| Unit 2: Individual Screening |
|
Introductory |
Emergent |
Practiced |
Proficient/Mastered |
Score |
Weight |
Final |
|
0 -1.9 |
2 – 2.9 |
3 – 3.9 |
4 |
|
|
Score |
| Condition and screening |
Condition or type of screening methodology is not identified. |
Condition and type of screening methodology is selected but not clearly defined and has errors. |
Condition and type of screening methodology is selected but not defined. |
Condition and type of screening methodology is clearly defined. |
4 |
10% |
0.40 |
| Epidemiology of Condition |
Epidemiology of condition is not identified. |
Epidemiology of condition is weakly discussed and may have errors. |
Epidemiology of condition is addressed; detail is limited |
Epidemiology of condition is well addressed; comprehensive and appropriately |
4 |
10% |
0.40 |
| Methodology |
Methodology is not applied to a specific population. |
Methodology is properly applied to a specific population, may have errors or missing key elements of risks and related factors. Does not address testing measures |
Methodology is applied to a specific population addressing some risks and related factors; detail is limited. May not include positive measures or some features of measurement used. |
Methodology is properly applied to a specific population addressing risks and related factors. Measures of testing are included and supported |
4 |
10% |
0.40 |
| Guidelines followed |
United States Preventive Services Task Force guidelines are not selected or identified. |
United States Preventive Services Task Force guidelines are not applied appropriately to the screening methodology. Detail is limited. |
United States Preventive Services Task Force guidelines are identified; detail is limited. |
United States Preventive Services Task Force guidelines are identified correctly and are relevant to the screening methodology. |
4 |
15% |
0.60 |
| Critical Analysis |
No literature review included. |
Review is not comprehensive, little evidence of critical analysis and research. |
Review is present but not comprehensive, studies are represented, limited evidence of critical analysis. |
Provides appropriate literature support, derived from nursing scholarly journals and other social science literature, as evidence for their chosen screening. Discussion demonstrates critical analysis of strengths and weaknesses of the chosen screening methodology and guideline support. |
4 |
25% |
1.00 |
| Literature support |
No literature review sources are included. |
Provides 1 scholarly source for literature support. |
Provides 3-2 scholarly sources for literature support. |
Provides 4 or more scholarly sources for literature support. |
4 |
10% |
0.40 |
| Format/Style |
APA format is not utilized. No obvious attempt made to cite ideas and information from other sources. There are consistent and repeated errors in rules of grammar, word usage, and punctuation. There are consistent and repeated spelling and/or proofreading errors. Overall style is not at all consistent with formal, professional work. |
There are frequent repeated errors in consistency of the text, title page, and references page with APA format. There are numerous errors in which ideas and information from other sources are not cited correctly. There are numerous errors in rules of grammar, word usage, and punctuation. There are numerous spelling and/or proofreading errors. Overall style is inadequate for formal, professional work; many areas needs need style improvement. |
There are some errors, but much of the text, title page, and references page is consistent with the APA format. Ideas and information from other sources are cited correctly with few exceptions. Rules of grammar, word usage, and punctuation are followed with few exceptions. Assignment has few spelling and/or proofreading errors. Overall style is adequate for formal, professional work; some areas need style improvement. |
Text, title page, and references page are consistent with APA format. Ideas and information from other sources are cited correctly. Rules of grammar, word usage, and punctuation are followed. Assignment is spellchecked and proofread. Overall style is demonstrates excellent consistency with that expected of formal, professional work. |
4 |
20% |
0.80 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
100% |
4.00 |
|
|
|
|
Final Score |
|
|
100 |
|
|
|
|
Percentage |
|
|
100.00% |
| Total available points = |
|
100 |
4 |
