week 9 Evidenced-based practice paper
MCC 503 Statistics and Quantitative Research Methods
Evidence-Based Practice Paper Rubric
Criteria | Novice 0 points | Competent 1-18 points | Proficient 19-24 points | Exemplary 25 points |
Introduction | Provided very limited background information about the topic. | Provided the reader with general background about the topic or provided context for the paper - did not address both | Established sufficient background information about the issue to orient the reader to the topic as well as provide context | Established sufficient background information about the issue to orient the reader to the topic as well as provide context; gave overview of the paper as a whole |
Presentation of treatment evidence regarding issue | Did not identify any treatment strategies identified in the research literature. | Presented one treatment strategy identified in the research literature. | Presented at least two unique treatment strategies identified in the research literature. | Presented at least three unique treatment strategies identified in the research literature. |
Reliability and Validity of past research considered | Did not critically evaluate the reliability and validity of research | Critically evaluated the reliability and validity of research related to some identified treatment strategies | Critically evaluated the reliability and validity of research related to all identified treatment strategies | Critically evaluated the reliability and validity of research related to all identified treatment strategies – including consideration of any remaining threats to validity |
Research designs of evidence evaluated | Did not critically evaluate the research designs of research related to any identified treatment strategies | Critically evaluated the research designs of research related to some identified treatment strategies | Critically evaluated the research designs of research related to all identified treatment strategies | Critically evaluated the research designs of research related to all identified treatment strategies – considered possible issues related to design used |
Statistical methods used evaluated | Did not critically evaluate the statistical methods of research related to all identified treatment strategies | Critically evaluated the statistical methods of research related to some identified treatment strategies | Critically evaluated the statistical methods of research related to all identified treatment strategies | Critically evaluated the statistical methods of research related to all identified treatment strategies – considered possible issues related to statistical test used |
Identification of effective treatment strategies/approaches | Did not identify any best practices or did not include supporting research citations. | Identified at least one best practice for treatment of /approach to the identified issue. Tied the best practice clearly to the research – including supporting citations | Identified at least two best practices for treatment of /approaches to the identified issue. Tied the best practices clearly to the research – including supporting citations | Identified at least three best practices for treatment of /approaches to the identified issue. Tied the best practices clearly to the research – including supporting citations. |
Identification of ineffective approaches | Did not consider or discussion ineffective approaches to treatment of issue | Considered ineffective approaches but did not cite any related research | Presented research evidence related to ineffective approaches in treatment of issue | Presented research evidence related to ineffective approaches in treatment of issue – compared these approaches to the effective approaches |
Identification of areas for future research related to treatment of topic issue | Did not identify areas for future research | Identified at least one possible directions for future research; Did not tie suggestions to shortcomings in past research or emerging trends in the | Identified at least one possible directions for future research; tied the direction to shortcomings in past research and/or emerging trends in the field | Identified at least two possible directions for future research; tied these directions to shortcomings in past research and/or emerging trends in the field |
Source citations | Did not adequately cite sources – entire paragraphs including factual information without supporting source citations. | Did not adequately cite sources – many factual statements with no supporting citations. | Cited sources but sometimes not often enough – cited sources only at the end of paragraphs. | Cited an appropriate source for every factual statement made within the paper. |
Paraphrasing | Included many direct quotes | Included two or more direct quotes | Included one direct quote | Paraphrased all information – did not include any direct quotes |
Quality of sources | All sources selected were of very low quality and/or were not scholarly peer-reviewed journal articles | Two or more of the sources used were not scholarly-peer reviewed sources published within the last ten years. The majority of all sources used were not scholarly, peer-reviewed journal articles | All but one of the sources used were scholarly-peer reviewed sources published within the last ten years The majority of all sources used were scholarly, peer-reviewed journal articles | All sources used were scholarly, peer-reviewed sources published within the last ten years.
|
APA Style | Well below expectations of APA standards | Many grammar errors, etc. Two format errors in title page Used some headers but not logical Substantial errors in citations & references Substantial organizational issues | Some grammar errors, etc. One format error in title page Used headers but one or more not appropriate Some format errors in citations &references Some organizational inconsistencies | Correct grammar, etc. Correct format of title page Appropriate headers Correct format of citations and references Properly organized and balanced throughout |