Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
Ministry of Education
University of Hail
College of Nursing
المملكة العربية السعودية
وزارة التعليم
جامـعـة حـائل
كلية التمريض
Master of Science in Nursing (MSN) – Emergency Nursing
Emergency Nursing Care II Theory (NURS 521)
Literature Review Paper Evaluation Criteria
Literature Review Paper Guidelines
Identify a patient-related clinical issue (e.g., patients' response to illness or therapy, nursing intervention strategy). Then review the literature specific to the identified issue. The review should reflect a scholarly writing in terms of knowledge, analysis, originality, synthesis, and structure and organization. The content should include: significance of the issue; structured, logical, and organized discussion and understanding of the current literature; research-based conclusion; and recommendations for future research.
The paper should not exceed 15 double spaced pages excluding illustrations, tables, figures, and references.
Due Date April 16, 2020
Student Name:
Student ID:
Semester/Year:
Overall Given Mark:
/ 30
Criteria for Evaluation of the Literature Review Paper:
No
Concept
Poor
1
Acceptable
3
Ideal
5
Given Mark
A
Introduction:
A.1
Clear overview of paper, demonstrates importance of topic and extrapolate the key points from the literature
B
Body:
B.1
Balanced viewpoint: Objective, balanced view from various perspectives
B.2
Coherent theme: Each cited study related to the topic and to other studies
B.3
Depth and breadth of research: Variety of studies and attention to detail about the topic
B.4
Applications: Concepts discussed are related to real life situations
B.5
Significance: Rationalize the practical significance of the research problem
B.6
Comprehension: Clear explanation and interpretation of the key points and vocabularies explored from the literature
B.7
Variables: Articulate important variables and phenomena relevant to the topic
B.8
Methodologies: Identify the main methodologies and research techniques that have been used in the field, and their advantages and disadvantages
B.9
Analysis: Includes a variety of sources from high-quality journals and publications that are analyzed for differences and commonalities about the topic, comparing and contrasting a variety of views from literature and practice
B.10
Argument: Developed in a coherent, logical, well balanced and sequential manner
C
Synthesis and Conclusion:
C.1
Synthesized and gained a new perspective on the literature
C.2
Information synthesized and brought to a clear and logical conclusion
C.3
Evidence of creativity and independent thinking
C.4
Research question(s) are formed through the literature review and clearly stated.
D
Evaluation
D.1
Identifying areas for future development in research, practice and education
E
Organization and Alignment:
E.1
Information logically organized with good flow.
F
Writing:
F.1
Correct spelling, punctuation, sentence structu ...
Kingdom of Saudi ArabiaMinistry of EducationUniversity of Ha
1. Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
Ministry of Education
University of Hail
College of Nursing
ة عودي س ال ية عرب ال كة ل مم ال
يم ل ع ت ال وزارة
ل ـائح عـة جامـ
ض تمري ال ية ل ك
Master of Science in Nursing (MSN) – Emergency Nursing
Emergency Nursing Care II Theory (NURS 521)
Literature Review Paper Evaluation Criteria
Literature Review Paper Guidelines
Identify a patient-related clinical issue (e.g., patients' response
to illness or therapy, nursing intervention strategy). Then
review the literature specific to the identified issue. The review
should reflect a scholarly writing in terms of knowledge,
analysis, originality, synthesis, and structure and organization.
The content should include: significance of the issue;
structured, logical, and organized discussion and understa nding
of the current literature; research-based conclusion; and
recommendations for future research.
The paper should not exceed 15 double spaced pages excluding
illustrations, tables, figures, and references.
Due Date April 16, 2020
Student Name:
Student ID:
2. Semester/Year:
Overall Given Mark:
/ 30
Criteria for Evaluation of the Literature Review Paper:
No
Concept
Poor
1
Acceptable
3
Ideal
5
Given Mark
A
Introduction:
A.1
Clear overview of paper, demonstrates importance of topic and
extrapolate the key points from the literature
B
Body:
B.1
Balanced viewpoint: Objective, balanced view from various
perspectives
B.2
Coherent theme: Each cited study related to the topic and to
other studies
3. B.3
Depth and breadth of research: Variety of studies and attention
to detail about the topic
B.4
Applications: Concepts discussed are related to real life
situations
B.5
Significance: Rationalize the practical significance of the
research problem
B.6
Comprehension: Clear explanation and interpretation of the key
points and vocabularies explored from the literature
B.7
Variables: Articulate important variables and phenomena
relevant to the topic
4. B.8
Methodologies: Identify the main methodologies and research
techniques that have been used in the field, and their advantages
and disadvantages
B.9
Analysis: Includes a variety of sources from high-quality
journals and publications that are analyzed for differences and
commonalities about the topic, comparing and contrasting a
variety of views from literature and practice
B.10
Argument: Developed in a coherent, logical, well balanced and
sequential manner
C
Synthesis and Conclusion:
C.1
Synthesized and gained a new perspective on the literature
C.2
5. Information synthesized and brought to a clear and logical
conclusion
C.3
Evidence of creativity and independent thinking
C.4
Research question(s) are formed through the literature review
and clearly stated.
D
Evaluation
D.1
Identifying areas for future development in research, practice
and education
E
Organization and Alignment:
E.1
Information logically organized with good flow.
6. F
Writing:
F.1
Correct spelling, punctuation, sentence structure, word usage,
and capitalization, with the use of the standard English which
demonstrates good grammar.
G
APA:
G.1
Correct, accurate and consistent of use of APA in body of paper
H
References:
H.1
References correctly typed, appropriate number and quality
Total (out of 100)
Evaluator Name
Evaluator’s signature
Page 2 of 2