Exemplary DemonstrationProficientDemonstrationDevelo

•Download as DOCX, PDF•

0 likes•2 views

This document outlines a rubric for evaluating demonstrations on the impact of medical issues on service members and their families. It evaluates demonstrations on several criteria in 4 levels: Exemplary, Proficient, Developing, and Beginning. For each criterion, like use of evidence-based practices or APA formatting, it provides point ranges to assess the demonstration as Exemplary, Proficient, Developing, or Beginning. Criteria include comprehensively addressing the topic, using academic sources, proper APA style, and appropriately using military terms. Higher point ranges indicate expectations were exceeded, while lower ranges mean expectations were not fully met.

Education

Exemplary Demonstration
Proficient
Demonstration
Developing Demonstration
Beginning
Demonstration
Impact on Mental Health regarding Medical Issues on Service
Member and Family
25 points
Expectations are exceeded significantly about impact: a high
degree of competence is demonstrated, responds creatively,
would require little or no changes
22-25 points
Expectations are met about impact: a satisfactory degree of
competence is demonstrated, responds competently, would
require limited changes
19-21 points
Expectations are partially met about impact: a limited degree of
competence demonstrated, responds incompletely, would require
changes in several areas.
12-18 points
Expectations are not met in this area: minimal or no competence
demonstrated, responds inadequately, would require extensive
changes

0-11 points
Description of evidence based practices and use
25 points
Assignment addressed each EBP area of the question with added
information about the subject matter.
22-25 points
Assignment addressed most of each EBP area of the question .
19-21 points
Assignment addressed some EBP areas of the question.
12- 18 points
Assignment addressed none of the components (or none) in the
question.
0-11 points
APA Formatting Writing
Consent Form signed
Two academic resources per issue
10 points
No errors in APA
formatting. Scholarly
style. At least two academic references used per issue.
Writing is
flowing and easy
to follow.
The assignment consistently
models the language and conventions used in scholarly/
professional literature
appropriate to the student’s
discipline and is error-free. The
Assignment would meet the

guidelines for submission for
publication in a peer reviewed
scholarly journal in the student's
field of study. APA
formatting is error-free.
9- 10 points
Errors in APA
style are occasional. At least one reference used. Two resources
per issue but not all were academic.
The
style and format
(APA) are broadly
followed, but
inconsistencies are
apparent. There is
selection of less
suitable scholarly
sources (non-peer
reviewed literature,
excessive use web
information). Weak
transitions and
apparent logic gaps
occur between topics
being addressed. The
style may be difficult
to follow so as to
detract from the
comprehensibility of
the Assignment.
7-8 points
Errors in APA

style are
noticeable.
Not enough references or lack of complete references.
Word choice
occasionally
informal in tone.
Writing has a few
awkward or
unclear passages.
While
some educational
conventions are
followed, others are
not. Assignment lacks
consistency of style
and no evidence of
the use of APA in
formatting. It may be
unclear which
references are direct
quotes and which are
paraphrased. Based
on the information
provided, the reader
would have some
difficulty referring
back to cited sources.
Significant revisions
would contribute to
the comprehensibility
of the assignment.
4-6 points
Errors in APA
style detract

substantially from
the assignment.
No references Word choice is
informal in tone.
Writing is choppy,
with many
awkward or
unclear passages.
The stylistic
conventions of scholarly
writing are not followed.
Fails to demonstrate
thoroughness and
competence in
documentation.
Inappropriate style and
format make reading and
comprehensibility
problematic. Please seek help from the writing center.
0-3 points
Military Integration
15 points
Assignment consistently used appropriate military terms and
concepts while adding information about military culture
14-15 points
Assignment used appropriate military terms and concepts
12-13 points
Assignment minimally used appropriate military terms and
concepts

8-11 points
Assignment did not used appropriate military terms and
concepts
0-7 points

This feedback form summarizes an assessment of a student's immunology and microbiology essay. The marker identified strengths in the student's use of figures and engagement with current literature, but weaknesses in essay structure, referencing errors, and lack of depth. Suggestions for improvement include addressing spelling and grammar errors, increasing use of journal articles, improving essay flow and narrative, and adding more specific details about bacterial species and effects on the microbiome. The student intends to use this feedback to greatly improve essay structure, referencing format, and add more depth and complexity in future work.

Referencing using Murdoch’s Library Listing (APA shown) He.docx

lorent8

Referencing using Murdoch’s Library Listing (APA shown) Here is the book I want to reference. Clicking on the quote marks to the right of the listing will give me the referencing options To format list with a Hanging Indent, highlight the entries and press Control_T. Before: Eldridge, D. E., Quee, M., & Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. (2012). Social and emotional wellbeing: Development of a children's headline indicator : Information paper. Canberra, ACT: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. After: Eldridge, D. E., Quee, M., & Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. (2012). Social and emotional wellbeing: Development of a children's headline indicator : Information paper. Canberra, ACT: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. To alphabetise your Reference List, highlight the full list and click the sort icon on Word. J J Murphy | 2018 Copy and paste the reference into your Reference List. CHECK that the listing is correct using the Murdoch APA Referencing Guide. NR512 HealthIT Topic of Week Assignment Guidelines with Scoring Rubric Purpose This assignment is designed to help students Develop an appreciation for informatics, basic skills and knowledge required in practice settings. Students will select a “hot” or popular topic of particular interest to their practice to discuss. The topic will be selected from the website using the link provided in the course Assignments section. Due Date: Sunday 11:59 p.m. MT at the end of Week 5. Total Points Possible: 175 Requirements Students will login to FierceEMR and FierceHealthIT using the link provided in the reading assignment module for Week 5 and select a “current/popular” topic of the week that may impact their practice. Students, in a professionally developed paper, will discuss the rationale for choosing the topic, how it will impact practice in a positive or negative manner, citing pros and cons. Include a discussion of how informatics skills and knowledge were used in the process relevance to developing the assignment. In the conclusion, provide recommendations for the future. Submit completed FierceHealthIT Topic paper for Wk. 5 to dropbox by end of Week 5. Preparing the paper 1. The FierceEMR and FierceHealthIT Current/Popular Topic of the Week assignment must be a professional, scholarly prepared paper. See the guidelines for writing a professional, scholarly paper in the Course Resources. The professional paper will have an introduction, body of paper to explain what you are doing, summary/conclusion, and at least three scholarly references. 2. Required texts may be used as references, but a minimum of three sources must be from outside of course readings. 3. All aspects of the paper must be in APA format as expressed in the 6th edition. 4. The paper (excluding the title page, introduction and reference page) is 4-6 pages in length. 5. Ideas and information from professional sources must be cited correctly. 6. Gr.

