|
Assignment Criteria
|
Exceptional
Outstanding or highest level of performance
|
Exceeds
Very good or high level of performance
|
Meets
Competent or satisfactory level of performance
|
Needs Improvement
Poor or failing level of performance
|
Developing
Unsatisfactory level of performance
|
|
Identification of the problem/concern
|
20 Points
|
18 Points
|
16 Points
|
8 Points
|
0 Points
|
|
Comprehensively identifies the problem/concern
|
Adequately identifies the problem/concern
|
Identification of problem/concern is limited
|
Identification of problem/concern is unclear.
|
Identification of problem/concern is absent
|
|
|
Background and significance of the disease (includes incidence
or prevalence statistics)
|
30 Points
|
26 Points
|
24 Points
|
11 Points
|
0 Points
|
Background is complete, presents risks, disease impact and
includes a review of incidence and prevalence of the disease within the
student’s local area, state, and nationally. Evidence supports background.
|
Background is complete, presents risk, disease impact and at
least one set of incidence and prevalence statistics are presented and
supported by evidence.
|
Background missing one or more key points and at least one set
of incidence and prevalence statistics are presented. Lack of evidence or limited
presentation of the background.
|
Background missing more than one key point and at least one set
of incidence and prevalence statistics are presented, or there is no
supported evidence. Unclear
conclusions or presentation.
|
Background and significance of the disease is not provided.
|
|
|
Current surveillance methods
|
30 Points
|
26 Points
|
24 Points
|
11 Points
|
0 Points
|
|
Current local, state, and national disease surveillance methods
are reviewed, currently gathered types of statistics, and information on
whether the disease is mandated for reporting, supported by evidence
|
More than one local, state, and national disease surveillance
methods are reviewed, currently gathered types of statistics, and information
on whether the disease is mandated for reporting, supported by evidence
|
One of either local, state, and national disease surveillance
methods are reviewed, currently gathered types of statistics, and information
on whether the disease is mandated for reporting, supported by evidence
|
One of either local, state, and national disease surveillance
methods are reviewed, currently gathered types of statistics, or only
information on whether the disease is mandated for reporting, or evidence is
lacking to support this area. Unclear
conclusions or presentation.
|
Local, state, and national disease surveillance methods were not
discussed.
|
|
|
Descriptive epidemiological analysis (includes characteristics
of the at-risk population and/or those affected by the disease and costs of
the disease)
|
30 Points
|
26 Points
|
24 Points
|
11 Points
|
0 Points
|
Comprehensive review and analysis of descriptive epidemiological
points of the identified disease and population most at risk, supported by
scholarly evidence.
|
Adequate review with some analysis of descriptive
epidemiological points of the identified disease and population most at risk
supported by scholarly evidence.
|
Limited review and analysis of key descriptive epidemiological
points of the identified disease and at-risk population.
|
Minimal analysis of key descriptive epidemiological points of
the identified disease and at-risk population.
|
No analysis of key descriptive epidemiological points of the
identified disease and at-risk population is provided.
|
|
Screening and diagnosis (includes review of current guidelines
for screening and diagnosis of the disease. In-depth review of statistics one
screening or diagnostic test provided)
|
30 Points
|
26 Points
|
24 Points
|
11 Points
|
0 Points
|
Comprehensive review of current guidelines for screening,
diagnosis, and statistics related to validity, predictive value, and
reliability of screening tests is presented.
|
Adequate review of guidelines for screening, diagnosis, and
statistics related to validity, predictive value, and reliability of
screening tests is presented.
|
Limited review of guidelines for screening, diagnosis, and
statistics related to validity, predictive value, and reliability of
screening tests.
|
Minimal or unclear review of guidelines for screening, diagnosis,
and statistics related to validity, predictive value, and reliability of
screening tests.
|
Review of guidelines for screening, diagnosis, and statistics
related to validity, predictive value, and reliability of screening tests not
provided.
|
|
|
Plan of action (includes at least three evidenced based actions,
supported by literature, that the student will take in their own practice and
how outcomes will be measured)
|
30 Points
|
26 Points
|
24 Points
|
11 Points
|
0 Points
|
A comprehensive plan of action specific to the student’s
interests, the problem, and the geographic area is presented with 3 evidenced
based actions that will be taken to address the impact, outcomes, or
prevalence of the disease.
|
An adequate, but not fully comprehensive, plan of action
specific to the student’s interests, the problem, and the geographic area is
presented with 3 evidenced based actions that will be taken to address the
impact, outcomes, or prevalence of the disease.
|
A limited plan of action specific to the student’s interests,
the problem, and the geographic area is, outcomes, or prevalence of the
disease. Three actions are presented with
limited or little evidence.
|
Actions are minimal or unclear, or lack specificity to
geographic area, are not supported directly by evidence or are not direct
actions the student can take in practice.
|
Plan of action not provided.
|
|
|
Conclusion
|
20 Points
|
18 Points
|
16 Points
|
8 Points
|
0 Points
|
The conclusion thoroughly, clearly, succinctly, and logically
presents major points of the paper with clear direction for action.
|
The conclusion adequately and logically presents major points of
the paper with clear direction for action, but lacks one major point or is
not succinct.
|
The conclusion is a limited review of key points of the paper,
is not succinct, or lacks one or more major points of the paper or clear
direction for action.
|
Conclusion is unclear or significantly limited in overview of
the paper.
|
|
|
|
Grammar, Spelling, APA
|
10 Points
|
9 Points
|
8 Points
|
4 Points
|
0 Points
|
APA format, grammar, spelling, and/or punctuation are accurate,
or with zero to one errors.
|
Two to four errors in APA format, grammar, spelling, and syntax
noted.
|
Five to seven errors in APA format, grammar, spelling, and
syntax noted.
|
Eight to nine errors in APA format, grammar, spelling, and
syntax noted.
|
Post contains greater than ten errors in APA format, grammar,
spelling, and/or punctuation or repeatedly makes the same errors after
faculty feedback.
|
|
|
|
Total Points Possible = 200 points
|
|
|
|
