Module 1: Master's Prepared Nurse Interview Guide Criteria % Value 1: Unsatisfactory 2: Less Than Satisfactory 3: Satisfactory 4: Good 5: Excellent % Scaling 0% 80% 88% 92% 100% Content – 70% Introduction 5% Introduction lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim. Introduction is insufficiently developed and/or vague. Purpose is not clear. Introduction is clear, forecasting development of the paper. Introduction is comprehensive; purpose of the paper is present. Introduction is comprehensive and makes the purpose of the paper clear by restating the thesis. Career Overview 15% Omits major elements and is disorganized. Describes but fails to paint a clear picture of the nurse's career and/or progression in a logical order. Addresses most of the primary elements of the individual's career in a logical fashion. Addresses the primary elements. Reader can easily see purpose. Thoroughly presents all of the information to portray a clear chronology as well as richness of detail. Graduate Education 15% Omits major elements; is disorganized; and has no depth or detail. Describes but fails to address some of the elements; lacks depth and detail. Addresses the same elements but lacks depth and detail. Necessary elements are present and clearly presented. Decision-making process is evident to the reader. Thoroughly presents the process that led to the decision to seek graduate education as well as the program itself with clarity, order, and depth. Present Position (includes pearls of wisdom) 20% Omits major elements; information is tangential and disorganized. Describes but fails to address most of the primary elements in any depth. Addresses most of the primary elements of the present position with recognition of competencies but lacks detail. All key elements are presented with clarity. Thoroughly presents all of the key elements of the present position with emphasis on competencies required. Describes in rich detail, and includes advice given and original insights. Conclusion 15% Conclusion lacks any discernible purpose. Conclusion is insufficiently developed and/or vague. Conclusion is clear and identifies key points of interview but fails to draw inferences. Conclusion is clearly evident to the reader. Career opportunities are present. Conclusion is comprehensive; paints a clear picture of the potential outcomes and career opportunities of graduate education; identifies key points of the interview; and demonstrates insight and interpretation. Organization and Effectiveness – 20% Thesis Development and Purpose 7% Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim. Thesis and/or main claim are insufficiently developed and/or vague; purpose is not clear. Thesis and/or main claim are apparent and appropriate to purpose. Thesis and/or main claim are clear and forecast the development of the paper. It is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose. Thesis and/or main claim are com ...

1. Module 1: Master's Prepared Nurse Interview Guide
Criteria
% Value
1: Unsatisfactory
2: Less Than Satisfactory
3: Satisfactory
4: Good
5: Excellent
% Scaling
0%
80%
88%
92%
100%
Content – 70%
Introduction
5%
Introduction lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing
claim.
Introduction is insufficiently developed and/or vague. Purpose
is not clear.
Introduction is clear, forecasting development of the paper.
Introduction is comprehensive; purpose of the paper is present.
Introduction is comprehensive and makes the purpose of the
paper clear by restating the thesis.
Career
Overview
15%
Omits major elements and is disorganized.
Describes but fails to paint a clear picture of the nurse's career

2. and/or progression in a logical order.
Addresses most of the primary elements of the individual's
career in a logical fashion.
Addresses the primary elements. Reader can easily see purpose.
Thoroughly presents all of the information to portray a clear
chronology as well as richness of detail.
Graduate
Education
15%
Omits major elements; is disorganized; and has no depth or
detail.
Describes but fails to address some of the elements; lacks depth
and detail.
Addresses the same elements but lacks depth and detail.
Necessary elements are present and clearly presented. Decision-
making process is evident to the reader.
Thoroughly presents the process that led to the decision to seek
graduate education as well as the program itself with clarity,
order, and depth.
Present
Position (includes pearls of wisdom)
20%
Omits major elements; information is tangential and
disorganized.
Describes but fails to address most of the primary elements in
any depth.
Addresses most of the primary elements of the present position
with recognition of competencies but lacks detail.
All key elements are presented with clarity.
Thoroughly presents all of the key elements of the present
position with emphasis on competencies required. Describes in
rich detail, and includes advice given and original insights.
Conclusion
15%
Conclusion lacks any discernible purpose.

