Grading Rubric for MS Synthesis Paper 2024
MS Synthesis Paper
Student: Faculty Grader: Title:| Topic | Excellent | Adequate | Poor |
| Purpose / Introduction (5 points) | Addresses purpose of paper and introduces how the paper will demonstrate synthesis of the concepts, theory and other aspects of MS course work designed to develop knowledge and skills required for practice. (4.7 – 5 points) | Partially addresses purpose of paper and/or partially demonstrates the synthesis of concepts, theory and other aspects of MS course work designed to develop knowledge and skills required for practice. (4.2 – 4.6 points) | Fails to address purpose of paper and/or fails to demonstrate synthesis of concepts, theory and other aspects of MS course work designed to develop knowledge and skills required for practice. (0 – 4.1 points total) |
| Health Issue (20 points) | Addresses health issue in exemplary depth demonstrating a thorough application to practice. This includes but is not limited to physiology & pathophysiology, levels of prevention, screening and assessment, treatment recommendations (pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic) and diagnostic testing per most recent clinical guidelines. The discussion thoroughly includes the evaluation of patient outcomes. (18.4 -20 points) | Addresses health issue in sufficient depth demonstrating adequate application to practice. This includes but is not limited to physiology & pathophysiology, levels of prevention, screening and assessment, treatment recommendations (pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic) and diagnostic testing per most recent clinical guidelines. The discussion adequately includes the evaluation of patient outcomes. (16.6 – 18.3 points) | The health issue is insufficiently addressed and/or does not demonstrate application to practice and/or align with the most recent clinical guidelines. The required physiology & pathophysiology, levels of prevention, screening and assessment, treatment recommendations (pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic), diagnostic testing are incorrectly and/or minimally addressed and/or omitted. The discussion poorly includes the evaluation of patient outcomes. (0 – 16.5 points) |
| Case Study (7 points total) | Case study is presented through a narrative synopsis of the case, including: age, gender, employment status, CC, concise summary of PMH, HPI, current medications, pertinent available diagnostic and screening test results and insurance coverage. The patient’s treatment preferences, if known, are included. Includes discussion of any further history questions that could have been asked for a more thorough history. Case study includes a concise synopsis of the social history and what is known about the patient’s family, employment, etc. Includes a discussion of family assessment and what aspects of the patient’s family should be assessed in this instance. These may include family structure, members of household, major roles and/or family health practices that are impacting patient’s health status. Definitions and theory are appropriately referenced. (6.5 – 7 points) | Case study synopsis is sufficiently presented but lacks clarity, is incomplete or includes information not pertinent to the study. Family assessment is partially addressed but lacks elements indicated by the case study. Definitions and theory are partially addressed. Some but not all terms are defined and referenced. (5.8-6.4) | Case study is not well-presented. Lacks sufficient detail to convey a summary of the case, or includes unnecessary information. Family assessment is minimally or incorrectly addressed or excluded. Theory is minimally referenced; terms and definitions are minimally or incorrectly included or are omitted. (0 – 5.7 points) |
| Theoretical Framework Integration of Role & Specialization (5 points total) | Chosen theoretical framework is appropriate to clinical case and is addressed in exemplary depth, demonstrating a thorough application to practice. Definitions and theory are appropriately referenced. Discussions of APN role and Family specialization are applied in relation to the case study and the guiding framework. If needed, a description of how the framework could be modified to guide practice for this clinical case is included. (4.7 – 5 points) | Partially addresses theoretical framework or chosen framework is not entirely appropriate to the case. Partially demonstrates application of theory to practice. Definitions and theory are referenced but source is not of high quality. Discussions of APN role and Family specialization are partially applied in relation to the case study and the guiding framework. If appropriate, a description of how it is to be modified to guide practice is partially included. (4.2 – 4.6 points) | Insufficiently addresses theoretical framework in a weak application to practice. Chosen framework poorly fits or does not fit the clinical case. Definitions and theory are either poorly referenced, inappropriate or omitted. Discussion of APN role and specialization is poorly applied to case study and guiding framework. Poorly addresses modification of framework to practice if indicated. (0 – 4.1 points) |
