Want create site? With Free visual composer you can do it easy.

DNP 805 Week 6 Assignment Telehealth GCU

DNP 805 Week 6 Assignment Telehealth GCU

https://nursingassignmentcrackers.com/dnp-805-week-6-assignment-telehealth-gcu/

Assessment Description

Telehealth encompasses a wide range of basic to complex health care delivery options, with an equally expansive array of technologies to employ. For the assignment, you will locate a scholarly article on telehealth published within the last 5 years in a peer-reviewed journal. You will compose a paper containing a precis, mind map, and discussion. The precis will focus on the scholarly article pertaining to telehealth technology. The mind map and discussion will help to generate and illustrate ideas about how the identified telehealth technology can be used in your current practice.

DPI Project Content Connection: While telehealth may not be directly associated with your project, this assignment will help prepare you in learning how to review and present literature. In future courses, you will develop Chapter 2 of your manuscript in which you will review at least 50 sources related to your DPI topic. Learning how to succinctly synthesize scholarly sources is a very useful skill. The precis portion will help you learn how to summarize (future assignments will assist in synthesis), and the mind map portion will help you learn how to organize your ideas and establish connections between topics and subtopics.

General Guidelines:

Use the following information to ensure successful completion of the assignment:

  • This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
  • Doctoral learners are required to use APA style for their writing assignments. The APA Style Guide is located in the Student Success Center.
  • Use primary sources published within the last 5 years. Provide citations and references for all sources used.
  • You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. A link to the LopesWrite technical support articles is located in Class Resources if you need assistance.
  • Learners will submit this assignment using the assignment dropbox in the learning management system. In addition, learners must upload this deliverable to the Learner Dissertation Page (LDP) in the DNP PI Workspace for later use.

Directions:

Write a 750-1,000 word paper on a telehealth technology that can be used in your current practice. The paper will include a precis, mind map (provided as the Appendix), discussion of the mind map, and conclusion, according to the following:

DNP 805 Week 6 Assignment Telehealth GCU

Introduction

Provide an introduction that is succinct and includes a thesis or main idea. The essence of the paper should be contained within the thesis, and the thesis statement should make the purpose of the paper clear. You may also use the introduction to provide an overview of the organization of the paper and establish the purpose for each section.

Precis

Donald Davidson, in his book, American Composition and Rhetoric, discusses the precis as follows:

“A precis is not an outline, but a summary or digest. It is useful as an exercise in grasping the essential ideas of an already completed composition and instating these ideas in concentrated form. The precis shears away all elaborations of the thought and gives only what is left, in such a way as to make the summary a complete composition. It does not, therefore, skeletonize the original composition so much as it reduces its scale. Many of the articles in the Reader’s Digest are only precis, so skillfully done that the average reader does not know that he is reading a summary. Since the precis says a great deal within a brief space, it is of great service in taking notes on library assignments and general reading.”

The precis should be an organization of ideas (including logical sequencing of points), contain clear and meaningful expression, and use language suitable to the situation. Your precis section should only cite the article you are reviewing. When finished, the precis section should summarize a single scholarly article on the topic of telehealth and should be four statements long:

  1. A statement of what was studied (i.e., argued, discussed, deliberated).
  2. A statement of focus of the current scholarly article selected (i.e., how it was organized and completed).
  3. A statement of what information was identified or learned from the scholarly article.
  4. A statement of why the information in the article is important to your field of study.

Mind Map

Brainstorm to generate ideas about how the identified telehealth technology can be used in your current practice using a mind map. Include the final mind map as the Appendix at the end of the paper.

Create your mind map according to the following:

  1. Take a sheet of paper and write an identifiable main idea in the center of the page, using only one to three words. (You may also achieve this via an electronic sheet of paper.)
  2. Draw a branch off your main idea. On the branch, write or draw a main topic related to your main idea.
  3. Continue to branch off from your main idea with main topics as needed.
  4. From your main topics, branch off with subtopics.
  5. From your subtopics, branch off with supporting details (write or draw). Continue to add more details. You are free to add more topics, subtopics, or any other items.
  6. When you stand back and survey your work, you should see a sort of map: hence the name for this activity. At this point, you can start to form conclusions about how to approach a potential area of practice change. At the end of the day, what you do with the particular mapcluster set, or web that you have produced depends on what you need.
  7. If you create your mind map on physical paper, you may scan it in as an image and insert the image into your document. If you create the mind map electronically, you may either convert the electronic map to an image or use the snipping tool. Usually you can find this tool by searching in the start menu.