My selected Topic Hydrocele & Spermatocele & Varicocele .docx

gemaherd

My selected Topic: Hydrocele & Spermatocele & Varicocele Your initial post should also include the following: The most common presenting symptoms. The manner in which your disorder is routinely diagnosed. A standard treatment plan. Link(s) to routine screening and treatment guidelines. If national screening and treatment guidelines do not exist for your disorder, choose a set of guidelines related to disorders that have been discussed in previous weeks. This is a great way for everyone to build a library of guidelines to help with their academic journey. There is an abundance of information available on these disorders.In your research, look for the nuggets of information that are not common knowledge, or something specific that surprised you when you were researching your topic. RUBRIC: Discussion Question Rubric Note: Scholarly resources are defined as evidence-based practice, peer-reviewed journals; textbook (do not rely solely on your textbook as a reference); and National Standard Guidelines. Review assignment instructions, as this will provide any additional requirements that are not specifically listed on the rubric. Discussion Question Rubric – 100 PointsCriteriaExemplary Exceeds ExpectationsAdvanced Meets ExpectationsIntermediate Needs ImprovementNovice InadequateTotal PointsQuality of Initial PostProvides clear examples supported by course content and references. Cites three or more references, using at least one new scholarly resource that was not provided in the course materials. All instruction requirements noted. 40 points Components are accurate and thoroughly represented, with explanations and application of knowledge to include evidence-based practice, ethics, theory, and/or role. Synthesizes course content using course materials and scholarly resources to support importantpoints. Meets all requirements within the discussion instructions. Cites two references. 35 points Components are accurate and mostly represented primarily with definitions and summarization. Ideas may be overstated, with minimal contribution to the subject matter. Minimal application to evidence-based practice, theory, or role development. Synthesis of course content is present but missing depth and/or development. Is missing one component/requirement of the discussion instructions. Cites one reference, or references do not clearly support content. Most instruction requirements are noted. 31 points Absent application to evidence-based practice, theory, or role development. Synthesis of course content is superficial. Demonstrates incomplete understanding of content and/or inadequate preparation. No references cited. Missing several instruction requirements. Submits post late. 27 points40 Peer Response PostOffers both supportive and alternative viewpoints to the discussion, using two or more scholarly references per peer post. Post provides additional value to the conversation. All instruction require.

Focus System - HEENT NECKReflect on the focus area or syste.docx

bryanwest16882

Focus System - HEENT /NECK Reflect on the focus area or system(s) for the week. What challenges might you anticipate in completing this assessment? What differences might you anticipate when assessing patients across the lifespan? Share findings from scholarly resources that help in the performance of this assessment. Question Rubric Note: Scholarly resources are defined as evidence-based practice, peer-reviewed journals; textbook (do not rely solely on your textbook as a reference); and National Standard Guidelines. Review assignment instructions, as this will provide any additional requirements that are not specifically listed on the rubric. Note: The value of each of the criterion on this rubric represents a point range. (example: 17-0 points) Discussion Question Rubric – 100 PointsCriteriaExemplary Exceeds ExpectationsAdvanced Meets ExpectationsIntermediate Needs ImprovementNovice InadequateTotal PointsQuality of Initial PostProvides clear examples supported by course content and references. Cites three or more references, using at least one new scholarly resource that was not provided in the course materials. All instruction requirements noted. 40 points Components are accurate and thoroughly represented, with explanations and application of knowledge to include evidence-based practice, ethics, theory, and/or role. Synthesizes course content using course materials and scholarly resources to support importantpoints. Meets all requirements within the discussion instructions. Cites two references. 35 points Components are accurate and mostly represented primarily with definitions and summarization. Ideas may be overstated, with minimal contribution to the subject matter. Minimal application to evidence-based practice, theory, or role development. Synthesis of course content is present but missing depth and/or development. Is missing one component/requirement of the discussion instructions. Cites one reference, or references do not clearly support content. Most instruction requirements are noted. 31 points Absent application to evidence-based practice, theory, or role development. Synthesis of course content is superficial. Demonstrates incomplete understanding of content and/or inadequate preparation. No references cited. Missing several instruction requirements. Submits post late. 27 points40 Peer Response PostOffers both supportive and alternative viewpoints to the discussion, using two or more scholarly references per peer post. Post provides additional value to the conversation. All instruction requirements noted. 40 points Evidence of further synthesis of course content. Provides clarification and new information or insight related to the content of the peer’s post. Response is supported by course content and a minimum of one scholarly reference per each peer post. All instruction requirements noted. 35 points Lacks clarification or new information. Scholarly reference sup.

Healthcare Policy and Economics.docx

bkbk37

This assignment asks students to reflect on patient safety and satisfaction in healthcare by answering four questions in 1500-2000 words. The questions address how patient safety measures can lead to cost savings, defining the role of the Joint Commission in healthcare, reflecting on one's future role in contributing to patient safety, and the role of the chief nursing officer regarding patient safety. The assignment expects students to thoroughly address the questions using at least two scholarly references cited in APA style. It will be graded based on content, organization, logic/argument, use of references, and quality of written communication.

Reflect on the focus area - lungs, thorax, vascular and peripher

kailynochseu

Reflect on the focus area - lungs, thorax, vascular and peripheral systems What challenges might you anticipate in completing this assessment? What differences might you anticipate when assessing patients across the lifespan? Share findings from scholarly resources that help in the performance of this assessment. Grading Rubric Discussion Question Rubric Note: Scholarly resources are defined as evidence-based practice, peer-reviewed journals; textbook (do not rely solely on your textbook as a reference); and National Standard Guidelines. Review assignment instructions, as this will provide any additional requirements that are not specifically listed on the rubric. Note: The value of each of the criterion on this rubric represents a point range. (example: 17-0 points) Discussion Question Rubric – 100 PointsCriteriaExemplary Exceeds ExpectationsAdvanced Meets ExpectationsIntermediate Needs ImprovementNovice InadequateTotal PointsQuality of Initial PostProvides clear examples supported by course content and references. Cites three or more references, using at least one new scholarly resource that was not provided in the course materials. All instruction requirements noted. 40 points Components are accurate and thoroughly represented, with explanations and application of knowledge to include evidence-based practice, ethics, theory, and/or role. Synthesizes course content using course materials and scholarly resources to support importantpoints. Meets all requirements within the discussion instructions. Cites two references. 35 points Components are accurate and mostly represented primarily with definitions and summarization. Ideas may be overstated, with minimal contribution to the subject matter. Minimal application to evidence-based practice, theory, or role development. Synthesis of course content is present but missing depth and/or development. Is missing one component/requirement of the discussion instructions. Cites one reference, or references do not clearly support content. Most instruction requirements are noted. 31 points Absent application to evidence-based practice, theory, or role development. Synthesis of course content is superficial. Demonstrates incomplete understanding of content and/or inadequate preparation. No references cited. Missing several instruction requirements. Submits post late. 27 points40 Peer Response PostOffers both supportive and alternative viewpoints to the discussion, using two or more scholarly references per peer post. Post provides additional value to the conversation. All instruction requirements noted. 40 points Evidence of further synthesis of course content. Provides clarification and new information or insight related to the content of the peer’s post. Response is supported by course content and a minimum of one scholarly reference per each peer post. All instruction requirements noted. 35 points Lacks clarification or new information. Schol ...

