1 Unsatisfactory 0.00% |
2 Less than Satisfactory 75.00% |
3 Satisfactory 79.00% |
4 Good 89.00% |
5 Excellent 100.00% |
80.0 %Content |
|
20.0 %Background Information |
A discussion of background information is not included. |
A discussion of background information is present but lacks detail or is incomplete. Subject knowledge is unclear or inconsistent. |
A discussion of background information is present. Some subject knowledge is evident. |
A discussion of background information is present, and subject knowledge is competent. |
A discussion of background information is thoroughly developed with supporting details. |
|
20.0 %Problem Statement |
A problem statement is not included. |
A problem statement is present but lacks detail or is incomplete. Subject knowledge is unclear or inconsistent. |
A problem statement is present. Some subject knowledge is evident. |
A problem statement is included, and subject knowledge is competent. |
A problem statement is thoroughly developed with supporting details. |
|
20.0 %Suggestions |
Suggestions for addressing the issue are not included. |
Suggestions for addressing the issue are present but lack detail or are incomplete. Subject knowledge is unclear or inconsistent. |
Suggestions for addressing the issue are present. Some subject knowledge is evident. |
Suggestions for addressing the issue is present, and subject knowledge is competent. |
Suggestions for addressing the issue are thoroughly developed with supporting details. |
|
20.0 %Impact |
A discussion on the impact on the health care delivery system is not included. |
A discussion on the impact on the health care delivery system is present but lacks detail or is incomplete. Subject knowledge is unclear or inconsistent. |
A discussion on the impact on the health care delivery system is present. Some subject knowledge is evident. |
A discussion on the impact on the health care delivery system is present, and subject knowledge is competent. |
A discussion on the impact on the health care delivery system is thoroughly developed with supporting details. |
|
15.0 %Organization and Effectiveness |
|
5.0 %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. |
|
5.0 %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. |
|
5.0 %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), sentence structure, or word choice are present. |
Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they 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 |
|
|