3. Conclusion is insufficiently developed and/or vague.
Conclusion is clear and identifies key points of interview but
fails to draw inferences.
Conclusion is clearly evident to the reader. Career opportunities
are present.
Conclusion is comprehensive; paints a clear picture of the
potential outcomes and career opportunities of graduate
education; identifies key points of the interview; and
demonstrates insight and interpretation.
Organization and Effectiveness – 20%
Thesis Development and Purpose
7%
Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.
Thesis and/or main claim are insufficiently developed and/or
vague; purpose is not clear.
Thesis and/or main claim are apparent and appropriate to
purpose.
Thesis and/or main claim are clear and forecast the development
of the paper. It is descriptive and reflective of the arguments
and appropriate to the purpose.
Thesis and/or main claim are comprehensive. The essence of the
paper is contained within the thesis. Thesis statement makes the
purpose of the paper clear.
Argument Logic and Construction
8%
Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The
conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is
incoherent and uses noncredible sources.
Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks
consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some
sources have questionable credibility.
Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The

4. argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument
logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources
used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the
thesis.
Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of
argumentation are evident.
There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to
conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.
Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim
in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are
authoritative.
Mechanics of Writing
(includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)
5%
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede
communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or
sentence construction are used.
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader.
Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence
structure, and/or word choice are present.
Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly
distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and
audience-appropriate language are used.
Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may
be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective
figures of speech are used.
Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic
English.
Format – 10%
Paper Format
(Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)
5%
Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is
rarely followed correctly.

5. Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or
mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent.
Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although
some minor errors may be present.
Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors
in formatting style.
All format elements are correct.
Research Citations
(In-text citations for paraphrasing and direct quotes, and
reference page listing and formatting, as appropriate to
assignment and style)
5%
No reference page is included. No citations are used.
Reference page is present. Citations are inconsistently used.
Reference page is included and lists sources used in the paper.
Sources are appropriately documented, although some errors
may be present.
Reference page is present and fully inclusive of all cited
sources. Documentation is appropriate and citation style is
usually correct.
In-text citations and a reference page are complete and correct.
The documentation of cited sources is free of error.
© 2011. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
CHE/1290 Chem Forensics Project Fall16.pdf
rev Fall 2016

6. Name: _______________________________________
CHEM 1290 Section No. ________
Chemical Forensics II Group Project
100 pts. total – due in lab per the posted Experiment Schedule
50 pts. = online participation; 50 pts. = answers to questions 1-2
This assignment is a group project that requires participation in
Blackboard. The discussion about this
assignment must take place on the group discussion board, as a
reply to the thread “Chem Forensics”. In
order to receive the participation points, you must post multiple
replies on the Discussion Board that
contribute constructively to the discussion; “I don’t understand
the assignment”, “I agree” or similar
postings will not receive any points. A minimum of ten original,
constructive and valid posts is required
to receive full credit for the online portion of the assignment.
Proper use of the vocabulary you have
learned in lab (precipitate, supernate, filtrate, etc.) is a
requirement of the assignment; points will be
deducted for improper use of this vocabulary. Each lab section
is a group and all of the information
needed to complete the assignment has already been or will be
covered in lab and/or your lab manual.
Although this is a group assignment, each student must turn in,
as a minimum, the written answers to the
questions below in order to receive credit for any part of this
assignment. The assignment is due at the
beginning of lab on the day of your last experiment for the
semester – see the posted Experiment
Schedule to confirm the date.

7. Note: Read the entire problem and make sure to follow ALL
directions for each question.
Scenario: You are an engineer supervising the work on a
brownfield remediation project. Just before the
close of business, as you are grabbing your coat, you notice one
of your coworkers left some
stock solutions out on the bench. Thinking you can quickly put
them away and then go home,
you walk over to do so, but you discover instead that the labels
have not been put on the stock
containers. There are labels on the counter, in front of the
containers, but they have not been
printed yet. There are four colorless glass containers, two of
which contain a clear, colorless
solution. The other two solutions have a dark bluish-green
color.
Over to the right are a number of containers that had been used
recently. These containers
contain chemical compounds, in solid form, that are commonly
used in your lab. They are:
barium nitrate, nickel(II) chloride, potassium nitrite, iron(III)
nitrate, lithium sulfate, aluminum
nitrate, sodium bromide, lead(II) chloride, calcium nitrate and
magnesium fluoride.
Can you identify the contents of the containers and put correct
labels on the containers?