Write two to three well-developed paragraphs (450–500 words) usi.docx

annetnash8266

Write two to three well-developed paragraphs (450–500 words) using APA formatting, integrating two evidence-based resources to include clinical practice guidelines as well as the course textbook. (Do not use lay press Internet sites). Include the following in your initial post: Explanation of the pathophysiology of the diagnosis. Description of the drug category: Overview of use/action. Analysis of the specific agents: Pharmacokinetics/pharmacotherapeutics, adverse drug reactions, interactions, monitoring, patient education Please choose two diagnoses from the following list: Migraine Seizure Disorder Alzheimer’s Disease Bell’s Palsy Insomnia For each of the two diagnoses you choose, select two drug categories used for treatment. For each of the two drug categories, choose two specific pharmacological agents. Course Text book : Woo, Terri Moser and Robinson, Marylou V. (2020). Pharmacotherapeutics for Advanced Practice Nurse Prescribers . (5th ed.) Philadelphia, PA: F.A. Davis Company. RUBRIC Discussion Question Rubric Note: Scholarly resources are defined as evidence-based practice, peer-reviewed journals; textbook (do not rely solely on your textbook as a reference); and National Standard Guidelines. Review assignment instructions, as this will provide any additional requirements that are not specifically listed on the rubric. Note: The value of each of the criterion on this rubric represents a point range. (example: 17-0 points) Discussion Question Rubric – 100 PointsCriteriaExemplary Exceeds ExpectationsAdvanced Meets ExpectationsIntermediate Needs ImprovementNovice InadequateTotal PointsQuality of Initial PostProvides clear examples supported by course content and references. Cites three or more references, using at least one new scholarly resource that was not provided in the course materials. All instruction requirements noted. 40 points Components are accurate and thoroughly represented, with explanations and application of knowledge to include evidence-based practice, ethics, theory, and/or role. Synthesizes course content using course materials and scholarly resources to support importantpoints. Meets all requirements within the discussion instructions. Cites two references. 35 points Components are accurate and mostly represented primarily with definitions and summarization. Ideas may be overstated, with minimal contribution to the subject matter. Minimal application to evidence-based practice, theory, or role development. Synthesis of course content is present but missing depth and/or development. Is missing one component/requirement of the discussion instructions. Cites one reference, or references do not clearly support content. Most instruction requirements are noted. 31 points Absent application to evidence-based practice, theory, or role development. Synthesis of course content is superficial. Demonstrates incomplete understanding of content and/or inadequate pr.

EDUC 741Course Project Part 1 Grading RubricCriteriaLevels .docx

tidwellveronique

EDUC 741 Course Project: Part 1 Grading Rubric Criteria Levels of Achievement Content 70% Advanced Proficient Developing Not Present Analysis 13 to 14 points The analysis thoroughly interprets and examines at least three referred journal articles for perspective, validity, and significance of the findings. 12 points The analysis partially interprets and examines at least three referred journal articles for perspective, validity, and significance of the findings. 1 to 11 points The analysis attempts of some aspects of analysis and interpretation of journal articles in a limited way. The review is more descriptive than analytical. 0 points Not present Use of Evidence and Relevant Outside Information 13 points The analysis is thoroughly supported with relevant facts, arguments, examples, and details. Information outside the subject articles is often incorporated into the analysis. 11 to 12 points The analysis is generally supported with relevant facts, arguments, and details. Information outside the subject articles is occasionally incorporated into the analysis. 1 to 10 points The analysis is thoroughly supported with some facts, arguments, examples, and details. Information outside the subject articles is incorporated in a limited way into the analysis. 0 points Not present Organization and Development 13 points The analysis is quite well-reasoned, indicating substantial breath and depth of thinking. The summary of each article is thorough and meaningful. 11 to 12 points The analysis is generally well-reasoned, indicating some breath and depth of thinking. The summary of each article is generally sound. 1 to 10 points The analysis has limited reasoning, indicating a surface understanding of the articles. The summary of each article is limited. 0 points Not present Body – Biblical Worldview 13 points A biblical worldview perspective is clearly articulated and is supported by appropriate Scripture references, course requirements, and application. 11 to 12 points A biblical worldview perspective is articulated but is not supported by Scripture or is not appropriate, and somewhat applies to course requirements and application. 1 to 10 points A biblical worldview perspective is poorly articulated and is not supported by Scripture or is not appropriate, and does not apply to course requirements and application. 0 points Not present Structure 30% Advanced Proficient Developing Not Present Grammar and Spelling 6 points Correct spelling and grammar are used throughout the essay. There are 0–2 errors in grammar or spelling that distract the reader from the content. 5 points There are 3–5 errors in grammar or spelling that distract the reader from the content. 1 to 4 points There are 6–10 errors in grammar or spelling that distract the reader from the content. 0 points There are more than 10 errors in the grammar or spelling that distract the reader from the content. Sentence Structure and Mechanics 6 points Sentences are well-phrased and varied in lengt.

Paul Leslie from the Education Faculty at Sharjah Women's College discusses using rubrics for grading. A rubric is provided that evaluates student work across four categories: critical understanding, structure and organization, references, and language usage. Each category is worth a different percentage of the total grade. Scores are assigned on a scale of 1-10 for each category. An example of a completed rubric is shown grading a student's work. The grades for each category are multiplied by the category's weight and added together to calculate the student's total score in Excel. Resources are also provided on the Excel sheet used, rubric grading, and using discussion boards for assessment.