Mind Map Discussion

In this section, discuss the mind map based on the scholarly article reviewed in the precis. In your discussion of the mind map:

  1. Include a critical evaluation of ideas and connections related to the topics and subtopics, as well as how this information could be used in practice.
  2. Include support from two additional scholarly sources (i.e., primary sources published within the last 5 years).
  3. Provide citations in text for all sources used and accompanying references in the References section. In addition, refer to the mind map in the appendix and cite it properly in text.

Conclusion

In the conclusion, provide a summary of ideas and support the main claim of the paper. Be sure to summarize key points rather than restating the material.

Telehealth – Rubric

Collapse All Telehealth – RubricCollapse All

Introduction

5 points

Criteria Description

Introduction

  1. Excellent

5 points

An introduction is extremely thorough, with substantial supporting detail.

  1. Good

4.6 points

An introduction is complete and includes supporting detail.

  1. Satisfactory

4.4 points

An introduction is included but lacks supporting detail.

  1. Less Than Satisfactory

4 points

An introduction is incomplete or incorrect.

  1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

An introduction is not included.

Precis: Statement of What Was Studied

5 points

Criteria Description

Precis: Statement of What Was Studied

  1. Excellent

5 points

A statement of what was studied (i.e., argued, discussed, or deliberated) is extremely thorough, organized, and contains clear meaningful expression.

  1. Good

4.6 points

A statement of what was studied (i.e., argued, discussed, or deliberated) is complete. The statement is organized and contains clear meaningful expression.

  1. Satisfactory

4.4 points

A statement of what was studied (i.e., argued, discussed, or deliberated) is included but lacks clarity and meaningful expression.

  1. Less Than Satisfactory

4 points

A statement of what was studied (i.e., argued, discussed, or deliberated) is incomplete or incorrect.

  1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

A statement of what was studied (i.e., argued, discussed, or deliberated) is not included.

Precis: Statement of Focus of the Scholarly Article (How It Was Organized and Completed)

5 points

Criteria Description

Precis: Statement of Focus of the Scholarly Article (How It Was Organized and Completed)

  1. Excellent

5 points

A statement of focus of the scholarly article (how it was organized and completed) is extremely thorough, organized, and contains clear meaningful expression.

  1. Good

4.6 points

A statement of focus of the scholarly article (how it was organized and completed) is organized and contains clear meaningful expression.

  1. Satisfactory

4.4 points

A statement of focus of the scholarly article (how it was organized and completed) is included but lacks clarity and meaningful expression.

  1. Less Than Satisfactory

4 points

DNP 805 Week 6 Assignment Telehealth GCU

DNP 805 Week 6 Assignment Telehealth GCU

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS:DNP 805 Week 6 Assignment Telehealth GCU

A statement of focus of the scholarly article (how it was organized and completed) is incomplete or incorrect.

  1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

A statement of focus of the scholarly article (how it was organized and completed) is not included.

Precis: Statement of Information Identified or Learned From the Scholarly Article

5 points

Criteria Description

Precis: Statement of Information Identified or Learned From the Scholarly Article

  1. Excellent

5 points

A statement of information identified or learned from the scholarly article is extremely thorough, organized, and contains clear meaningful expression.

  1. Good

4.6 points

A statement of information identified or learned from the scholarly article is complete. The statement is organized and contains clear meaningful expression.

  1. Satisfactory

4.4 points

A statement of information identified or learned from the scholarly article is included but lacks clarity and meaningful expression.

  1. Less Than Satisfactory

4 points

A statement of information identified or learned from the scholarly article is incomplete or incorrect.

  1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

A statement of information identified or learned from the scholarly article is not included.

Precis: Statement of Why the Information in the Article Is Important to the Field of Study of the DN

5 points

Criteria Description

Precis: Statement of Why the Information in the Article Is Important to the Field of Study of the DNP Learner

  1. Excellent

5 points

A statement of why the information in the article is important to the field of study of the DNP learner is extremely thorough, organized, and contains clear meaningful expression.

  1. Good

4.6 points

A statement of why the information in the article is important to the field of study of the DNP learner is organized and contains clear meaningful expression.

  1. Satisfactory

4.4 points

A statement of why the information in the article is important to the field of study of the DNP learner is included but lacks clarity and meaningful expression.

