Criteria |
Ratings |
Pts |
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDevelop a 1- to 2-page case study analysis, examining the patient symptoms presented in the case study. Be sure to address the following: Explain pulmonary pathophysiologic processes of why the patient presents these symptoms. |
30 to >27.0 pts
Excellent The response accurately and thoroughly describes the patient symptoms. … The response includes accurate, clear, and detailed reasons, with explanation for the pulmonary pathophysiologic processes supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. |
27 to >24.0 pts
Good The response describes the patient symptoms. … The response includes accurate reasons, with explanation for the pulmonary pathophysiologic processes supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. |
24 to >22.0 pts
Fair The response describes the patient symptoms in a manner that is vague or inaccurate. … The response includes reasons for the pulmonary pathophysiologic processes, with explanations that are vague or based on inappropriate evidence/research. |
22 to >0 pts
Poor The response describes the patient symptoms in a manner that is vague and inaccurate, or the description is missing. … The response does not include reasons for pulmonary pathophysiologic processes, or the explanations are vague or based on inappropriate or no evidence/research. |
| 30 pts |
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeExplain how the pulmonary pathophysiologic processes interact to affect the patient. |
30 to >27.0 pts
Excellent The response includes an accurate, complete, detailed, and specific explanation of how the pulmonary pathophysiologic processes interact to affect the patient. |
27 to >24.0 pts
Good The response includes an accurate explanation of how the pulmonary pathophysiologic processes interact to affect the patient. |
24 to >22.0 pts
Fair The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of how thepulmonary pathophysiologic processes interact to affect the patient. |
22 to >0 pts
Poor The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of how thepulmonary pathophysiologic processes interact to affect the patient. |
| 30 pts |
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeExplain any racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning. |
25 to >22.0 pts
Excellent The response includes an accurate, complete, detailed, and specific explanation of racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. |
22 to >19.0 pts
Good The response includes an accurate explanation of racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. |
19 to >17.0 pts
Fair The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning, and/or explanations based on inappropriate evidence/research. |
17 to >0 pts
Poor The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning, or the explanations are based on inappropriate or no evidence/research. |
| 25 pts |
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting – Paragraph Development and Organization: Paragraphs make clear points that support well-developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused—neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement and introduction are provided that delineate all required criteria. |
5 to >4.0 pts
Excellent Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity. … A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion are provided that delineate all required criteria. |
4 to >3.0 pts
Good Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time. … Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment are stated, yet are brief and not descriptive. |
3 to >2.0 pts
Fair Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%–79% of the time. … Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment are vague or off topic. |
2 to >0 pts
Poor Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time. … No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion were provided. |
| 5 pts |
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting – English Writing Standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation |
5 to >4.0 pts
Excellent Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors. |
4 to >3.0 pts
Good Contains a few (1 or 2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. |
3 to >2.0 pts
Fair Contains several (3 or 4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. |
2 to >0 pts
Poor Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding. |
| 5 pts |
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting – The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, running heads, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list. |
5 to >4.0 pts
Excellent Uses correct APA format with no errors. |
4 to >3.0 pts
Good Contains a few (1 or 2) APA format errors. |
3 to >2.0 pts
Fair Contains several (3 or 4) APA format errors. |
2 to >0 pts
Poor Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors. |
| 5 pts |
Total Points: 100 |
