What Would You Do Differently In The Future

1
Unsatisfactory
0.00%

2
Less than Satisfactory
65.00%

3
Satisfactory
75.00%

4
Good
85.00%

5
Excellent
100.00%

70.0 %Content

40.0 %Tool for Assessing the Spiritual Needs of Patients

Tool for assessing the spiritual needs of patients is not
present.

Tool for assessing the spiritual needs of patients is present
but lacks focus on experiences of patients.

Tool for assessing the spiritual needs of patients is present
and focuses on experiences of patients.

Tool for assessing the spiritual needs of patients is present
and focuses on experiences of patient. The tool uses reliable methods for
gathering data.

Tool for assessing the spiritual needs of patients is present
and focuses on experiences of patients. The tool uses effective methods for
gathering data that produces the results intended.

30.0 %Analysis of Interview Experience

An analysis of the interview experience is not included.

An analysis of the interview experience is included but addresses
a few of the points included in the assignment instructions.

An analysis of the interview experience is included and
addresses most of the points included in the assignment instructions.

An analysis of the interview experience is included and addresses
all of the points included in the assignment instructions.

An analysis of the interview experience is included and
addresses all of the points included in the assignment instructions. The
analysis shows a deep understanding of the connections.

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

Clear and convincing argument 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.

10.0 %Format

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