  1. Less Than Satisfactory

4 points

A statement of why the information in the article is important to the field of study of the DNP learner is incomplete or incorrect.

  1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

A statement of why the information in the article is important to the field of study of the DNP learner is not included.

Mind Map: Identifiable Main Idea

10 points

Criteria Description

Mind Map: Identifiable Main Idea

  1. Excellent

10 points

Mind map includes an identifiable main idea that is extremely thorough and logical.

  1. Good

9.2 points

Mind map includes an identifiable main idea that is complete, clear, and logical.

  1. Satisfactory

8.8 points

Mind map includes an identifiable main idea but it lacks clarity.

  1. Less Than Satisfactory

8 points

Mind map includes an identifiable main idea that is incorrect or incomplete.

  1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Mind map does not include an identifiable main idea.

Mind Map: Main Topic Branch or Branches Related to the Main Idea

10 points

Criteria Description

Mind Map: Main Topic Branch or Branches Related to the Main Idea

  1. Excellent

10 points

Mind map includes a main topic branch or branches related to the main topic, and they are extremely thorough and logical.

  1. Good

9.2 points

Mind map includes a main topic branch or branches related to the main idea, and they are clear and logical.

  1. Satisfactory

8.8 points

Mind map includes a main topic branch or branches related to the main idea, but they lack clarity.

  1. Less Than Satisfactory

8 points

Mind map includes a main topic branch or branches related to the main idea, but they are incorrect or incomplete.

  1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Mind map does not include a main topic branch or branches related to the main idea.

Mind Map: Subtopics Related to the Main Topics and the Main Idea

10 points

Criteria Description

Mind Map: Subtopics Related to the Main Topics and the Main Idea

  1. Excellent

10 points

Mind map includes subtopics related to the main topics and the main idea that are extremely thorough and logical.

  1. Good

9.2 points

Mind map includes subtopics related to the main topics and the main idea that are clear and logical.

  1. Satisfactory

8.8 points

Mind map includes subtopics related to the main topics and the main idea, but they lack clarity.

  1. Less Than Satisfactory

8 points

Mind map includes subtopics related to the main topics and the main idea, but they are incorrect or incomplete.

  1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Mind map does not include subtopics related to the main topics and the main idea.

Mind Map Discussion: Critical Evaluation of Ideas and Connections Related to the Topics and Subtopic

5 points

Criteria Description

Mind Map Discussion: Critical Evaluation of Ideas and Connections Related to the Topics and Subtopics

  1. Excellent

5 points

Mind map discussion critical evaluation of ideas and connections is extremely thorough and incorporates substantial supporting detail.

  1. Good

4.6 points

Mind map discussion provides a critical evaluation of ideas and connections that is complete and includes a sufficient amount of detail.

  1. Satisfactory

4.4 points

Mind map discussion provides a critical evaluation of ideas and connections but lacks a sufficient amount of detail.

  1. Less Than Satisfactory

4 points

Mind map discussion provides a critical evaluation of ideas and connections that is incomplete or incorrect.

  1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Mind map discussion providing a critical evaluation of ideas and connections is not included.

Mind Map Discussion: Connection to the Usefulness of the Information in Practice

5 points

Criteria Description

Mind Map Discussion: Connection to the Usefulness of the Information in Practice

  1. Excellent

5 points

Mind map discussion explains a connection to the usefulness of the information in practice that is extremely thorough and incorporates substantial supporting detail.

  1. Good

4.6 points

Mind map discussion includes a connection to the usefulness of the information in practice that is complete and includes a sufficient amount of detail.

  1. Satisfactory

4.4 points

Mind map discussion explains a connection to the usefulness of the information in practice but lacks a sufficient amount of detail.

  1. Less Than Satisfactory

4 points

Mind map discussion that explains a connection to the usefulness of the information in practice is incomplete or incorrect.

  1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Mind map discussion that explains a connection to the usefulness of the information in practice is not included.

Conclusion: Provides a Summary of Ideas and Supports the Main Claim of the Paper

5 points

Criteria Description

Conclusion: Provides a Summary of Ideas and Supports the Main Claim of the Paper

  1. Excellent

5 points

Conclusion is extremely thorough and incorporates substantial supporting detail.

  1. Good

4.6 points

Conclusion is complete and includes a sufficient amount of detail.

  1. Satisfactory

4.4 points

Conclusion is included but lacks sufficient amount of detail.

  1. Less Than Satisfactory

4 points

Conclusion is incomplete or incorrect.

