | Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style. | All format elements are correct. |
| Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) | 5.0% | Sources are not documented. | Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors. | Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present. | Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct. | Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error. |
| Total Weightage | 100% |
Drakejosh
Rubricforwk3.xlsx
