nursing

sweetpaula

Rubriforassignmenttofollow.docx

Home >Nursing homework help >nursing

NURS_6052_Module02_Week03_Assignment_Rubric

NURS_6052_Module02_Week03_Assignment_Rubric

Criteria

Ratings

Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePart 1: Identifying Research Methodologies After reading each of the four peer-reviewed articles you selected, use the Matrix Worksheet template to analyze the methodologies applied in each article. Your analysis should include the following: *The full citation of each peer-reviewed article in APA format *A brief statement explaining why you chose this peer-reviewed article and/or how it relates to your clinical issue of interest, including a brief explanation of the ethics of research related to your clinical issue of interest. *A brief description of the aims of the research of each article *A brief description of the research methodology used. Be sure to identify if the methodology used was qualitative, quantitative, or a mixed methods approach.

90 to >80.0 pts

Excellent

The response accurately and clearly provides a full citation of each article in APA format. ...The responses accurately and thoroughly explain the selection of these articles and/or how they relate to a clinical issue of interest, including a detailed explanation of the ethics of research. ...The responses accurately and clearly describe the aims of the research. ...The responses accurately and clearly describe the research methodology used, and clearly identify the type of methodology used with specific and relevant examples. ...The responses accurately and clearly describe the strengths of each of the research methodologies used, including a detailed explanation of the reliability and validity of how the methodology was applied in each of the articles selected.

80 to >71.0 pts

Good

The response accurately provides a full citation of each article in APA format. ...The responses accurately explain the selection of these articles and/or how they relate to a clinical issue of interest, including a detailed explanation of the ethics of research. ...The responses accurately describe the aims of the research. ...The responses accurately describe the research methodology used, and clearly identify the type of methodology used with specific and relevant examples. ...The responses accurately describe the strengths of each of the research methodologies used, including a detailed explanation of the reliability and validity of how the methodology was applied in each of the articles selected.

71 to >62.0 pts

Fair

The response provides incomplete or inaccurate citations of each peer-reviewed article in APA format. ...The responses inaccurately or vaguely explain the selection of these articles and/or how they relate to a clinical issue of interest, including the explanation of the ethics. ...The responses inaccurately or vaguely describe the aims of the research of each article. ...The responses inaccurately or vaguely describe the research methodology used and the type of methodology used, with only some examples. ...The responses inaccurately or vaguely describe the strengths of each of the research methodologies used, including the explanation of the reliability and validity of how the methodology was applied in each of the articles selected.

62 to >0 pts

Poor

The response inaccurately and vaguely provides a citation of each peer-reviewed article in APA format or is missing. ...The responses inaccurately & vaguely explain the selection of these articles and/or how they relate to a clinical issue, including the explanation of ethics of research, or they are missing. ...The responses inaccurately and vaguely describe the aims of the research, or they are missing. ...The responses inaccurately and vaguely describe the research methodology used, the type of methodology used with no examples present, or they are missing. ...The responses inaccurately and vaguely describe the strengths of each of the methodologies used, including the explanation of the reliability and validity of the methodology, or they are missing.

90 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeResource Synthesis

5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent

The responses provide a complete, detailed, and specific synthesis of two outside resources related to the selection of articles and two or three course-specific resources in addition to the four articles reviewed in the matrix.

4 to >3.0 pts

Good

The responses provide an accurate synthesis of at least one outside resource related to the selection of articles. The response integrates at least one outside resource and two or three course-specific resources in addition to the four articles reviewed in the matrix.

3 to >2.0 pts

Fair

The responses provided vaguely or inaccurately synthesize outside resources related to the selection of the articles. The response minimally integrates resources that may support the responses provided in addition to the four articles reviewed in the matrix.

2 to >0 pts

Poor

The responses provide a vague and inaccurate synthesis of outside resources related to the selection of the articles and fail to integrate any resources to support the responses provided, or synthesis is missing.

5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting—English Writing Standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation.

5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent

Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors.

4 to >3.0 pts

Good

Contains a few (one or two) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.

3 pts

Fair

Contains several (three or four) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.

3 to >0 pts

Poor

Contains many (five or more) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding.

5 pts

Total Points: 100