META-ANALYSES

NURS_8310_Week8_Assignment_Rubric

Criteria

Ratings

Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIn 2–3 pages, not including title page and references, address the following:Identify your selected article. Explain what characteristics make this a meta-analysis.

20 to >17.0 ptsExcellentThe article is clearly identified. The response accurately, clearly, and concisely explains the characteristics that make it a meta-analysis.

17 to >15.0 ptsGoodThe article is clearly identified. The response accurately explains the characteristics that make it a meta-analysis.

15 to >13.0 ptsFairThe article is identified. The response somewhat inaccurately or vaguely explains the characteristics that make it a meta-analysis.

13 to >0 ptsPoorThe response inaccurately or vaguely identifies the article and explains the characteristics that make it a meta-analysis, or it is missing.

20 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWere the inclusion and exclusion criteria clearly stated? How were the articles that were included selected? Do you agree with the researchers’ approach? Explain why or why not.

20 to >17.0 ptsExcellentThe response provides an accurate, clear, and concise explanation of whether the inclusion and exclusion criteria were clearly stated and how included articles were selected. A critique of the researcher’s approach with strong rationale is included.

17 to >15.0 ptsGoodThe response provides an accurate explanation of whether the inclusion and exclusion criteria were clearly stated and how included articles were selected. A critique of the researcher’s approach with rationale is included.

15 to >13.0 ptsFairThe response provides a somewhat inaccurate or vague explanation of whether the inclusion and exclusion criteria were clearly stated and how included articles were selected. Critique of the researcher’s approach is somewhat vague, or rationale is inadequate.

13 to >0 ptsPoorThe response provides an inaccurate and vague explanation of whether the inclusion and exclusion criteria were clearly stated and how included articles were selected or is missing. Critique of the researcher’s approach is vague, inaccurate, unsupported, or missing.

20 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDo you agree with the conclusions? Explain why or why not.

20 to >17.0 ptsExcellentA clear and concise critique of the study’s conclusions that demonstrates strong critical thinking is provided.

17 to >15.0 ptsGoodA clear critique of the study’s conclusions that demonstrates some critical thinking is provided.

15 to >13.0 ptsFairA somewhat inaccurate or vague critique of the study’s conclusions is provided.

13 to >0 ptsPoorAn inaccurate and vague critique of the study’s conclusions is provided, or it is missing.

20 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeExplain how you could apply implications from the study to your nursing practice.

25 to >22.0 ptsExcellentAn accurate and detailed explanation of how the study could be applied to nursing practice is provided.

22 to >19.0 ptsGoodAn accurate explanation of how the study could be applied to nursing practice is provided.

19 to >17.0 ptsFairA somewhat inaccurate or vague explanation of how the study could be applied to nursing practice is provided.

17 to >0 ptsPoorAn inaccurate and vague explanation of how the study could be applied to nursing practice is provided, or it is missing.

25 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten 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 is provided which delineates all required criteria.

5 to >4.0 ptsExcellentParagraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity.... A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion is provided which delineates all required criteria.

4 to >3.5 ptsGoodParagraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time.... Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is stated, yet is brief and not descriptive.

3.5 to >3.0 ptsFairParagraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%–79% of the time.... Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is vague or off topic.

3 to >0 ptsPoorParagraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time.... No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion was provided.

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

4 to >3.5 ptsGoodContains a few (1 or 2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.

3.5 to >3.0 ptsFairContains several (3 or 4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.

3 to >0 ptsPoorContains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding.

5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting: The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list.

5 to >4.0 ptsExcellentUses correct APA format with no errors.

4 to >3.5 ptsGoodContains a few (1 or 2) APA format errors.

3.5 to >3.0 ptsFairContains several (3 or 4) APA format errors.

3 to >0 ptsPoorContains many (≥ 5) APA format errors.

5 pts