Review the following treatments and rationale. Do you agree or disa.docx

vickiea1

Review the following treatments and rationale. Do you agree or disagree? Why? What information from this week’s content or outside information can you cite to support your opinions? The purpose of this discussion is to recommend two resources that should be provided for a 15 year old male newly diagnosed with Type II diabetes. Unfortunately, chronic diagnoses such as diabetes have the potential to cause mental health issues in teenagers. Developmentally, they want to be like their peers and fit in to a group. It has been studied that rates of depression in teenagers with diabetes can range from 8% to 22% (“Behavioral health and diabetes,” 2021). In my opinion, there are two reasons why this patient feels depressed. First, they may not have basic knowledge about their disease and how their life is going to change. Thus, the patient should be referred to a diabetes educator as recommended by the American Diabetes Association. This resource can help a patient increase their knowledge, skills and confidence with management of diabetes ("Diabetes education program," 2021). Most importantly, the counselor can discuss and help the patient overcome stigmas related to the disorder (“Behavioral health and diabetes,” 2021). With increased knowledge, the patient will hopefully feel they can manage the disease. In addition, the patient should be referred to a diabetes support group that specifically encompasses patients of the same age. In this group, the patient can discuss his own thoughts and feelings (“Diabetes and mental health,” 2021). The patient may feel less depression knowing that other kids are going through the same disease as him. Thus, a diabetes support counselor and support group are two resources that should be recommended. RuBRIC: Discussion Question Rubric Note: Scholarly resources are defined as evidence-based practice, peer-reviewed journals; textbook (do not rely solely on your textbook as a reference); and National Standard Guidelines. Review assignment instructions, as this will provide any additional requirements that are not specifically listed on the rubric. Note: The value of each of the criterion on this rubric represents a point range. (example: 17-0 points) Discussion Question Rubric – 100 PointsCriteriaExemplary Exceeds ExpectationsAdvanced Meets ExpectationsIntermediate Needs ImprovementNovice InadequateTotal PointsQuality of Initial PostProvides clear examples supported by course content and references. Cites three or more references, using at least one new scholarly resource that was not provided in the course materials. All instruction requirements noted. 40 points Components are accurate and thoroughly represented, with explanations and application of knowledge to include evidence-based practice, ethics, theory, and/or role. Synthesizes course content using course materials and scholarly resources to support importantpoints. Meets all requirements within the discussion instructions. Cites .

Performing health assessments as an APRN will help you to develo

dannies7qbuggie

Performing health assessments as an APRN will help you to develop a collaborative partnership with your patients. After reading Chapter 4 and 12 in your Pender text, think about the vulnerable population that you choose during Week 1 - consider what you perceive / know about this group in relation to the following topics: Health assets Health problems Health-related lifestyle strengths Key health-related beliefs Health behaviors that put the person at risk Changes that could improve their quality of life Now consider the pros and cons of implementing a Community-Based Participatory Research health promotion project with the vulnerable group. You should consider not only the benefit of the actions but the active role the vulnerable will play in the development and implementation of the health promotion plan. How does your population’s health disparities and health inequities benefit and/or hinder this type of project’s success? Remember that you should include citations/references from at least three scholarly sources. Rubric: Discussion Question Rubric Note: Scholarly resources are defined as evidence-based practice, peer-reviewed journals; textbook (do not rely solely on your textbook as a reference); and National Standard Guidelines. Review assignment instructions, as this will provide any additional requirements that are not specifically listed on the rubric. Discussion Question Rubric – 100 PointsCriteriaExemplary Exceeds ExpectationsAdvanced Meets ExpectationsIntermediate Needs ImprovementNovice InadequateTotal PointsQuality of Initial PostProvides clear examples supported by course content and references. Cites three or more references, using at least one new scholarly resource that was not provided in the course materials. All instruction requirements noted. 40 points Components are accurate and thoroughly represented, with explanations and application of knowledge to include evidence-based practice, ethics, theory, and/or role. Synthesizes course content using course materials and scholarly resources to support importantpoints. Meets all requirements within the discussion instructions. Cites two references. 35 points Components are accurate and mostly represented primarily with definitions and summarization. Ideas may be overstated, with minimal contribution to the subject matter. Minimal application to evidence-based practice, theory, or role development. Synthesis of course content is present but missing depth and/or development. Is missing one component/requirement of the discussion instructions. Cites one reference, or references do not clearly support content. Most instruction requirements are noted. 31 points Absent application to evidence-based practice, theory, or role development. Synthesis of course content is superficial. Demonstrates incomplete understanding of content and/or inadequate preparation. No references cited. Missing several instruction requirements. Submits post ...

Healthcare Policy and Economic Discussion.docx

bkbk37

This document provides instructions for an assignment on healthcare policy and economic discussion. Students are asked to reflect on their future role in healthcare and how it may change due to policy changes like the Affordable Care Act. They should discuss how they will advocate for patients and the healthcare consumer. The assignment should be 1,500-2,000 words and address these questions in a clear, concise manner while citing at least two scholarly references. It will be graded based on content, organization, logic/argument, sources, and quality of written communication.

Answer the following questions in three well-developed paragraph.docx

nolanalgernon

Answer the following questions in three well-developed paragraphs (450- 500 words) using APA formatting, integrating two evidence-based resources to include clinical practice guidelines as well as the course textbook. Topic: Heart Failure ML is a retired registered nurse (RN) who has been given the diagnosis of Stage A heart failure. She knows from her RN education that she will definitely be placed on digoxin as a therapy. She remembers something about halos as something to be attuned to. Explain the pathophysiology of Stage A heart failure. What is the rational drug choice for treatment of this individual? Address the patientâ€™s concern about halos should digoxin be prescribed. Are there gender considerations related to medication treatment in this scenario? If so, what are they? For example, do men and women differ in their side effect profile and/or complications (for instance, from digoxin)? Discuss monitoring of the pharmacological agent(s) selected. RUBRIC: ote: Scholarly resources are defined as evidence-based practice, peer-reviewed journals; textbook (do not rely solely on your textbook as a reference); and National Standard Guidelines. Review assignment instructions, as this will provide any additional requirements that are not specifically listed on the rubric. Note: The value of each of the criterion on this rubric represents a point range. (example: 17-0 points) Discussion Question Rubric – 100 PointsCriteriaExemplary Exceeds ExpectationsAdvanced Meets ExpectationsIntermediate Needs ImprovementNovice InadequateTotal PointsQuality of Initial PostProvides clear examples supported by course content and references. Cites three or more references, using at least one new scholarly resource that was not provided in the course materials. All instruction requirements noted. 40 points Components are accurate and thoroughly represented, with explanations and application of knowledge to include evidence-based practice, ethics, theory, and/or role. Synthesizes course content using course materials and scholarly resources to support importantpoints. Meets all requirements within the discussion instructions. Cites two references. 35 points Components are accurate and mostly represented primarily with definitions and summarization. Ideas may be overstated, with minimal contribution to the subject matter. Minimal application to evidence-based practice, theory, or role development. Synthesis of course content is present but missing depth and/or development. Is missing one component/requirement of the discussion instructions. Cites one reference, or references do not clearly support content. Most instruction requirements are noted. 31 points Absent application to evidence-based practice, theory, or role development. Synthesis of course content is superficial. Demonstrates incomplete understanding of content and/or inadequate preparation. No references cited. Missing several instruction requirements..