8. 40 pts. 1. Design a flowchart to show how you would test the
solutions to determine what they
might be. The flowchart must clearly list the chemicals needed
for each test as well as
show the expected test results.
10 pts. 2. If you were actually confronted with this situation,
would you put labels on the
containers or would you dispose of the solutions? Explain your
answer.
CHE/How To Make Chemistry Flowcharts.pdf
Page 1 of 4
HOW-TO MAKE A FLOWCHART
Dr. John Rentner – University of Toledo
“A good flowchart should give a reader an immediate idea of
what needs to be done in
the laboratory except in a less detailed format. Think of a
flowchart as a "road map" of
the experiment. It gives a reader a "pictorial" representation of
the experimental
procedure. In general there are two major steps when
constructing the flowchart. First,
read the experimental procedure carefully. Second, rewrite the
procedures in a flowchart
format. Keep in mind that the flowchart should be brief and
cover all the steps in a simple

9. and easy to follow manner. There should be no complicated
sentences or paragraphs in
the flowchart. You may have to do a lot of rewriting in order to
simplify the procedures
into a flowchart format. This is exactly why we want you to do
it. This gives you a
chance to THINK about what you read and how to rewrite it in a
way that can be
implemented into a flowchart.”1
Flowchart Components
There is not any one “right” way to make a flowchart of one of
our chemistry
experiments. In business and industry, standard shaped boxes
are used to construct
flowcharts, which ensures that another person looking at the
flowchart will understand
what it means.
Chemistry flowcharts generally consist of four different
geometrically shaped “boxes”.
Terminal box (start or end of the experiment)
Processing box (steps in the experiment)
Connector box (a convenient place to join arrows together)

10. Decision box (makes branches in the experiment where you
have
to make a decision)
These “boxes” are connected with arrows showing the flow of
the experiment.
We’ll use these shapes, along with these few rules to construct
our flowcharts. (In Chem
1280 and 1290, we are not concerned that you always use
correctly shaped boxes, but
you should follow the rules listed below.)
Page 2 of 4
1. Make an explanatory title.
Example: LAB 484 – Relating Mass and Volume
2. Flowcharts begin with only one “start” terminal box but you
can end with one or
more “end” terminal boxes.
Example:

11. 3. Reagents added during the experiment are NOT shown in
boxes.
Example: Adding 3M HCl
Add 10mL 3M HCl
Obtain unknown sample;
record sample number
Weigh
unknown
sample
Gravity filter
Filter sample
Put filtrate down
drain

12. Dry and weigh
Residue
Page 3 of 4
4. Process boxes usually contain actions.
Example:
Here’s a complete example using the procedure in Chemistry
1280 lab 484 – Relating
Mass and Volume.
Here’s the procedure as written in the Lab Manual.2
1. Obtain an unknown from Group 1 from the supply cart.
Record its code on the
data sheet.
2. Obtain a 25 mL graduated cylinder from the supply cart. Add
approx. 15 mL of
water to the cylinder. Measure and record the volume of water

13. in the cylinder.
3. Place the cylinder on the balance and record its mass.
4. Carefully add enough of the unknown sample to change the
volume of water in
the cylinder by approx. 0.5 mL. Measure and record the mass of
the cylinder, and
record the new volume of water in the cylinder.
5. Repeat step 4 four more times.
6. Carefully pour off the water from the solid sample in the
cylinder. Transfer the
solids to a paper towel so that they can dry while you continue
with the second
unknown sample.
7. Obtain a different unknown from the second group from the
supply cart and
record its code on the data sheet.
8. Obtain a 50 mL graduated cylinder from the supply cart. Add
approx. 25 mL of
water to the cylinder. Measure and record the volume of water
in the cylinder.
9. Repeat steps 3-6 with the second unknown so that the volume
change is

14. approximately 1.0 mL
10. Return the dried samples to your instructor. Do NOT return
them to the containers
on the supply cart.
Dry over boiling
water bath
Page 4 of 4
Below is a flowchart that graphically represents the procedure
using the rules above and
illustrating the use of the different shaped boxes. In this
procedure, the only reagents we
add during the experiment are water and more unknown sample.
1 Wun Chiou (A Former UCLA First-Year Lab Courses
Teaching Assistant), 2004.
2 Edith Kippenhan, CHEM 1280 Lab Manual, General
Chemistry Lab I, Academic Year
2010-2011, University of Toledo, 2010.
CHE/Screen Shot 2017-04-11 at 1.54.36 PM.png