| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeThe Assignment: Part 1: Literature Review of at least 10 scholarly articles:• Using the Walden Library as your source, search to select at least 10 scholarly articles that represent current literature (i.e., published within the previous 5 years) with evidence that addresses your critical question and could inform a practice change initiative for quality improvement. Using the Individual Evidence Summary/Synthesis Tool template document, complete all sections for each article. |
| 100 to >89.0 pts
Excellent 90%–100%
The response uses the Individual Evidence Summary/synthesis Tool template to clearly, accurately, and in detail complete all sections for at least 10 scholarly articles with evidence that addresses your critical question. The synthesis includes consistencies and inconsistences of the evidence and makes recommendations that could inform a practice change initiative for quality improvement. |
89 to >79.0 pts
Good 80%–89%
The response uses the Individual Evidence Summary Tool template to clearly and accurately complete all sections for at least 10 scholarly articles with evidence that addresses your critical question. The synthesis somewhat identifies consistencies and inconsistences of the evidence and makes recommendations that could inform a practice change initiative for quality improvement. There may be a few minor errors in the document. |
79 to >69.0 pts
Fair 70%–79%
The response uses the Individual Evidence Summary Tool template to complete most sections for 10 or fewer scholarly articles with evidence that vaguely or somewhat addresses your critical question. The synthesis is not clear on how the evidence could inform a practice change initiative for quality improvement. There are several errors throughout the document. |
69 to >0 pts
Poor 0%–69%
The response is an incomplete use of the Individual Evidence Summary Tool template with fewer than 10 scholarly articles, a substantial number of missing sections and inaccuracies and vague, inaccurate, and/or missing evidence in some to most articles. The synthesis is not completed and does not address your critical question and informing a practice change initiative for quality improvement. |
|
100 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeThe Assignment: Part 2: Critical AssessmentIn a paper of at least 7 pages, plus cover page and references page, include the following:• Write a critical assessment of your search outcomes that synthesizes the evidence from your literature review. |
| 40 to >35.0 pts
Excellent 90%–100%
The response provides a clear, accurate, and detailed assessment of your search outcomes that fully synthesizes the evidence from your literature review. |
35 to >31.0 pts
Good 80%–89%
The response provides a clear and accurate assessment of your search outcomes that synthesizes the evidence from your literature review. |
31 to >27.0 pts
Fair 70%–79%
The response provides a vague and/or inaccurate assessment of your search outcomes that somewhat synthesizes the evidence from your literature review. |
27 to >0 pts
Poor 0%–69%
The response provides a vague, inaccurate, or missing assessment of your search outcomes that minimally or fails to synthesize the evidence from your literature review. |
|
40 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome• Demonstrate clear connections between the practice problem that informs your critical question, your appraisal of evidence that addresses the critical question, and resulting clarification on the need for a practice change initiative focusing on quality improvement. Be specific and provide examples. |
| 45 to >44.0 pts
Excellent 90%–100%
The response clearly, accurately, and in detail demonstrates connections between the practice problem that informs your critical question, your appraisal of evidence that addresses the critical question, and resulting clarification on the need for a practice change initiative focusing on quality improvement…. The response fully synthesizes and integrates at least four scholarly resources that fully support the connections provided. |
44 to >39.0 pts
Good 80%–89%
The response clearly and accurately demonstrates connections between the practice problem that informs your critical question, your appraisal of evidence that addresses the critical question, and resulting clarification on the need for a practice change initiative focusing on quality improvement. … The response synthesizes and integrates at least three scholarly resources that support the connections provided. |
39 to >34.0 pts
Fair 70%–79%
The response vaguely or inaccurately demonstrates connections between the practice problem that informs your critical question, and/or your appraisal of evidence that addresses the critical question, and/or resulting clarification on the need for a practice change initiative focusing on quality improvement. … The response somewhat synthesizes and integrates three scholarly resources that may support the connections provided. |
34 to >0 pts
Poor 0%–69%
The response vaguely and inaccurately demonstrates, and/or is missing connections between the practice problem that informs your critical question, and/or your appraisal of evidence that addresses the critical question, and/or resulting clarification on the need for a practice change initiative focusing on quality improvement. … The response minimally and/or inaccurately synthesizes and integrates one or two scholarly resources, or resources are not scholarly, or are missing. |
|
45 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting: Paragraph/Sentence StructureParagraphs make clear points that support well-developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are clearly structured and carefully focused–neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. |
| 5 to >4.0 pts
Excellent 90%–100%
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for structure, flow, continuity, and clarity. |
4 to >3.0 pts
Good 80%–89%
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for structure, flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time. |
3 to >2.0 pts
Fair 70%–79%
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for structure, flow, continuity, and clarity 60%–79% of the time. |
2 to >0 pts
Poor 0%–69%
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for structure, flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time. |
|
5 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting: English writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation. |
| 5 to >4.0 pts
Excellent 90%–100%
Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors. |
4 to >3.5 pts
Good 80%–89%
Contains a few (1–2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. |
3.5 to >3.0 pts
Fair 70%–79%
Contains several (3–4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. |
3 to >0 pts
Poor 0%–69%
Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. |
|
5 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting: The assignment contains parenthetical/in-text citations, and at least 10 evidence-based references are listed. |
| 5 to >4.0 pts
Excellent 90%–100%
Contains parenthetical/in-text citations and at least 10 evidence-based references are listed. |
4 to >3.5 pts
Good 80%–89%
Contains parenthetical/in-text citations and 10 evidence-based references are listed. |
3.5 to >3.0 pts
Fair 70%–79%
Contains parenthetical/in-text citations and fewer than 10 evidence-based references are listed. |
3 to >0 pts
Poor 0%–69%
Contains no parenthetical/in-text citations and significantly fewer than 10 evidence-based references are listed, or there is no references page. |
|
5 pts |
| Total Points: 200 |