This discussion will allow you to examine several different prev.docx

jwilliam16

This discussion will allow you to examine several different preventive guidelines related to vaccinations. Please read the following scenario and for your initial post; be sure to address all the questions posed by the scenario and include at least three scholarly sources within your initial post. Patient #1 : Two five-year-old girls are on your schedule for a kindergarten physical. The foster parent of one of the children indicates she received all her immunization from birth to one year of age, but after that the child has not had any further vaccines. The second child appears to have been vaccinated per the CDC schedule. Is there a difference in the immunization plan you will initiate today for these two patients? Why or why not? What immunizations will you be ordering for each of these two patients today? RUBRIC Discussion Question Rubric Note: Scholarly resources are defined as evidence-based practice, peer-reviewed journals; textbook (do not rely solely on your textbook as a reference); and National Standard Guidelines. Review assignment instructions, as this will provide any additional requirements that are not specifically listed on the rubric. Discussion Question Rubric – 100 PointsCriteriaExemplary Exceeds ExpectationsAdvanced Meets ExpectationsIntermediate Needs ImprovementNovice InadequateTotal PointsQuality of Initial PostProvides clear examples supported by course content and references. Cites three or more references, using at least one new scholarly resource that was not provided in the course materials. All instruction requirements noted. 40 points Components are accurate and thoroughly represented, with explanations and application of knowledge to include evidence-based practice, ethics, theory, and/or role. Synthesizes course content using course materials and scholarly resources to support importantpoints. Meets all requirements within the discussion instructions. Cites two references. 35 points Components are accurate and mostly represented primarily with definitions and summarization. Ideas may be overstated, with minimal contribution to the subject matter. Minimal application to evidence-based practice, theory, or role development. Synthesis of course content is present but missing depth and/or development. Is missing one component/requirement of the discussion instructions. Cites one reference, or references do not clearly support content. Most instruction requirements are noted. 31 points Absent application to evidence-based practice, theory, or role development. Synthesis of course content is superficial. Demonstrates incomplete understanding of content and/or inadequate preparation. No references cited. Missing several instruction requirements. Submits post late. 27 points40 Peer Response PostOffers both supportive and alternative viewpoints to the discussion, using two or more scholarly references per peer post. Post provides additional value to the convers.

Component Proficient (2 points)Competent (1 points)Novic.docx

mccormicknadine86

Component Proficient (2 points) Competent (1 points) Novice (0 to 1 point) Score Assignment Requirements Student completed all required portions of the assignment. The paper included two scholarly sources. The sources were cited appropriately. No unsupported claims were made. 0.5 Points Completed portions of the assignment. The paper had one scholarly source. Few citations. Unsupported claims. 0.25 Points Did not complete the required assignment. The paper had zero or one sources. No citation. Unsupported claims and opinions. 0 to 0.25 Points Writing Skills and Grammar Assignment strongly demonstrates graduate-level proficiency in organization, grammar, and style. Assignment is well written, and ideas are well developed and explained. Demonstrates strong writing skills. Student paid close attention to spelling and punctuation. Sentences and paragraphs are grammatically correct. 0.5 Points Assignment demonstrates graduate-level proficiency in organization, grammar, and style. Assignment is effectively communicated, but some sections lacking clarity. Student paid some attention to spelling and punctuation, but there are errors within the writing. Needs attention to proper writing skills. 0.25 Points Assignment does not demonstrate graduate-level proficiency in organization, grammar, and style. Assignment is poorly written and confusing. Ideas are not communicated effectively. Student paid no attention to spelling and punctuation. Demonstrates poor writing skills. 0 to 0.25 Points APA Style and Formatting Proper use of APA formatting. Properly and explicitly cited outside resources. Correct reference page and the reference list matches citations. APA headings are utilized to organize content. Correct APA title page. Correct font and spacing. 0.5 Points Use of APA formatting and citations of outside resources but has a few instances in which proper citations are missing. Incorrect references page or mismatched citations and references. Some APA headings. Incorrect APA title page. Partially correct font or spacing. 0.25 Points The assignment lacks the use of APA formatting and does not provide proper citations or includes no citations. No references page. No APA headings. No APA title page. Incorrect font or spacing. 0 to 0.25 Points Paper Organization Submission is well organized and has a tight and cohesive focus that is integrated throughout the document. 0.5 Points Submissions has an organizational structure and the focus is clear throughout. 0.25 Points Submission lacks focus or contains major drifts in focus 0 to 0.25 Points Rubic_Print_FormatCourse CodeClass CodeAssignment TitleTotal PointsHLT-362VHLT-362V-O501Article Analysis 1120.0CriteriaPercentage1: Unsatisfactory (0.00%)2: Less Than Satisfactory (65.00%)3: Satisfactory (75.00%)4: Good (85.00%)5: Excellent (100.00%)CommentsPoints EarnedContent100.0%Three Quantitative Articles10.0%Fewer than three arti ...

Exercise #1SC integration is critical. Information is the infra.docx

SANSKAR20

Exercise #1 SC integration is critical. Information is the infrastructure that makes the SC successful. Create a piece of SC information and using the 8 dimensions used to manage the SC integration, explain the path and purpose of the information you created. See next page for reading material related to this exercise. Discussion Rubric Levels of Achievement Criteria Outstanding Performance Excellent Performance Competent Performance Room for Improvement Poor Performance Content-Main Posting 30 to 30 points -Main posting addresses all criteria with 75% of post exceptional depth and breadth supported by credible references 27 to 29 points -Main posting addresses all criteria with 75% of post exceptional depth and breadth supported by credible references 24 to 26 points Main posting meets expectations. All criteria are addressed with 50% containing good breadth and depth. 21 to 23 points Main posting addresses most of the criteria. One to two criterion are not addressed or superficially addressed. 0 to 20 points Main posting does not address all of criteria, superficially addresses criteria. Two or more criteria are not addressed. Course Requirements and Attendance 20 to 20 points -Responds to two colleagues’ with posts that are reflective, are justified with credible sources, and ask questions that extend the discussion. 18 to 19 points -Responds to two colleagues’ with posts that are reflective, are justified with credible sources, and ask questions that extend the discussion. 16 to 17 points Responds to a minimum of two colleagues’ posts, are reflective, and ask questions that extend the discussion. One post is justified by a credible source. 14 to 15 points Responds to less than two colleagues’ posts. Posts are on topic, may have some depth, or questions. May extend the discussion. No credible sources are cited 0 to 13 points Responds to less than two colleagues’ posts. Posts may not be on topic, lack depth, do not pose questions that extend the discussion Scholarly Writing Quality 30 to 30 points -The main posting clearly addresses the discussion criteria and is written concisely. The main posting is cited with more than two credible references that adhere to the correct format per the APA Manual 6th Edition. No spelling or grammatical errors. ***The use of scholarly sources or real life experiences needs to be included to deepen the discussion and earn points in reply to fellow students. 27 to 29 points -The main posting clearly addresses the discussion criteria and is written concisely. The main posting is cited with more than two credible references that adhere to the correct format per the APA Manual 6th Edition. No spelling or grammatical errors. 24 to 26 points -The main posting clearly addresses the discussion criteria and is written concisely. The main posting is cited with a minimum of two current credible references that adhere to the correct format per the APA Manual 6th Edition. Contains one to two spelling or gramma ...

