Assessment 3 -Marking Rubrics 2019(‘:, online.uts.edu.au
Evidence for Nursing decision making
Criteria Criteria High Distinction ca.., 42.5) Your paper h.
6
cci
Assessment Task 3: Using evidence to inform clinical Overall weighting: 50% Distinction (37.5- 42) credit (32., 37) Pnss 25-32) Unsatisfactory (<25)
Contributes to Week 6 and Week Made three or more meaningful Made two meaningful Made one meaningful Made one meaningful Engagement and the quality of 7 Online discussion forums (6 participations in each online participations and participated participation and participated participation and demonstrated the in-class presentation and marks) and participates in Week discussion forum and participated constructively in the in-class actively in the in-class acceptable contribution to the in- online discussions were 8 in-class workshop (2 marks). eagerly and constructively in the in- workshop, providing a quality, workshop, providing a clear class workshop, giving a unsatisfactory (<4). class worlcshop. providing a high succinct, and accumte presentation .d mostly accurate satisfactory presentation (4-5.1). quality. succinct, and accurate (6- 6.7). presentation (5.2- 5.9). presentation 6.8). Demonstrates ability to search Demonstrated and applied Demonstrated and applied very Demonstrated clear Demonstrated a reasonable Demonstrated poor knowledge for evidence using a searchable comprehensive knowledge and good knowledge and knowledge and knowledge and understanding of and understanding of database question. a correct search understanding of database searching understanding of database understanding of database database searching resulting in searching resulting in an strategy, and presents print resulting in a highly successful search searching resulting in a very searching resulting in a some success (5-6.4), unsuccessful search (<5). screens of the abstracts of the (78.5). successfid search (7.5-8.4). successful search (6.5-7.4). selected papers ( 10 marks). Demonstrates an understanding Demonstrated and applied Demonstrated and applied detailed Demonstrated clear Demonstrated and applied Described some concepts oldie different levels. types, and comprehensive knowledge and knowledge and understanding of knowledp and partially-developed knowledge related to the topic. but these quality of evidence underpinning understanding of the levels and types the levels and types of evidence understanding of database and understanding attic levels may have been under-nursing practice and healthcare of evidence used to answer a clinical used to answer a clinical question. searching resulting in a and/or types of evidence used to developed, unclear or incorrect. SePACC delivery ()2 marks). question. Drawn upon credible and Dmwn upon credible and relevant successfhl search (7.8-8.8). answer a clinical qu.tion. Drawn Used few or no references to relevant literature and evidence to literature and evidence to support upon limited literature and support your discu.ion and/or support your discussion 10.2). your discussion (9-)0). evidence to suppon your failed to use credible academic discussion (6-7.6). sources (<6). Demonstrates the ability to use Presented an extremely well- Presented a well-constructed Piesented a clear argument Presented a re.onable argument Presented a superficial, research findings to answer a constructed and insightful argument argument based on detailed based on an interpretation of linked to research findings to inaccurate, or poorly clinical question (15 marks). based on skilful intetpretation of interprevation of research findings research findings to answer a answer a clinical question (9.6- constructed argument with little research findings to answer a clinical to answer a arnica! question (112- clinical question (9.75-)1.0. 9.7%). or no reference to research )2220i22 ),)2.7). (2.6). findings or based on incorrect interpretation (<7.5).
Writes clearly and succinctly, Maintained a standard that is virtually Demonstrated pod planning, with Maintained appropriate Some incorrect spelling. grammar Faller.° present information in with COITCCi grammar, free from spelling, grammatical and/or correct spelling and grammar, and academic style. vvith minimal and/or terminology. an academic style, with terminology and referencing (5 terminology errors. Accurately used appropriate terminology used spelling or grammatical Some errors in the application of numerous spelling, gratnmatical marks). the Harvard referencing style for in- throughout. Accurately used the errors, and mostly suitable Harvanl rekrencing style ().5- and/or terminology errors. text citations and reference list Harvard referencing style for in- use of terminology. 3.2%). Used incorrect referencing style (24.25). text citations and reference list Accurately referenced the or had a large number of (3.75-4.2). majority of sources using the referencing errors (<2.5). Harvard style (3.25-3.7).
Overall