Methodologies on demand
On Demand: Using Run and Control Charts to Understand VariationLinks to an external site.
The topics addressed in Dr. Lloyd’s 55-minute presentation include:
On Demand: Building Skills in Data Collection and Understanding VariationLinks to an external site.
The topics addressed in Dr. Lloyd’s 50-minute presentation include:
On Demand: An Introduction to the Model of ImprovementLinks to an external site.
The following topics are addressed in Dr. Lloyd’s 56-minute presentation:
Methodologies on demand
Institute for Healthcare Improvement On Demand Presentation Grading Rubric
NUR 3031: Methodologies for Doctor of Nursing Practice Projects
Name: |
Criteria | Mastery (4)
Points _________ |
Meets Expectations (3)
Points__________ |
Developing (2)
Points_________ |
Emerging (1)
Points_______ |
Statement of purpose:
1 point -Clearly and succinctly stated |
Skillfully defines the scope of the topic
1.00 point |
Purpose is clear, but slight revision would enhance clarity for reader
.75 point |
Purpose of the paper is vague
.50 point |
Reader comes away from paper with little understanding of paper’s purpose
.25 point |
Organization of the paper:
1 point -Writing is logically coherent, no gaps -Flow of paragraphs to paragraphs and sentences to sentences |
Extremely coherent and cohesive flow of ideas
1.00 point |
The flow of ideas is generally coherent and cohesive, although minor edits could enhance readability
.75 point |
The flow of ideas is sometimes lacking coherence and/or cohesion, which impedes readability
.50 point |
Flow of ideas is incoherent and/or lacking cohesion, which confuses the reader
.25 point |
Use of Evidence:
1 point -Evidence is appropriate and relevant -Used to support ideas Higher level: -Recognize limitation of evidence -Spot deception/holes in others’ arguments |
Evidence is completely relevant and synthesized in a way that fully achieves the purpose of the paper
1.00 point |
Evidence is relevant but not adequately synthesized
.75 point |
Some evidence is not relevant and not fully synthesized to support the purpose of the paper
.50 point |
Evidence provided does not address purpose of the paper
.25 point |
Conclusions
1 point -Evidence and ideas are integrated to support a conclusion (e.g., intervention, procedure, solution to problem, reason for an action, a new model, etc.) -Make recommendations |
Conclusion flows from synthesis of evidence and consistent with the purpose of the paper
1.00 point |
Does not fully reflect the synthesis of the evidence, but consistent with the purpose of the paper
Overstated or unstated some parts of the conclusion .75 point |
Conclusion is not consistent with the synthesis of evidence or does not entirely address the purpose
Overstated or unstated the conclusion .50 point |
No concluding statements consistent with evidence or purpose
.25 point |
Quality of writing:
1 point -Effective use of grammar, punctuation, syntax, mechanics and conventions of style (if applicable) to promote readability and reader engagement |
Writing is virtually free of errors
1.00 point |
Writing contains minor errors that do not impede meaning
.75 point |
Writing contains several errors that affect clarity of evidence and ideas presented
.50 point |
Writing contains many errors that make it difficult to understand the ideas
.25 point |
Methodologies on demand