| |
1
Unsatisfactory 0-71%
0.00% |
2
Less Than Satisfactory 72-75%
75.00% |
3
Satisfactory 76-79%
79.00% |
4
Good 80-89%
89.00% |
5
Excellent 90-100%
100.00% |
| 60.0 %Content |
|
| 5.0 % Background |
Background section is not present. Benchmark – Capstone Project Change Proposal |
Background section is present, but incomplete or otherwise lacking in required detail. |
Background section is present. Some minor details or elements are missing but the omission(s) do not impede understanding. |
Background section is present and complete. The submission provides the basic information required. |
Background section is present, complete, and incorporates additional relevant details and critical thinking to engage the reader. |
|
| 5.0 % Problem Statement |
Problem statement is not present. |
Problem statement is present, but incomplete or otherwise lacking in required detail. |
Problem statement is present. Some minor details or elements are missing but the omission(s) do not impede understanding. |
Problem statement is present and complete. The submission provides the basic information required. |
Problem statement is present, complete, and incorporates additional relevant details and critical thinking to engage the reader. |
|
| 5.0 % Change Proposal Purpose |
Purpose of change proposal is not present. |
Purpose of change proposal is present, but incomplete or otherwise lacking in required detail. |
Purpose of change proposal is present. Some minor details or elements are missing but the omission(s) do not impede understanding. |
Purpose of change proposal is present and complete. The submission provides the basic information required. |
Purpose of change proposal is present, complete, and incorporates additional relevant details and critical thinking to engage the reader. |
|
| 5.0 % PICOT |
PICOT is not present. |
PICOT is present, but incomplete or otherwise lacking in required detail. |
PICOT is present. Some minor details or elements are missing but the omission(s) do not impede understanding. |
PICOT is present and complete. The submission provides the basic information required. |
PICOT is present, complete, and incorporates additional relevant details and critical thinking to engage the reader. |
|
| 5.0 % Literature Search Strategy |
Literature search strategy is not present. Benchmark – Capstone Project Change Proposal |
Literature search strategy is present, but incomplete or otherwise lacking in required detail. |
Literature search strategy is present. Some minor details or elements are missing but the omission(s) do not impede understanding. |
Literature search strategy is present and complete. The submission provides the basic information required. |
Literature search strategy is present, complete, and incorporates additional relevant details and critical thinking to engage the reader. |
|
| 5.0 % Literature Evaluation |
Literature evaluation is not present. |
Literature evaluation is present, but incomplete or otherwise lacking in required detail. |
Literature evaluation is present. Some minor details or elements are missing but the omission(s) do not impede understanding. |
Literature evaluation is present and complete. The submission provides the basic information required. |
Literature evaluation is present, complete, and incorporates additional relevant details and critical thinking to engage the reader. |
|
| 5.0 % Utilization of Change or Nursing Theory (2.2) |
Theory utilization is not present. |
Theory utilization content is present, but incomplete or otherwise lacking in required detail. |
Theory utilization content is present. Some minor details or elements are missing but the omission(s) do not impede understanding. |
Theory utilization content is present and complete. The submission provides the basic information required. |
Theory utilization content is present, complete, and incorporates additional relevant details and critical thinking to engage the reader. |
|
| 5.0 % Proposed Implementation Plan with Outcome Measures (3.2) |
Implementation plan is not present. |
Implementation plan is present, but incomplete or otherwise lacking in required detail. |
Implementation plan is present. Some minor details or elements are missing but the omission(s) do not impede understanding. |
Implementation plan is present and complete. The submission provides the basic information required. |
Implementation plan is present, complete, and incorporates additional relevant details and critical thinking to engage the reader. |
|
| 5.0 % Identification of potential barriers to plan implementation, and a discussion of how these could be overcome (2.3) |
Identification of potential barriers to plan implementation and /or discussion component is not present. |
Identification of potential barriers to plan implementation with a discussion component is present, but is incomplete or otherwise lacking in required detail. |
Identification of potential barriers to plan implementation with a discussion component is present. Some minor details or elements are missing but the omission(s) do not impede understanding. |
Identification of potential barriers to plan implementation with a discussion component is present and complete. The submission provides the basic information required. |
Identification of potential barriers to plan implementation with a discussion component is present, complete, and incorporates additional relevant details and critical thinking to engage the reader. |
|
| 5.0 % Appendices Inclusive of Practice Immersion Clinical Documentation (1.2) |
Appendices are not present. Benchmark – Capstone Project Change Proposal |
Appendices are present, but incomplete or otherwise lacking in required detail. |
Appendices are present with minor elements missing that do not impede understanding. |
Appendices are present and complete. The submission provides the basic information required. |
Appendices are present, complete, and incorporates additional relevant details and critical thinking to engage the reader. |
|
| 10.0 % Evidence of Revision |
Final paper does not demonstrate incorporation of feedback or evidence of revision on research critiques. |
Incorporation of research critique feedback or evidence of revision is incomplete. |
Incorporation of research critique feedback and evidence of revision are present. |
Evidence of incorporation of research critique feedback and revision is clearly provided. |
Evidence of incorporation of research critique 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. Benchmark – Capstone Project Change Proposal |
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 progression. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative. |
Clear and convincing argument 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 or sentence construction is used. |
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied. |
Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed. |
Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech. |
Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English. |
|
| 10.0 %Format |
|
| 5.0 % Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) |
Template is not used appropriately, or documentation format is rarely followed correctly. |
Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent. |
Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present. |
Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style. |
All format elements are correct. |
|
| 5.0 % Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) |
Sources are not documented. Benchmark – Capstone Project Change Proposal |
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 |
|
|