| Unit 9 assignment grading rubric. Instructors: Enter total available points in cell H2, and values between 0 and 4 in the yellow cells in the Score column. |
| Total available points = | | | | | | | 275 |
| Content Rubric | Introductory | Emergent | Practiced | Proficient/Mastered | Score | Weight | Final Score |
| | 0 - 1.9 | 2 - 2.9 | 3 - 3.9 | 4 |
| Abstract | The assignment does not address any or all of this section | The assignment contains some information on this area of focus, but needs more clarity. Topic needs to be developed more thoroughly. | Entry well-constructed and demonstrated basic connection to the course materials, the required topic and/or upper-level thinking (application or analysis). | Group project demonstrates substantial integration of course materials and/or use of upper level thinking (legal synthesis of malpractice case). | | 10% | 0.00 |
| Current situation necessitating the change | The assignment does not address any or all of this section. | The assignment contains some information on this area of focus, but needs more clarity. Topic needs to be developed more thoroughly. | Entry well-constructed and demonstrated basic connection to the course materials, the required topic and/or upper-level thinking (application or analysis). | Group project demonstrates substantial integration of course materials and/or use of upper level thinking (legal synthesis of malpractice case). | | 10% | 0.00 |
| The proposed policy change | The assignment does not address any or all of this section. | The assignment contains some information on this area of focus, but needs more clarity. Topic needs to be developed more thoroughly. | Entry well-constructed and demonstrated basic connection to the course materials, the required topic and/or upper-level thinking (application or analysis). | Group project demonstrates substantial integration of course materials and/or use of upper level thinking (legal synthesis of malpractice case). | | 10% | 0.00 |
| Agenda setting | The assignment does not address any or all of this section. | The assignment contains some information on this area of focus, but needs more clarity. Topic needs to be developed more thoroughly. | Entry well-constructed and demonstrated basic connection to the course materials, the required topic and/or upper-level thinking (application or analysis). | Group project demonstrates substantial integration of course materials and/or use of upper level thinking (legal synthesis of malpractice case). | | 10% | 0.00 |
| A model or theory that can be used to bring about the change | The assignment does not address any or all of this section. | The assignment contains some information on this area of focus, but needs more clarity. Topic needs to be developed more thoroughly. | Entry well-constructed and demonstrated basic connection to the course materials, the required topic and/or upper-level thinking (application or analysis). | Group project demonstrates substantial integration of course materials and/or use of upper level thinking (legal synthesis of malpractice case). | | 10% | 0.00 |
| Design strategies | The assignment does not address any or all of this section. | The assignment contains some information on this area of focus, but needs more clarity. Topic needs to be developed more thoroughly. | Entry well-constructed and demonstrated basic connection to the course materials, the required topic and/or upper-level thinking (application or analysis). | Group project demonstrates substantial integration of course materials and/or use of upper level thinking (legal synthesis of malpractice case). | | 10% | 0.00 |
| Implementation strategies | The assignment does not address any or all of this section. | The assignment contains some information on this area of focus, but needs more clarity. Topic needs to be developed more thoroughly. | Entry well-constructed and demonstrated basic connection to the course materials, the required topic and/or upper-level thinking (application or analysis). | Group project demonstrates substantial integration of course materials and/or use of upper level thinking (legal synthesis of malpractice case). | | 10% | 0.00 |
| Evaluation strategies | The assignment does not address any or all of this section. | The assignment contains some information on this area of focus, but needs more clarity. Topic needs to be developed more thoroughly. | Entry well-constructed and demonstrated basic connection to the course materials, the required topic and/or upper-level thinking (application or analysis). | Group project demonstrates substantial integration of course materials and/or use of upper level thinking (legal synthesis of malpractice case). | | 10% | 0.00 |
| Conclusion | The assignment does not address any or all of this section. | The assignment contains some information on this area of focus, but needs more clarity. Topic needs to be developed more thoroughly. | Entry well-constructed and demonstrated basic connection to the course materials, the required topic and/or upper-level thinking (application or analysis). | Group project demonstrates substantial integration of course materials and/or use of upper level thinking (legal synthesis of malpractice case). | | 10% | 0.00 |
| Cooperates with group. Assists with assignments, | Does not cooperate with the group or does not participate. | Participates but does not put full efforts in or is disruptive to the group. | Participates in group process. | Exceptional Meet Requirements. | | 10% | 0.00 |
| | | | | | | Content Score | 0.00 |
| Writing Deduction Rubric (everyone starts with 4's = no deductions) | Introductory | Emergent | Practiced | Proficient/Mastered | Score | Weight | Final Score |
| | 0-1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
| Grammar & Punctuation | The overall meaning of the paper is difficult to understand. Sentence structure, subject verb agreement errors, missing prepositions, and missing punctuation make finding meaning difficult. | Several confusing sentences or 1 to 2 confusing paragraphs make understanding parts of the paper difficult, but the overall paper meaning is clear. Many subject verb agreement errors, run-on sentences, etc. cause confusion. | A few confusing sentences make it difficult to understand a small portion of the paper. However, the overall meaning of a paragraph and the paper are intact. There may be a few subject verb agreement errors or some missing punctuation. | There are one or two confusing sentences, but the overall sentence and paragraph meanings are clear. There are a few minor punctuation errors such as comma splices or run-on sentences. | 4 | 35% | 1.40 |
| Spelling | The many misspelled words and incorrect words choices significantly interfere with the readability. | Many typos, misspelled words, or the use of incorrect words making understanding difficult in a few places. | Some misspelled words or the misuse of words such as confusing then/than. However, intent is still clear. | A few misspelled words normally caught by spellcheckers are present but do not significantly interfere with the overall readability of the paper. | 4 | 35% | 1.40 |
| Order of Ideas & Length Requirement | Paper has some good information or research, but it does not follow assignment directions and is lacking in overall organization and content. | The order of information is confusing in several places and this organization interferes with the meaning or intent of the paper. However, the paper has a generally discernible purpose and follows assignment directions overall. | The order of information is confusing in a few places and the lack of organization interferes with the meaning or intent of the paper in a minor way. | The overall order of the information is clear and contributes to the meaning of assignment. There is one paragraph or a sentence or two that are out of place or other minor organizational issues. A few sentences may be long and hard to understand. Meets length requirements. | 4 | 20% | 0.80 |
| APA | There is some attempt at APA formatting and citing. There are one or more missing parts such as the cover page or references list. Citation information may be missing. Citation mistakes make authorship unclear. | This is an attempt use APA formatting and citing. There are both in-text citations and reference listings. Citation information may be missing or incorrect (i.e. Websites listed as in-text or reference citations). There is an attempt to cite all outside sources in at least one place. Authorship is generally clear. | There is an overall attempt at APA formatting and citation style. All sources appear to have some form of citation both in the text and on a reference list. There are some formatting and citation errors. Citations generally make authorship clear. | There is a strong attempt to cite all sources using APA style. Minor paper formatting errors such as a misplaced running head or margins may occur. Minor in-text citation errors such as a missing page number or a misplaced date may occur. Quotation marks and citations make authorship clear. | 4 | 10% | 0.40 |
| | | | | | | Writing Deduction | 0.00 |
| | | | | | | Final Score | 0.00 |
| | | | | | | Percentage | 0.00% |
| Feedback: |
nurse4life
unit_9_assignment_grading_rubric.xlsx