1Unsatisfactory0.002Less Than Satisfactory65.003Sa.docx

eugeniadean34240

This document outlines a rubric for grading a research paper on the effectiveness of online courses for high school students in the USA. It provides scoring criteria for various sections of the paper such as the title page, problem statement, introduction, body, conclusion, grammar/mechanics, citations, and bibliography. The highest scores are for exemplary quality, logical organization, inclusion of key elements, proper formatting, and being free from errors. Lower scores are for papers that are missing elements, disorganized, contain errors, or lack proper citations and references. The purpose is to build research skills and incorporate evidence-based solutions to educational issues.

Choose one of the Case Studies from Chapter 13 using the Week.docx

nancy1113

Choose one of the Case Studies from Chapter 13 using the Week 6: Case Study Choice . Please summarize the case and discuss the questions that are asked with the case study presentation. Although it is not specifically asked, make sure that you are including aspects of immobility from Chapter 25 within the answers to the questions, and drawing ABGs on your patient, relaying the results (note you will need to make up what would be considered appropriate ABG results based on this case), and what those results mean in relation to your case study. The case study I picked is : Cystic Fibrosis Discussion Question Rubric Note: Scholarly resources are defined as evidence-based practice, peer-reviewed journals; textbook (do not rely solely on your textbook as a reference); and National Standard Guidelines. Review assignment instructions, as this will provide any additional requirements that are not specifically listed on the rubric. Discussion Question Rubric – 100 PointsCriteriaExemplary Exceeds ExpectationsAdvanced Meets ExpectationsIntermediate Needs ImprovementNovice InadequateTotal PointsQuality of Initial PostProvides clear examples supported by course content and references. Cites three or more references, using at least one new scholarly resource that was not provided in the course materials. All instruction requirements noted. 40 points Components are accurate and thoroughly represented, with explanations and application of knowledge to include evidence-based practice, ethics, theory, and/or role. Synthesizes course content using course materials and scholarly resources to support importantpoints. Meets all requirements within the discussion instructions. Cites two references. 35 points Components are accurate and mostly represented primarily with definitions and summarization. Ideas may be overstated, with minimal contribution to the subject matter. Minimal application to evidence-based practice, theory, or role development. Synthesis of course content is present but missing depth and/or development. Is missing one component/requirement of the discussion instructions. Cites one reference, or references do not clearly support content. Most instruction requirements are noted. 31 points Absent application to evidence-based practice, theory, or role development. Synthesis of course content is superficial. Demonstrates incomplete understanding of content and/or inadequate preparation. No references cited. Missing several instruction requirements. Submits post late. 27 points40 Peer Response PostOffers both supportive and alternative viewpoints to the discussion, using two or more scholarly references per peer post. Post provides additional value to the conversation. All instruction requirements noted. 40 points Evidence of further synthesis of course content. Provides clarification and new information or insight related to the content of the peer’s post. Response is supported by course content and a m.

1. What is the role of federalism in framing youth issues2. Wha

BenitoSumpter862

1. What is the role of federalism in framing youth issues? 2. What are the Juvenile Detention Alternatives Initiative's five objectives for reform in the juvenile justice system? 3. How can fragmentation and tunneling be overcome? 4. What is important to consider when using a data-driven approach to decision making? CJUS 702 Activity Rubric Criteria Levels of Achievement Content (70%) Advanced 92-100% Proficient 84-91% Developing 1-83% Not present Total Question Content 18.5 to 20 points: · Major points are stated clearly and are supported by valid evidence and logical reasoning. · Objective, reasoned analysis is employed. · An authoritative and persuasive voice is used. · Resonates Christian world view supporting your themes throughout your writing. · Four fully developed pages of content excluding the title-page, abstract, and reference page (s). · Use of 2 peer-reviewed scholarly references along with course materials/texts. 16.75 to 18.25 points: · Most major points are stated clearly and supported by valid evidence and logical reasoning, but some points may require clarification or greater support. · Some improvements to objective tone/perspective may be required. · Further interpretation and/or support for Christian world view needed. · Less than 4 fully developed pages of content excluding the title-page, abstract, and reference page (s). · Use of 1 peer-reviewed scholarly references along with course materials/texts. 1 to 16.5 points: · Major points require significant clarification and scholarly or Christian world view support. · Significant improvements to objective tone/perspective are required. · Less than 3 fully developed pages of content excluding the title-page, abstract, and reference page (s). · No external peer-reviewed scholarly references other than course materials/texts. 0 points Not present Opposing Viewpoints 18.5 to 20 points: Opposing viewpoints are sufficiently acknowledged and critically evaluated. 16.75 to 18.25 points: Opposing viewpoints are acknowledged but may require greater evaluation. 1 to 16.5 points: Opposing viewpoints are not adequately acknowledged and/or addressed. 0 points Not present Conclusion 11.5 to 12.5 points: The conclusion logically derives from the paper’s ideas. 10.5 to 11.25 points: The conclusion does not fully derive from the paper’s ideas. 1 to 10.25 points: Conclusion does not derive logically from the paper’s main ideas. 0 points Not present Structure (30%) Advanced 92-100% Proficient 84-91% Developing 1-83% Not present Total Grammar, Spelling, & Format 13.75 to 15 points: Minimal to no errors in grammar or spelling. Formatted in current APA format. 12.5 to 13.5 points: Minor errors in spelling and grammar. Minor adjustments needed in APA format. 1 to 12.25 points: Numerous errors in spelling or grammar. Not formatted in current APA format. 0 points Not present Page Length 7 to 7.5 points: Required page length of 4 pages is met. This does not include title-page, ...

1. What is the role of federalism in framing youth issues2. Wha

SantosConleyha

1. what is the role of federalism in framing youth issues2. wha

SUKHI5

This document outlines criteria for evaluating a student paper on collaboration in the juvenile justice system. It discusses the importance of considering opposing viewpoints, logically deriving conclusions, and adhering to formatting standards like APA style. Key points that must be addressed include the meaning of collaboration, challenges collaborative efforts face, and how to support positions with evidence from assigned readings and a Christian worldview perspective.

