RUBRIC.docx

CRITERIA

70-60 POINTS

59-35 POINTS

34-25 POINTS

24-10 POINTS

9-0 POINTS

Specific DNP Role, why chosen

Complete for part 1

Clear description of the specific DNP role of interest, identifies why this role was chosen. Includes sources identifying why there is a gap related to this role, extrapolates content from references into focused, organized description of the needed role.  Be sure to differentiate how/why the DNP is more prepared than a MSN educator in addressing these issues What are the differences coming from a DNP perspective? What skills will the DNP have that the MSN RN would not? 

Generally clear description of the DNP role with all components included. Some gaps need more development and explanation as to how they impact the potential new role. Provides some explanation of how the MSN and DNP nurse bringing differing skills and preparation but not well described.

Inconsistent description of the specific DNP role chosen, topics addressing why chosen, gaps related to or limited references (or supporting evidence) showing the need for this role, differences b/w MSN and DNP in role

Little or no relevant detail or lacks depth – cursory description of role; many areas that could be expanded regarding the specific DNP role and why the role was chosen, along with limited identification of the gaps related to this role.

Significantly Limited or no description of the specific role, no discussion of why the role is of interest. Sources minimal to show gaps or need for this role. Unfocused, unorganized description of the needed role

SWOT Analysis

Complete for Part 1

Describes thoroughly the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats for the DNP role. Includes references supporting findings.

Describes the SWOT analysis, but some areas could include more content related to the topic, limited references

Superficial description of some the SWOT analysis components; areas need more development; some areas unclear,

Little or no relevant detail; many areas that could be expanded regarding the SWOT analysis components

Limited or no analysis provided of the SWOT components

PEST Analysis

Complete for Part 2

Describes thoroughly the political, economical, social and technological influences – current and potential, as they impact the DNP role, references as appropriate

Describes the PEST analysis, but some areas could include more content related to the topic

Superficial or inconsistent description of some the PEST analysis components; areas need more development; some areas unclear

Little or no relevant detail; many areas that could be expanded regarding the PEST analysis

Limited or no analysis of the PEST components

Next steps for this new DNP role

Complete for Part 2

Presents implementation strategies addressing stakeholder support for new role, potential funding/costs of new role including savings if they exist, theoretical framework to assist with implementation, and potential evaluation methods to determine effectiveness of new role.

Provides a summary of the need for the DNP nurse in the identified role in a short paragraph

Describes the implementation plans, but some areas could include more content related to the topic; some of the key ideas are not clearly developed, summary does not tie concepts of the paper together well.

Superficial or incomplete description of some the plans for implementation; areas need more development; some areas unclear, summary or conclusion paragraph superficial or does not address importance of DNP in this role

Little or no relevant detail pertinent to the implementation of the role; many areas that could be expanded regarding stakeholder support, cost or evaluation methods, limited summary included.

Limited or no discussion of the next steps to implement this proposed new role in terms of support, expense, or evaluation methods, no summary provided

6-5 POINTS

4-3 POINTS

2 POINTS

1 POINTS

0 POINTS

Thesis / Topic

Exceptionally clear; easily identifiable, insightful; introduces the topic for the paper; summary in one or two well-written sentences.

Generally clear; is promising; could be a little more inclusive of the content of the paper.

Central idea is adequate but not fully developed; may be somewhat unclear (contains vague terms); only gives a vague idea of the content of the paper.

Difficult to identify with inadequate illustration of key ideas; does not let the reader know what the paper is going to include.

No thesis statement or introduction is identifiable.

6-5 POINTS

4-3 POINTS

2 POINTS

1 POINTS

0 POINTS

Content / Development

Thesis coherently developed and maintained throughout; thorough explanation of key idea(s) at an appropriate level for the target audience; critical thinking with excellent understanding of the topic; original in scope (this paper made sense, was easy to understand, and did not leave reader with questions due to incomplete development).

Explanation or illustration of key ideas consistent throughout essay; original but may be somewhat lacking in insight; minor topics of the paper could be developed more thoroughly.

Explanation or illustration of some of the key ideas; reader is left with some questions due to inadequate development; content may be a little confusing or unclear as to what the author means.

Little or no relevant detail; many areas that could be expanded.

Paper does not make sense; unclear what the author is trying to say; very little real information presented.

6-5 POINTS

4-3 POINTS

2 POINTS

1 POINTS

0 POINTS

Organization

Good organization with clear focus and excellent transition between paragraphs; logical order to presentation of information; paragraphs are well-organized; easy to understand and makes sense.

Adequate organizational style with logical transition between paragraphs; overall or paragraph organization could be slightly improved.

Adequate organizational style, although flow is somewhat choppy and may wander occasionally; somewhat confusing due to organization of paper or paragraphs.

Incoherent structure; logic is unclear; paragraph transition is weak; difficult to understand; must re-read parts to figure out what is being said.

No order to content; very confusing and difficult to read; makes no sense.

6-5 POINTS

4-3 POINTS

2 POINTS

1 POINTS

0 POINTS

Mechanics

Skillful use of language; varied, accurate vocabulary; well-developed sentence structure with minimal errors in punctuation, spelling or grammar; appropriate margins, font; correct application of research style format; use of professional active voice; very well-written paper.

Appropriate use of language with a few errors in grammar, sentence structure, punctuation; fairly accurate interpretation of assignment guidelines, with a few minor errors; readability of paper only slightly affected by mistakes.

Some problems with sentence structure, grammar, punctuation, and/or spelling; may have several run-on sentences or comma splices; some errors in citation style; format does not fully comply with assignment guidelines; somewhat difficult to read due to mistakes.

Many difficulties in sentence structure, grammar, citation style, punctuation, spelling and/or misused words; proper format not used consistently ; many errors in citation style very difficult to understand.

Not written at a graduate level; many mistakes; proper format not used consistently ; many errors in citation style; difficult to read and understand.

6-5 POINTS

4-3 POINTS

2 POINTS

1 POINTS

0 POINTS

References

Uses sources effectively and documents sources accurately with minimal errors; limited use of direct quotes (No more than 2 or 3); meets reference requirements for assignment; reference list is in correct format.

Appropriate sources and documentation; may have minimal errors with too few or too many in-text citations; missing no more than one reference as required for the assignment.

Some quotes not integrated smoothly into text; several errors with in-text citations or reference list; omitted in-text citations infrequently; missing   2 required references; overuse of direct quotes

Quotes are not well integrated into narrative or are significantly overused; paraphrasing is too close to original work. (Minimal errors only; more significant errors will be considered plagiarism – See Plagiarism statement to right.)

Plagiarism – source material not adequately paraphrased; direct quotes not identified; source material not referenced. *Plagiarized   papers will be given a grade of zero and could result in failure of the   course