  1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Conclusion is not included.

Thesis Development and Purpose

7 points

Criteria Description

Thesis Development and Purpose

  1. Excellent

7 points

Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.

  1. Good

6.44 points

Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.

  1. Satisfactory

6.16 points

Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.

  1. Less Than Satisfactory

5.6 points

Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.

  1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.

Argument Logic and Construction

8 points

Criteria Description

Argument Logic and Construction

  1. Excellent

8 points

Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.

  1. Good

7.36 points

Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.

  1. Satisfactory

7.04 points

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.

  1. Less Than Satisfactory

6.4 points

Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.

  1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

5 points

Criteria Description

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

  1. Excellent

5 points

Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.

  1. Good

4.6 points

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.

  1. Satisfactory

4.4 points

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.

  1. Less Than Satisfactory

4 points

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.

  1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.

Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)

5 points

Criteria Description

Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)

  1. Excellent

5 points

All format elements are correct.

  1. Good

4.6 points

Template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style.

  1. Satisfactory

4.4 points

Template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.

  1. Less Than Satisfactory

4 points

Template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent.

  1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.

Documentation of Sources

5 points

Criteria Description

Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)

  1. Excellent

5 points

Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.

  1. Good

4.6 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.

  1. Satisfactory

4.4 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.

  1. Less Than Satisfactory

4 points

Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.

  1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Sources are not documented.

Total 100 points

Rubric Criteria

Total100 points

Criterion

1. Unsatisfactory

2. Less Than Satisfactory

3. Satisfactory

4. Good

5. Excellent

Documentation of Sources

Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)

0 points

Sources are not documented.

4 points

Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.

4.4 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.

4.6 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.

5 points

Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.

Argument Logic and Construction

Argument Logic and Construction

0 points

Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.

6.4 points

Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.

7.04 points

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.

7.36 points

Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.

8 points

Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.

Mind Map: Identifiable Main Idea

Mind Map: Identifiable Main Idea

0 points

Mind map does not include an identifiable main idea.

8 points

Mind map includes an identifiable main idea that is incorrect or incomplete.

8.8 points

Mind map includes an identifiable main idea but it lacks clarity.

9.2 points

Mind map includes an identifiable main idea that is complete, clear, and logical.

10 points

Mind map includes an identifiable main idea that is extremely thorough and logical.

Mind Map Discussion: Connection to the Usefulness of the Information in Practice

Mind Map Discussion: Connection to the Usefulness of the Information in Practice

0 points

Mind map discussion that explains a connection to the usefulness of the information in practice is not included.

4 points

Mind map discussion that explains a connection to the usefulness of the information in practice is incomplete or incorrect.

4.4 points

Mind map discussion explains a connection to the usefulness of the information in practice but lacks a sufficient amount of detail.

4.6 points

Mind map discussion includes a connection to the usefulness of the information in practice that is complete and includes a sufficient amount of detail.

5 points

Mind map discussion explains a connection to the usefulness of the information in practice that is extremely thorough and incorporates substantial supporting detail.

Precis: Statement of Why the Information in the Article Is Important to the Field of Study of the DN

Precis: Statement of Why the Information in the Article Is Important to the Field of Study of the DNP Learner

0 points

A statement of why the information in the article is important to the field of study of the DNP learner is not included.

4 points

A statement of why the information in the article is important to the field of study of the DNP learner is incomplete or incorrect.

4.4 points

A statement of why the information in the article is important to the field of study of the DNP learner is included but lacks clarity and meaningful expression.

4.6 points

A statement of why the information in the article is important to the field of study of the DNP learner is organized and contains clear meaningful expression.

5 points

A statement of why the information in the article is important to the field of study of the DNP learner is extremely thorough, organized, and contains clear meaningful expression.

Thesis Development and Purpose

Thesis Development and Purpose

0 points

Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.

5.6 points

Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.

6.16 points

Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.

6.44 points

Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.

7 points

Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.

Conclusion: Provides a Summary of Ideas and Supports the Main Claim of the Paper

Conclusion: Provides a Summary of Ideas and Supports the Main Claim of the Paper

0 points

Conclusion is not included.

4 points

Conclusion is incomplete or incorrect.

4.4 points

Conclusion is included but lacks sufficient amount of detail.

4.6 points

Conclusion is complete and includes a sufficient amount of detail.

5 points

Conclusion is extremely thorough and incorporates substantial supporting detail.

Introduction

Introduction

0 points

An introduction is not included.

4 points

An introduction is incomplete or incorrect.