Faculty Comments Thank you for Week 4 – Assignment 1. I have g.docx

mecklenburgstrelitzh

Faculty Comments: Thank you for Week 4 – Assignment 1. I have graded your Application to reflect the Rubric assessment: DDBA_8300_Week_4_Assignment_Rubric. Grade: 85/100 = 68/80 DDBA_8300_Week_4_Assignment 1_Rubric Superior Criteria Excellent Criteria Satisfactory Criteria Marginal Criteria Unsatisfactory Criteria Not Submitted Element 1a: Initial Post – Quantitative Problem Statement (Hook & Anchor Statements) Points: 8 (10%) Student presents a well-written hook (WOW statement) statement that includes a correctly formatted APA citation and a well-written anchor statement that demonstrates the magnitude of the business problem and includes a correctly formatted APA citation from a quantitative perspective. There are no errors. Points: 7.6 (9.5%) Student presents a well-written hook (WOW statement) statement that includes a correctly formatted APA citation and a well-written anchor statement that demonstrates the magnitude of the business problem and includes a correctly formatted APA citation from a quantitative perspective. There are one or two minor errors. Points: 6.8 (8.5%) Student presents a hook (WOW statement) statement that includes a correctly formatted APA citation and an anchor statement that demonstrates the magnitude of the business problem and includes a correctly formatted APA citation from a quantitative perspective; however, the hook does not provide sufficient impact or anchor does not provide a number demonstrating magnitude or citations are not appropriate. Points: 6 (7.5%) Student presents a cursory or incomplete hook (WOW statement) statement and/or a cursory or incomplete anchor statement that is not appropriate for a quantitative problem statement and/or is missing citations. Points: 4 (5%) Does not meet minimal standards. Points: 0 (0%) Did not submit element. Element 1b: Initial Post – Quantitative Problem Statement (General & Specific Business Statements) Points: 8 (10%) Student presents a well-written general business statement that identifies an over-arching business problem and a well-written specific business problem that identifies who has the problem from a quantitative perspective. There are no errors. Points: 7.6 (9.5%) Student presents a well-written general business statement that identifies an over-arching business problem and a well-written specific business problem that identifies who has the problem from a quantitative perspective. There are one or two minor errors. Points: 6.8 (8.5%) Student presents a general business statement that identifies an over-arching business problem and a specific business problem that identifies who has the problem from a quantitative perspective; however, the general and/or specific business statements are not clear, are missing some details, and/or are not relevant to leaders in business. Points: 6 (7.5%) Student presents cursory or incomplete general business statement and/or cursory or incomplete specific business problem that doe.

Changes in culture and technology have resulted in patient populatio.docx

romeliadoan

Changes in culture and technology have resulted in patient populations that are often well informed and educated, even before consulting or considering a healthcare need delivered by a health professional. Fueled by this, health professionals are increasingly involving patients in treatment decisions. However, this often comes with challenges, as illnesses and treatments can become complex. What has your experience been with patient involvement in treatment or healthcare decisions? In this Discussion, you will share your experiences and consider the impact of patient involvement (or lack of involvement). You will also consider the use of a patient decision aid to inform best practices for patient care and healthcare decision making. To Prepare: Review the Resources and reflect on a time when you experienced a patient being brought into (or not being brought into) a decision regarding their treatment plan. Review the Ottawa Hospital Research Institute’s Decision Aids Inventory at https://decisionaid.ohri.ca/. Choose “For Specific Conditions,” then Browse an alphabetical listing of decision aids by health topic. NOTE: To ensure compliance with HIPAA rules, please DO NOT use the patient’s real name or any information that might identify the patient or organization/practice. RUBRIC Main Posting -- 45 (45%) - 50 (50%) Answers all parts of the discussion question(s) expectations with reflective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources. Supported by at least three current, credible sources. Written clearly and concisely with no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. 40 (40%) - 44 (44%) Responds to the discussion question(s) and is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. At least 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth. Supported by at least three credible sources. Written clearly and concisely with one or no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. 35 (35%) - 39 (39%) Responds to some of the discussion question(s). One or two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed. Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis. Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. Post is cited with two credible sources. Written somewhat concisely; may contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors. Contains some APA formatting errors. 0 (0%) - 34 (34%) Does not respond to the discussion question(s) adequately. Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria. Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis. Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. Contains only one or no credible sources. Not written clearly or concisely. Contains more than two spelling or gram.

Healthcare Informatics Applications.pdf

bkbk37

This document provides instructions for an assignment on healthcare informatics applications. Students are asked to write an essay addressing three topics: 1) discussing how big data or data mining could benefit healthcare, 2) describing a continuity plan for their workplace, and 3) analyzing the benefits and drawbacks of using technology in healthcare education. The assignment expects a 1500 word essay with three sections, one for each topic, and proper citations and references in APA style. It also provides a rubric for grading.

Criteria for Grading Midterm Exam A B C F Points Ea.docx

willcoxjanay

Criteria for Grading Midterm Exam A B C F Points Earned Quality of Content (55 pts) Student demonstrated exceptional knowledge of relevant concepts and theories; all statements and opinions were supported by appropriate citations from the literature. 55 - 50 points Student demonstrated satisfactory knowledge of relevant concepts and theories; most statements and opinions were supported by appropriate citations from the literature. 49 - 44 points Student demonstrated less than satisfactory knowledge of relevant concepts and theories; some statements and opinions were not supported by appropriate citations from the literature. 43 - 39 points Student demonstrated unsatisfactory knowledge of relevant concepts and theories; many statements and opinions were not supported by appropriate citations from the literature. 38 - 0 points Comments Quality of Research (20 pts) Student did an exceptional job of integrating course readings with additional research. Student cited more than the required number of references. Sources listed were all scholarly or practitioner journals from the last ten years. 20 - 18 points Student did a satisfactory job of integrating course readings with additional research. Student cited the required number of references. Sources listed were primarily scholarly or practitioner journals from the last ten years. 17 – 16 points Student did a less than satisfactory job of integrating course readings with additional research. Student may not have cited the required number of references. Some sources listed may not have been scholarly or practitioner journals from the last ten years. 15 - 14 points Student did an inadequate job of integrating course readings with additional research. Student did not cite the required number of references. Many of the sources listed were not scholarly or practitioner journals from the last ten years. 13 – 0 points Comments Organization and Mechanics (20 pts) Student presented information in a logical sequence that was very easy to follow. Essay had no major spelling and/or grammar errors. The page length requirement was met. 20 – 18 points Student presented information in a mostly logical sequence that was fairly easy follow. Essay had a few minor spelling and/or grammar errors. The page length requirement was met or may have been slightly exceeded. 17 – 16 points Student presented information in a confusing sequence that was not easy to follow. Essay had several major spelling and/or grammar errors. The page length requirement may not have been met. 15 - 14 points Student presented information in an illogical sequence that was difficult to follow. Essay had many spelling and/or grammar errors. The page length requirement was not met. .

