Rubric For Evaluating DNP Project
Rubric For Evaluating DNP Project
Rubric For Evaluating DNP Project
| 70-60 POINTS | 59-35 POINTS | 34-25 POINTS | 24-10 POINTS | 9-0 POINTS | |
| PROGRAM EVALUATIONPAPER CRITERIA
|
Identifies and clearly describes the type of model selected for evaluation; discrepancy, goal-free, transaction, goal-based or decision-making model.
Discuss why this model was chosen. Much detail included.
Clearly demonstrates how objectives will be evaluated.
Identifies how the financial aspect of the project will be evaluated for effectiveness. Much detail included.
Evaluation tools are developed well with the tool included in the appendix.
Identifies how the data collected will be analyzed and how the results will be utilized. Much detail included.
Evidence-based practice is incorporated into the project and clearly defined.
|
Identifies and describes the type of model selected for evaluation; discrepancy, goal-free, transaction, goal-based or decision-making model.
Discuss why this model was chosen. Detail included.
Demonstrates how objectives will be evaluated. Generally clear.
Identifies how the financial aspect of the project will be evaluated for effectiveness. Detail included.
Evaluation tools are developed with the tool included in the appendix.
Identifies how the data collected will be analyzed and how the results will be utilized. Detail included.
Evidence-based practice is incorporated into the project and defined. Generally clear.
|
Identifies and describes the type of model selected for evaluation; discrepancy, goal-free, transaction, goal-based or decision-making model. Lacking detail.
Discuss why this model was chosen. Lacking detail.
Demonstrates how objectives will be evaluated. Lacking detail.
Identifies how the financial aspect of the project will be evaluated for effectiveness. Lacking detail.
Evaluation tools are developed with the tool included in the appendix. Lacking detail.
Identifies how the data collected will be analyzed and how the results will be utilized. Lacking detail.
Evidence-based practice is incorporated into the project. Lacking detail.
|
Identifies and describes the type of model selected for evaluation; discrepancy, goal-free, transaction, goal-based or decision-making model. Lacking much detail.
Discuss why this model was chosen. Lacking much detail.
Demonstrates how objectives will be evaluated. Lacking much detail.
Identifies how the financial aspect of the project will be evaluated for effectiveness. Lacking much detail.
Evaluation tools are developed with the tool included in the appendix. Lacking much detail.
Identifies how the data collected will be analyzed and how the results will be utilized. Lacking much detail.
Evidence-based practice is incorporated into the project. Lacking much detail.
|
Identifies the type of model selected for evaluation; discrepancy, goal-free, transaction, goal-based or decision-making model. Model not described.
Does not discuss why this model was chosen.
Does not demonstrate how objectives will be evaluated.
Does not identify how the financial aspect of the project will be evaluated for effectiveness.
Evaluation tools are developed. Tool may or may not be included in the appendix.
May not identify how the data collected will be analyzed and how the results will be utilized.
Evidence-based practice is absent in the project
|
70 points maximum for specific assignment/topic and 30 points maximum using Standard Grading rubric (below) for writing= 100 points total for a writing assignment. This assignment relates to CO 1,2,3,4,5.
Project Evaluation Paper Guidelines:
Construct a framework for the evaluation of your project. Identify and describe the type of model selected for evaluation: discrepancy, goal-free, transaction, goal-based or decision-making model. Discuss why this model was chosen. You will then develop the tool(s) to be used to evaluate if the objective/goals, the financial aspect of the project and how the data collected will be analyzed. The final paper should not exceed eight pages without title page, references and appendix.
The Following Grading Rubric Will Be Used To Ensure a Consistent Standard for Evaluating DNP Student Papers (Essays):
30 Points Total
| 6-5 POINTS | 4-3 POINTS | 2 POINTS | 1 POINTS | 0 POINTS | |
| Thesis / Topic | Exceptionally clear; easily identifiable, insightful; introduces the topic for the paper; summary in one or two well-written sentences. | Generally clear; is promising; could be a little more inclusive of the content of the paper. | Central idea is adequate but not fully developed; may be somewhat unclear (contains vague terms); only gives a vague idea of the content of the paper. | Difficult to identify with inadequate illustration of key ideas; does not let the reader know what the paper is going to include. | No thesis statement or introduction is identifiable. |
| 6-5 POINTS | 4-3 POINTS | 2 POINTS | 1 POINTS | 0 POINTS | |
| Content / Development | Thesis coherently developed and maintained throughout; thorough explanation of key idea(s) at an appropriate level for the target audience; critical thinking with excellent understanding of the topic; original in scope (this paper made sense, was easy to understand, and did not leave reader with questions due to incomplete development). | Explanation or illustration of key ideas consistent throughout essay; original but may be somewhat lacking in insight; minor topics of the paper could be developed more thoroughly. | Explanation or illustration of some of the key ideas; reader is left with some questions due to inadequate development; content may be a little confusing or unclear as to what the author means. | Little or no relevant detail; many areas that could be expanded. | Paper does not make sense; unclear what the author is trying to say; very little real information presented. |
| 6-5 POINTS | 4-3 POINTS | 2 POINTS | 1 POINTS | 0 POINTS | |
| Organization | Good organization with clear focus and excellent transition between paragraphs; logical order to presentation of information; paragraphs are well-organized; easy to understand and makes sense. | Adequate organizational style with logical transition between paragraphs; overall or paragraph organization could be slightly improved. | Adequate organizational style, although flow is somewhat choppy and may wander occasionally; somewhat confusing due to organization of paper or paragraphs. | Incoherent structure; logic is unclear; paragraph transition is weak; difficult to understand; must re-read parts to figure out what is being said. | No order to content; very confusing and difficult to read; makes no sense. |
| 6-5 POINTS | 4-3 POINTS | 2 POINTS | 1 POINTS | 0 POINTS | |
| Mechanics | Skillful use of language; varied, accurate vocabulary; well-developed sentence structure with minimal errors in punctuation, spelling or grammar; appropriate margins, font; correct application of research style format; use of professional active voice; very well-written paper. | Appropriate use of language with a few errors in grammar, sentence structure, punctuation; fairly accurate interpretation of assignment guidelines, with a few minor errors; readability of paper only slightly affected by mistakes. | Some problems with sentence structure, grammar, punctuation, and/or spelling; may have several run-on sentences or comma splices; some errors in citation style; format does not fully comply with assignment guidelines; somewhat difficult to read due to mistakes. | Many difficulties in sentence structure, grammar, citation style, punctuation, spelling and/or misused words; proper format not used consistently ; many errors in citation style very difficult to understand. | Not written at a graduate level; many mistakes; proper format not used consistently ; many errors in citation style; difficult to read and understand. |
| 6-5 POINTS | 4-3 POINTS | 2 POINTS | 1 POINTS | 0 POINTS | |
| References | Uses sources effectively and documents sources accurately with minimal errors; limited use of direct quotes (No more than 2 or 3); meets reference requirements for assignment; reference list is in correct format. | Appropriate sources and documentation; may have minimal errors with too few or too many in-text citations; missing no more than one reference as required for the assignment. | Some quotes not integrated smoothly into text; several errors with in-text citations or reference list; omitted in-text citations infrequently; missing 2 required references; overuse of direct quotes | Quotes are not well integrated into narrative or are significantly overused; paraphrasing is too close to original work. (Minimal errors only; more significant errors will be considered plagiarism – See Plagiarism statement to right.) | Plagiarism – source material not adequately paraphrased; direct quotes not identified; source material not referenced. *Plagiarized papers will be given a grade of zero and could result in failure of the course |
