Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.
Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.
By Day 7
See Week 2 Assignment section for details and instructions.
submission information
Before submitting your final assignment, you can check your draft for authenticity. To check your draft, access the Turnitin Drafts from the Start Here area.
- To submit your completed assignment, save your Assignment as WK3Assgn+last name+first initial.
- Then, click on Start Assignment near the top of the page.
- Next, click on Upload File and select Submit Assignment for review.
Rubric
NURS_4210_Week3_Assignment_Rubric
| Criteria | Ratings | Pts | |
|---|---|---|---|
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeRequired Content: Introduced the community including the name of the community, interesting or historical facts, and a description of the section of the community you chose to survey. | 40 to >35.0 ptsExcellentProvided a fully developed introduction to their community with insightful analysis of concepts and related issues.35 to >31.0 ptsProficientProvided a developed introduction to their community with reasonable analysis of concepts and related issues.31 to >27.0 ptsBasicProvided a minimally developed introduction to their community with limited analysis of concepts and related issues.27 to >0 ptsNeeds ImprovementProvided an under-developed introduction to their community with little or no analysis of concepts and related issues. | 40 pts | |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeRequired Content: Presented the findings of their windshield survey including photographs of selected areas. | 40 to >35.0 ptsExcellentProvided a fully developed description of their windshield survey findings with pictures with insightful analysis of concepts and related issues.35 to >31.0 ptsProficientProvided a developed description of their windshield survey findings with pictures of their community with reasonable analysis of concepts and related issues.31 to >27.0 ptsBasicProvided a minimally developed description of their windshield survey findings with pictures of their community with limited analysis of concepts and related issues.27 to >0 ptsNeeds ImprovementProvided an under-developed description of their windshield survey findings with pictures of their community with little or no analysis of concepts and related issues. | 40 pts | |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeRequired Content: Described vulnerable population and demographics associated as well as related social determinants and community strengths. | 50 to >44.0 ptsExcellentProvided a fully developed description of vulnerable populations, social determinants and community strengths of their community with insightful analysis of concepts and related issues.44 to >39.0 ptsProficientProvided a developed description of vulnerable populations, social determinants and community strengths of their community with reasonable analysis of concepts and related issues.39 to >34.0 ptsBasicProvided a minimally developed description of vulnerable populations, related social determinants and community strengths of their community with limited analysis of concepts and related issues.34 to >0 ptsNeeds ImprovementProvided an under-developed description of vulnerable populations, related social determinants and community strengths of their community with little or no analysis of concepts and related issues. | 50 pts | |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeRequired Content: Included conclusions based on nursing assessment of the community and selected population for practicum. | 40 to >35.0 ptsExcellentProvided a fully developed explanation of conclusions with insightful analysis of concepts and related issues.35 to >31.0 ptsProficientProvided a developed explanation of conclusions with reasonable analysis of concepts and related issues.31 to >27.0 ptsBasicProvided a minimally developed explanation of conclusions with limited analysis of concepts and related issues.27 to >0 ptsNeeds ImprovementProvided an under-developed explanation of conclusions with little or no analysis of concepts and related issues. | 40 pts | |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeProfessional Writing: Clarity, Flow, and Organization | 10 to >8.0 ptsExcellentContent is free from spelling, punctuation, and grammar/syntax errors. Writing demonstrates very well-formed sentence and paragraph structure. Content presented is completely clear, logical, and well-organized.8 to >7.0 ptsProficientContent contains minor spelling, punctuation, and/or grammar/syntax errors. Writing demonstrates appropriate sentence and paragraph structure. Content presented is mostly clear, logical, and well-organized.7 to >6.0 ptsBasicContent contains moderate spelling, punctuation, and/or grammar/syntax errors. Writing demonstrates adequate sentence and paragraph structure and may require some editing. Content presented is adequately clear, logical, and/or organized, but could benefit from additional editing/revision.6 to >0 ptsNeeds ImprovementContent contains significant spelling, punctuation, and/or grammar/syntax errors. Writing does not demonstrate adequate sentence and paragraph structure and requires additional editing/proofreading. Key sections of presented content lack clarity, logical flow, and/or organization. | 10 pts | |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeProfessional Writing: Context, Audience, Purpose, and Tone | 10 to >8.0 ptsExcellentContent clearly demonstrates awareness of context, audience, and purpose. Tone is highly professional, scholarly, and free from bias, and style is appropriate for the professional setting/workplace context.8 to >7.0 ptsProficientContent demonstrates satisfactory awareness of context, audience, and purpose. Tone is adequately professional, scholarly, and/or free from bias, and style is consistent with the professional setting/workplace context.7 to >6.0 ptsBasicContent demonstrates basic awareness of context, audience, and purpose. Tone is somewhat professional, scholarly, and/or free from bias, and style is mostly consistent with the professional setting/workplace context.6 to >0 ptsNeeds ImprovementContent minimally or does not demonstrate awareness of context, audience, and/or purpose. Writing is not reflective of professional/scholarly tone and/or is not free of bias. Style is inconsistent with the professional setting/workplace context and reflects the need for additional editing. | 10 pts | |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeProfessional Writing: Originality, Source Credibility, and Attribution of Ideas | 10 to >8.0 ptsExcellentContent reflects original thought and writing and proper paraphrasing. Writing demonstrates full adherence to reference requirements, including the use of credible evidence to support a claim, with appropriate source attribution (when applicable) and references.8 to >7.0 ptsProficientContent adequately reflects original writing and paraphrasing. Writing demonstrates adequate adherence to reference requirements, including the use of credible evidence to support a claim, with appropriate source attribution (when applicable) and references.7 to >6.0 ptsBasicContent somewhat reflects original writing and paraphrasing. Writing somewhat demonstrates adherence to reference requirements, including the use of credible evidence to support a claim, with appropriate source attribution (when applicable) and references.6 to >0 ptsNeeds ImprovementContent does not adequately reflect original writing and/or paraphrasing. Writing demonstrates inconsistent adherence to reference requirements, including the use of credible evidence to support a claim, with appropriate source attribution (when applicable) and reference. | 10 pts | |
| Total Points: 200 | |||