Revised 2015 .docx

healdkathaleen

Revised 2015 EEX2000 Master Syllabus /7 Description: Keeping current in the reading of educational literature is a requirement for continuous improvement of teachers. Directions: Select a peer reviewed article from an education journal that discusses an issue of interest in the field of special education. The article should have been written within the last five years. The article should consist of a minimum of three pages. 1. Write a summary of the article. Citations from the article and your textbook must be included. 2. Write an opinion of the article’s viewpoint. Using citations include how the article relates to our readings and discussions in EEX 2000. 3. Your article summary and review should not be longer than four pages. 4. Attach a PDF copy of the article with your review Article is current and relevant to coursework (15%) Insufficient evidence to evaluate Article is not relevant or published w/n the past five years (1 pt) Article is relevant but not published w/n the past five years (7.5 pts) Article is relevant to coursework and published w/n the past five years (15 pts) Summary is thorough stating/discussing main ideas of article, citations from article/text included (25%) Insufficient evidence to evaluate Summary is brief and contains one citation from article/text (1 pt) Summary discusses main ideas of article and includes a maximum of 2 citations from article/text included (12.5 pts) Summary is thorough and detailed and includes a minimum of 3 citations from article/text included (25 pts) Reflections/Opinions have been presented with supported details from readings (25%) Insufficient evidence to evaluate An opinion has been stated in the reflection section but is not supported using citations from article/text (1 pt) Opinion(s) are evident in the reflection section but supported with a maximum of 2 citations from article/text (12.5 pts) Opinion(s) have been presented in the reflection section and supported with a minimum of 3 citations from article/text (25 pts) Review has been written in APA style (15%) Insufficient evidence to evaluate APA style citations are not evident throughout the assignment (1 pt) APA style citations have been attempted throughout the assignment (7.5 pts) Citations have been written in APA format correctly throughout the assignment (15 pts) Mechanics (20%) More than 4 errors in composition, and/or spelling are evident A maximum of 4 errors in grammar, composition, and spelling, are evident (1 pt) A maximum of 2 errors grammar, composition, and/or spelling, are evident (10 pts) No major errors in grammar, composition and/or spelling, are evident (20 pts) Disability Research Paper Description: Education students must know how to write effectiv ...

Rubric Detail Select Grid View or List View to change the r

ajoy21

Rubric Detail Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric's layout. Content Name: NURS_6501_Discussion_Rubric Grid ViewList View Excellent Good Fair Poor Main Posting Points: Points Range: 45 (45%) - 50 (50%) Answers all parts of the Discussion question(s) with reflective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources. Supported by at least three current, credible sources. Written clearly and concisely with no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. Feedback: Points: Points Range: 40 (40%) - 44 (44%) Responds to the Discussion question(s) and is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. At least 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth. Supported by at least three credible sources. Written clearly and concisely with one or no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. Feedback: Points: Points Range: 35 (35%) - 39 (39%) Responds to some of the Discussion question(s). One or two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed. Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis. Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. Post is cited with two credible sources. Written somewhat concisely; may contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors. Contains some APA formatting errors. Feedback: Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) - 34 (34%) Does not respond to the Discussion question(s) adequately. Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria. Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis. Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. Contains only one or no credible sources. Not written clearly or concisely. Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors. Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style. Feedback: Main Post: Timeliness Points: Points Range: 10 (10%) - 10 (10%) Posts main post by Day 3. Feedback: Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) - 0 (0%) N/A Feedback: Points: ...

Ashford 3 - Week 2 - AssignmentGlobal Supply Chain Management Qu.docx

lauricesatu

Ashford 3: - Week 2 - Assignment Global Supply Chain Management: Quality Strategy This assignment is based on a case study that is in Ashford University’s library. Please read Soltani, Azadegan, Liao, and Phillips (2011) which may be found in the Ashford University library (EBSCO database). You are the senior executive in charge of supply chain management for the focal firm or buyer in the United States. M-case and H-case are two important suppliers for your firm. The CEO of the focal firm wants action. The CEO has asked you to respond to the following statements. Examine the problems and causes that may contribute to low quality throughout the supply chain. Soltani, et al. (2011) recommended that the leadership in the focal firm or buyer select good partners, ensure cooperation, and motivate loyalty to the buyer. Describe how you would implement the recommendations developed in the case study. Propose changes to the supplier contract in order for the supply chain to be successful. Submit your three to four-page paper (not including the title and reference pages) written according to APA style as shown in the approved style guide. The CEO has also asked you to include two scholarly sources in addition to the textbook to support your answers. Carefully review the Grading Rubric for the criteria that will be used to evaluate your assignment. Description : Total Possible Score : 9.00 Examines the Problems and Causes That Contribute to Low Quality Throughout the Supply Chain Total: 3.00 Distinguished - Comprehensively examines the problems and causes that contribute to low quality throughout the supply chain. Proficient - Examines the problems and causes that contribute to low quality throughout the supply chain. Minor details are missing. Basic - Partially examines the problems and the causes that contribute to low quality throughout the supply chain. Relevant details are missing. Below Expectations - Attempts to examine the problems and causes that contribute to low quality throughout the supply chain; however, significant details are missing. Non-Performance - The examination of the problems and causes that contribute to low quality is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions. Describes How to Implement the Recommendations Developed in the Case Study Total: 2.00 Distinguished - Thoroughly describes how to implement the recommendations developed in the case study. Proficient - Describes how to implement the recommendations developed in the case study. The description is slightly underdeveloped. Basic - Vaguely describes how to implement the recommendations developed in the case study. The description is underdeveloped. Below Expectations - Attempts to describe how to implement the recommendations developed in the case study; however, the description is significantly underdeveloped. Non-Performance - The description of how to implement the recommendations is either nonexistent or lacks the compo.

MANAGEGIAL ECONOMICS AND ORGANIZATIONAL ARCHITECTURE 5Th Edition .docx

Exemplary DemonstrationProficientDemonstrationDevelo

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Exemplary DemonstrationProficientDemonstrationDevelo

Similar to Exemplary DemonstrationProficientDemonstrationDevelo (20)

More from BetseyCalderon89

More from BetseyCalderon89 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Exemplary DemonstrationProficientDemonstrationDevelo