4.4 points

An introduction is included but lacks supporting detail.

4.6 points

An introduction is complete and includes supporting detail.

5 points

An introduction is extremely thorough, with substantial supporting detail.

Mind Map Discussion: Critical Evaluation of Ideas and Connections Related to the Topics and Subtopic

Mind Map Discussion: Critical Evaluation of Ideas and Connections Related to the Topics and Subtopics

0 points

Mind map discussion providing a critical evaluation of ideas and connections is not included.

4 points

Mind map discussion provides a critical evaluation of ideas and connections that is incomplete or incorrect.

4.4 points

Mind map discussion provides a critical evaluation of ideas and connections but lacks a sufficient amount of detail.

4.6 points

Mind map discussion provides a critical evaluation of ideas and connections that is complete and includes a sufficient amount of detail.

5 points

Mind map discussion critical evaluation of ideas and connections is extremely thorough and incorporates substantial supporting detail.

Mind Map: Subtopics Related to the Main Topics and the Main Idea

Mind Map: Subtopics Related to the Main Topics and the Main Idea

0 points

Mind map does not include subtopics related to the main topics and the main idea.

8 points

Mind map includes subtopics related to the main topics and the main idea, but they are incorrect or incomplete.

8.8 points

Mind map includes subtopics related to the main topics and the main idea, but they lack clarity.

9.2 points

Mind map includes subtopics related to the main topics and the main idea that are clear and logical.

10 points

Mind map includes subtopics related to the main topics and the main idea that are extremely thorough and logical.

Precis: Statement of What Was Studied

Precis: Statement of What Was Studied

0 points

A statement of what was studied (i.e., argued, discussed, or deliberated) is not included.

4 points

A statement of what was studied (i.e., argued, discussed, or deliberated) is incomplete or incorrect.

4.4 points

A statement of what was studied (i.e., argued, discussed, or deliberated) is included but lacks clarity and meaningful expression.

4.6 points

A statement of what was studied (i.e., argued, discussed, or deliberated) is complete. The statement is organized and contains clear meaningful expression.

5 points

A statement of what was studied (i.e., argued, discussed, or deliberated) is extremely thorough, organized, and contains clear meaningful expression.

Precis: Statement of Focus of the Scholarly Article (How It Was Organized and Completed)

Precis: Statement of Focus of the Scholarly Article (How It Was Organized and Completed)

0 points

A statement of focus of the scholarly article (how it was organized and completed) is not included.

4 points

A statement of focus of the scholarly article (how it was organized and completed) is incomplete or incorrect.

4.4 points

A statement of focus of the scholarly article (how it was organized and completed) is included but lacks clarity and meaningful expression.

4.6 points

A statement of focus of the scholarly article (how it was organized and completed) is organized and contains clear meaningful expression.

5 points

A statement of focus of the scholarly article (how it was organized and completed) is extremely thorough, organized, and contains clear meaningful expression.

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

0 points

Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.

4 points

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.

4.4 points

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.

4.6 points

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.

5 points

Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.

Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)

Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)

0 points

Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.

4 points

Template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent.

4.4 points

Template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.

4.6 points

Template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style.

5 points

All format elements are correct.

Mind Map: Main Topic Branch or Branches Related to the Main Idea

Mind Map: Main Topic Branch or Branches Related to the Main Idea

0 points

Mind map does not include a main topic branch or branches related to the main idea.

8 points

Mind map includes a main topic branch or branches related to the main idea, but they are incorrect or incomplete.

8.8 points

Mind map includes a main topic branch or branches related to the main idea, but they lack clarity.

9.2 points

Mind map includes a main topic branch or branches related to the main idea, and they are clear and logical.

10 points

Mind map includes a main topic branch or branches related to the main topic, and they are extremely thorough and logical.

Precis: Statement of Information Identified or Learned From the Scholarly Article

Precis: Statement of Information Identified or Learned From the Scholarly Article

0 points

A statement of information identified or learned from the scholarly article is not included.

4 points

A statement of information identified or learned from the scholarly article is incomplete or incorrect.

4.4 points

A statement of information identified or learned from the scholarly article is included but lacks clarity and meaningful expression.

4.6 points

A statement of information identified or learned from the scholarly article is complete. The statement is organized and contains clear meaningful expression.

5 points

A statement of information identified or learned from the scholarly article is extremely thorough, organized, and contains clear meaningful expression.

Did you find apk for android? You can find new Free Android Games and apps.