Week 3 Assignment Instructions and Rubric
Tutor MUST have a good command of the English language
Sources need to be journal/scholarly articles.
Use only articles that are published between 2015-2018 (except for your theory articles which will be older as you must cite primary sources).
No textbook or direct quotes
The Epidemiology Paper is a practice immersion assignment designed to be completed in three sections. This is part two of the assignment. Learners are required to identify an at-risk population, how the health risk for this population can be affected by nursing science, and the potential obstacles that may hinder implementation of health prevention and promotion activities for this particular population.
Use the following information to ensure successful completion of the assignment:
This assignment comprises the second part of the Epidemiology Paper. Write a 1,250-1,500 word paper that provides the following:
Epidemiology Paper Part Two – Analysis and Application
|1 Unsatisfactory 0.00%||2 Less Than Satisfactory 74.00%||3 Satisfactory 79.00%||4 Good 87.00%||5 Excellent 100.00%|
|6.0 %Completed Changes and Corrected Errors to Subsequent Paper, Including Transitions for a Scholarly Paper||Learner did not attach previous paper and did not make changes as indicated.||N/A||Learner attached previous paper and has made changes as indicated. Learner needs to incorporate transitions to connect the ideas between the papers||Learner attached previous paper and has made changes as indicated. Learner needs to incorporate better transitions to connect the ideas between the papers.||Learner attached previous paper and has made changes as indicated. Learner has includes all necessary transitions to create a scholarly paper.|
|18.0 %Identifies Existing At-Risk Population (Aggregated Statistics Support Claims, Identifies Criteria and Data That Substantiates That the Population Is at Risk)||Paper does not establish that an existing population is at-risk using aggregated statistics. Paper does not accurately identify an existing at-risk population.||Paper uses aggregated statistics to demonstrate that an existing population may be at-risk, but does not identify criteria to substantiate why the population is at-risk.||Paper uses aggregated statistics to demonstrate that a population is at-risk. Paper identifies some criteria that explain why the population is at risk, but limited criteria does not substantiate why the population is at-risk.||Paper uses aggregated statistics to demonstrate that a population is at-risk and identifies common criteria that substantiates why the population is at-risk.||Paper uses aggregated statistics logically and accurately to demonstrate that a population is at-risk. Paper identifies strong criteria that substantiate why the population is at-risk.|
|18.0 %Population Analysis Identifies Health Risk Within Identified At-Risk Population That Nursing Science Can Impact (SPSS Data Correlates the Population to an Identified Health Risk; Describes Specific Variables)||Paper does not perform a population analysis based on SPSS data.||Population analysis is only partially based on SPSS data, and does not establish a correlation to a population or identified health risk that nursing science can impact. No specific variables are described.||SPSS data is used in the population analysis, but the analysis is flawed or incomplete, and only a weak correlation suggests that nursing science may have an impact on the health risk for the population. Some specific variables have been described for the identified population.||SPSS data is used in the population analysis, demonstrates a correlation to a population or identified health risk that nursing science can impact. Contributing variables have been identified for the population and health risk.||Population analysis uses SPSS data logically and accurately to demonstrate a strong correlation between a population or identified health risk that nursing science can impact. Contributing variables are identified, thoroughly explored, and supported by data.|
|18.0 %Identifies Collaborators, Potential Obstacles and Solutions; Defines Outcomes and Timeframes, and Uses Contemporary Theories or Concepts for Support||Paper does not identify collaborators or potential obstacles and solutions. Paper does not propose timeframe or use contemporary theories or concepts for support.||Some collaborators and obstacles have been identified, but no evidence is proposed to assess or resolve potential obstacles. No clear timeframe has been established. Contemporary theories or concepts are not used for support.||Potential collaborators and obstacles have been identified, but solutions for resolving conflict are vague. The timeframe has been established but is missing key elements needed. The use of contemporary theories and concepts is introduced.||Potential collaborators and obstacles have been identified and general solutions for overcoming obstacles have been proposed. A general timeframe has been established. General support is offered through the use of contemporary theories and concepts.||Paper demonstrates insightful use of contemporary theories and concepts for support. Paper identifies realistic collaborators and obstacles, provides well-researched solutions to overcome obstacles; defines clear timeline and expected outcomes.|
|10.0 %Six to Eight Additional Scholarly Research Sources With In-Text Citations||None of the required elements (minimum of six topic-related scholarly research sources and six in-text citations) are present.||Not all required elements are present. One or more elements are missing and/or included sources are not scholarly research or topic-related.||All required elements are present. Scholarly research sources are topic-related, but the source and quality of one or more references is questionable.||All required elements are present. Scholarly research sources are topic-related, and obtained from reputable professional sources.||All required elements are present. Scholarly research sources are topic-related, and obtained from highly respected, professional, original sources.|
|20.0 %Organization and Effectiveness|
|7.0 %Thesis Development and Purpose||Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.||Thesis and/or main claim are insufficiently developed and/or vague; purpose is not clear.||Thesis and/or main claim are apparent and appropriate to purpose.||Thesis and/or main claim are clear and forecast the development of the paper. It is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.||Thesis and/or main claim are comprehensive. The essence of the paper is contained within the thesis. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.|
|8.0 %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 and/or sentence construction are used.||Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) and/or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.||Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but 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.|
|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 %Research Citations (in-text citations for paraphrasing and direct quotes, and reference page listing and formatting, as appropriate to assignment and style)||No reference page is included. No citations are used.||Reference page is present. Citations are inconsistently used.||Reference page is included and lists sources used in the paper. Sources are appropriately documented, although some errors may be present.||Reference page is present and fully inclusive of all cited sources. Documentation is appropriate and citation style is usually correct.||In-text citations and a reference page are complete and correct. The documentation of cited sources is free of error.|
|100 %Total Weightage|
The post Potential obstacles that may hinder the implementation of the prevention and health promotion activities appeared first on Nursing Assignments Desk.