for expert_researcher

profilekaki2274
_journal_article_review_guidelines__week_2.docx
Home>Literature homework help>for expert_researcher

Journal Article Review:

Guidelines and Grading Rubric

Purpose

The student will read an assigned nursing article and write a critique related to a selected topic.

Course Outcomes

This assignment enables the student to meet the following course outcomes:

CO #3: Utilize effective communication when performing a health assessment. (PO #3)

CO #5: Explore the professional responsibilities involved in conducting a comprehensive health assessment and providing appropriate documentation. (PO #6)

Points

This assignment is worth a total of 100 points.

Directions

Lloyd, H., & Craig. S. (2007). A guide to taking a patient’s history. Nursing Standard, 22(13), 42-48.

The elements of the reference are:

Authors: Lloyd, H., & Craig, S.

Date: 2007

Title: A guide to taking a patient's history, Clinical skills: 28

Journal: Nursing Standard, volume 22, issue 13, pages 42-48

1. Read the article carefully and take notes. Highlight important points in the article that are helpful to you and other students.

2. Use Microsoft Word 2007 (or later) to type the paper.

3. The length of the paper is to be no longer than four (4) pages excluding title page and reference page. Extra pages will not be read and will not count toward your grade.

4. APA format is required. Include a title page and a reference page. The body of the paper should have four sections with these headings:

a. Introduction

b. Summary of the Article

c. Evaluation of the Article

d. Conclusion

5. Use scholarly writing including correct English grammar, syntax and sentence structure.

Grading Criteria

Category

Points

%

Description

Introduction

2

2

The Introduction is the first part of the body of the paper. It should be one paragraph that include:

· Author(s) full name,

· Article title

· Journal name

· Date of publication

Summary of the article

38

38

The Summary is the second part of the body of the paper. It should include:

· Focus of the article

· Health assessment procedure and rationales discussed

· Health assessment tools and/or strategies discussed

Evaluation of the Article

30

30

Evaluate the article. Include a full one- to-two page critique that answers all of the following questions:

· What was done well and what could have been improved in the article?

· Did this article interest you? If so, explain why. If not, explain this reaction.

· Was the health assessment strategy beneficial? Could you adopt it in your practice?

· Was the health assessment strategy explained clearly?

· Should more research articles be written about this area of health assessment?

· What population or individuals would benefit the most from information reported in this article?

Conclusion

10

10

Identify the main ideas and major support points from the body of your report. Omit minor details. Summarize the benefits of proper assessment for the patient.

Scholarly writing

15

15

Use standard English grammar and sentence structure. Make no spelling or typographical errors. Organize the paper according to the required components including the use of appropriate headers.

APA format

5

5

Follow APA formatting according to the 6th edition of the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association. Include a Title page and References page. Follow the APA rules for margins, font type, font size, etc. Create an in-text for all information mentioned that appears in another source, even if you summarize the information. The References list should include all sources mentioned in in-text citations. Likewise, your References should only list sources that are cited in the body of the paper.

Total

100

100%

A quality paper will meet or exceed all of the above requirements.

Grading Rubric

Assignment Criteria

Meets Criteria

Partially Meets Criteria

Does Not Meet Criteria

Introduction

(2 pts)

Full and complete identification of article including the author(s) full name, article title, journal name, and date of publication.

2 points

Partial identification of article required elements.

1 point

No Introduction

0 points

Summary of the article

(38 pts)

Summary complete; thoroughly covers all required elements.

34–38 points

Summary is incomplete and/or not all required elements covered.

29–33 points

Summary of article elements is minimal.

0–28 points

Evaluation of the Article

(30 pts)

Excellent critique of article demonstrates critical thinking; answered all required questions.

27–30 points

Critique demonstrated basic understanding of article; answered all but one of the required questions.

23–26 points

Poor critique of article; lacks critical or original thinking. Failed to answer 2 or more questions.

0–22 points

Conclusion

(10 pts)

Excellent understanding of article. Original explanation is well evidenced and developed.

9–10 points

Basic understanding and/or limited use of original explanation and/or inappropriate emphasis on an area.

7–8 points

Little understanding of article. Little to no original explanation; inappropriate emphasis on an area.

0–6 points

Scholarly writing

(15 pts)

Excellent use of standard English showing original thought. No spelling or grammar errors. Well organized with good flow of meaning.

14–15 points

Some evidence of own expression & competently uses language. Few spelling or grammar errors Well organized.

11–13 points

Language needs development. Many spelling and/or grammar errors. Poorly organized thoughts and concepts.

0–10 points

APA format

(5 pts)

APA correct with minimal errors.

4–5 points

3-5 errors in APA, grammar, spelling, or syntax, and/or 1-2 citations are missing.

2–3 points

APA, grammar, spelling and/or punctuation contain multiple errors and/or many citations are missing.

0–1 points

Total Points Possible = 100 points

3