65.0 %Content

3.0 % Research Problem and Purpose

The research problem or purpose of study is not mentioned.

There are some inaccuracies in describing the research problem.

The research problem and purpose are present and mostly accurate.

The research problem and purpose are described with reference to nursing.

The problem and purpose of the study are clearly articulated, and their importance to nursing is addressed.

3.0 % Research Objective, Questions, or Hypotheses

The research objective, questions, or hypotheses are not mentioned. Does not mention research objective, questions or hypotheses.

There are some inaccuracies describing the research objective, questions or hypotheses.

The research objective, questions, or hypotheses are present and mostly accurate.

The research objective, questions, or hypotheses are described and related to study methods.

Research question is clearly and accurately described and is congruent with research purpose, method, and worldview of researcher.

3.0 % Literature Review

Literature review is not mentioned.

There are some inaccuracies describing the literature review.

The literature review elements are discussed and support the purpose of the study.

The literature review and how it supports the purpose of the study are described.

The literature review critique is thorough and clear, and supports the purpose and research question.

3.0 %Conceptual/Theoretical Framework – Qualitative

The conceptual/theoretical framework is not mentioned.

There are some inaccuracies in describing the conceptual/theoretical framework.

The conceptual/theoretical framework elements are present and mostly accurate.

The conceptual/theoretical framework is described.

The conceptual/theoretical framework is thorough, clear, and accurately described using research terminology.

3.0 % Protection of Human Participants

Protection of human participants is not critiqued.

Some of the study tools are critiqued. Ethical issues are not addressed for quantitative design.

The study tools are critiqued. Ethical issues are discussed for quantitative design.

The study tools are critiqued using research terminology. Ethical issues are addressed for quantitative design.

The study tools are thorough, clear and accurately critiqued using research terminology. Ethical issues are addressed for quantitative design.

3.0 % Data Collection

Data collection methods are not critiqued.

Data collection methods are critiqued, but not to the full extent or not including ethical issues.

Data collection methods and potential biases are reviewed. Ethical issues are described. Interview or data collection processes are presented.

Data collection methods are critiqued and potential biases are reviewed. Ethical issues are described. Interview or data collection processes are critiqued.

Data collection methods are fully critiqued, and potential biases are addressed. Potential ethical issues, interview or data collection processes are critiqued.

5.0 % Problem Statement in PICOT Format

No problem statement is provided.

The critique of the problem statement is provided, but is missing criteria as indicated in the writing guidelines. There are some inaccuracies describing the elements associated with the PICOT statement.

The critique of the problem statement meets all criteria of the writing guidelines. The PICOT is present and most of the elements and description are mostly accurate.

The critique of the problem statement meets all criteria of the writing guidelines in a detailed and comprehensive manner. The PICOT statement is described and related to the research question or problem of the study.

The critique of the problem statement meets all criteria of the writing guidelines in a detailed and comprehensive manner while demonstrating deeper understanding by incorporating prior learning or thoughtful reflection. The PICOT statement is clearly and accurately described and is congruent with the description of the research question or problem of the study.

3.0 % Data Analysis or Data Management

Data analysis or management is not critiqued.

Data analysis is described. Significance and nonsignificance are explained; generalization and implications to nursing practice are not fully addressed. Conclusions are vague.

Data analysis is described and linked to research questions. Results are explained, and implications to nursing practice are reviewed. Conclusions are presented.

Data analysis is critiqued and tied to research questions. Results are explained. Generalization and implications to nursing practice are reviewed. Conclusions are tied back to purpose of study.

Data analysis is accurately critiqued and linked to research questions. Significance and nonsignificance are explained. Generalization and implications to nursing practice are reviewed. Conclusions are tied back to purpose of study and literature review.

6.0 % Implications for Practice and Future Research

The quality of the study and implications for nursing practice and future research are not addressed.

The quality of the study and implications for nursing practice and future research are mentioned but not fully addressed.

The quality of the study and implications for nursing practice and future research are addressed and explained.

The quality of the study and implications for nursing practice and future research are addressed and explained with specific suggestions mentioned.

The quality of the study and implications for nursing practice and future research are addressed and explained in detail, including specific suggestions.

3.0 % Conclusion

Conclusion does not summarize a critical appraisal and applicability of findings.

Conclusion is vague and does not discuss importance to nursing.

Conclusion summarizes utility of the research and importance to nursing practice.

Conclusion summarizes utility of the research from the critical appraisal and the findings importance to nursing practice.

Conclusion summarizes utility of the research from the critical appraisal, knowledge learned, and the importance of the findings to nursing practice.

5.0 % Identifies a Nursing Practice Problem

A nursing practice problem is not clearly described.

PICOT describes a nursing practice problem but lacks reliable sources.

A nursing practice problem is described with a few reliable sources.

PICOT articulates a nursing practice problem using supporting information from reliable sources.

PICOT clearly articulates a problem relevant to nursing practice. PICOT supports the nursing practice problem with current research.

5.0 % PICOT Statement, Research Article, and Nursing Practice Problem Link

Discussion of the link between the PICOT statement, research articles, and nursing practice problem is not included.

Discussion of the link between the PICOT statement, research articles, and nursing practice problem is incomplete or incorrect.

Discussion of the link between the PICOT statement, research articles, and nursing practice problem is included but lacks relevant details and supporting explanation.

Discussion of the link between the PICOT statement, research articles, and nursing practice problem is complete and includes relevant details and supporting explanation.

Discussion of the link between the PICOT statement, research articles, and nursing practice problem is extremely thorough with substantial relevant details and extensive supporting explanation.

5.0 % Proposed Evidence-Based Practice Change

The proposed evidence-based practice change is not included.

The proposed evidence-based practice change is incomplete or incorrect.

The proposed evidence-based practice change is included but lacks supporting explanation and relevant details.

The proposed evidence-based practice change is complete and includes supporting explanation and relevant details.

The proposed evidence-based practice change is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting explanation and numerous relevant details.

15.0 % Evidence of Revision

Final paper does not demonstrate incorporation of feedback or evidence of revision.

Incorporation of feedback or evidence of revision is incomplete.

Incorporation of feedback and evidence of revision are present.

Evidence of incorporation of feedback and revision is clearly provided.

Evidence of incorporation of feedback and revision is comprehensive and thoroughly developed.

30.0 %Organization and Effectiveness

10.0 % Thesis Development and Purpose

Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.

Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.

Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.

Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.

Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.

10.0 % Argument Logic and Construction

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 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.

10.0 % Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

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.

5.0 %Format

2.0 % Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)

Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.

Template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent.

Template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.

Template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style.

All format elements are correct.

3.0 % Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)

Sources are not documented.

Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.

Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.

100 % Total Weightage