| Review of literature (15 points) | The literature review identifies and discusses a model used to identify the levels of evidence for the articles used. The level of evidence for each article is identified. An exemplary review of literature that uses multiple sources and moves beyond description of literature to synthesis of concepts as applied to practice. The literature review demonstrates an understanding of family issues, dynamics and support for interventions described in the care plan. (14-15 points) | The literature review identifies and discusses a model used to identify the levels of evidence for the articles used. The level of evidence for each article is identified. A partial and/or incomplete review of literature that uses multiple sources and moves somewhat beyond the description of literature to synthesis of concepts as applied to practice. The literature review partially demonstrates an understanding of family issues, dynamics and support for interventions described in the care plan. (12.4 – 13.9 points) | The literature review does not identify and/or discuss a model used to identify the levels of evidence for the articles used. The level of evidence for each article is not identified. An incomplete and/or poor review of literature that does not use multiple sources and/or move beyond the description of literature to synthesis of concepts as applied to practice. The literature review poorly demonstrates an understanding of family issues, dynamics and support for interventions described in the care plan. (0 – 12.3 points) |
| Care Plan (13 points total) | Includes an evidence-based care plan for the case study. The interventions described are both pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic. The interventions clearly align with the most up-to date evidence-based guidelines. Includes discussion of diagnostics, therapeutics, education & referrals that would be recommended in this office visit. Includes description of how to make the care plan patient- centered, as well as provider goals for patient outcomes, and plans for follow up & future monitoring. Social Determinants of Health are considered in the plan of care. Interprofessional care activities are incorporated into the plan of care. Interventions are explicitly supported through literature citations, including levels of evidence. (12.1 – 13 points) | Includes an evidence-based care plan for the case study. The majority of care plan requirements are included but overall care plan is not well-described. Care plan interventions lack detail and/or are not fully shown to be evidence-based. Partially addresses how to create a patient-centered plan. Social Determinants of Health are only partially considered in the plan of care. Interprofessional care activities are only partially addressed in the plan of care. Citations evident but lacking some levels of evidence appropriate to support actions and interventions. (10.8 – 12 points) | Evidence-based care plan is omitted or poorly included. Care plan is minimally or poorly addressed or major portion is omitted. Interventions lack clarity, are inappropriate or are not shown to be evidence-based. Patient-centered care is not addressed. Inappropriate or no use of citations to support actions. Social Determinants of Health are minimally considered or omitted in the plan of care. Interprofessional care activities are minimally included in the plan of care or are omitted. (0 – 10.7 points) |
| Application of the Nurse Practitioner Competencies (5 points total) | Apply discussion of 7 (seven) competencies of advanced practice nurses (APNs) (per Hamric & Hanson reference) to case study. Each competency is identified, defined and discussed. Discussion includes specific examples of actions the APN would take in the case, to illustrate each competency. Demonstrates exemplary understanding of NP competencies. (4.7 – 5 points) | Apply discussion of fewer than 7 (seven) competencies of advanced practice nurses (APNs) to case study. The competencies correspond to Hamric text but are incompletely defined or discussed. Illustrative examples are partially included. Demonstrates sufficient understanding of NP competencies. (4.2 – 4.6 points) | Discussion of competencies of advance practice nurses (APNs) to case study is minimally addressed or inaccurately applied. Examples are minimal, inappropriate or omitted. Demonstrates an insufficient understanding of NP competencies. (0 – 4.1 points) |
| Ethical & Cultural Considerations (5 points total) | Addresses the ethical and cultural considerations related to the health issue and/or case study. Identifies and defines the ethical principles that guide the approach to these considerations within practice. Discussion of ethical and cultural consideration incorporates aspects of role and specialization and how the scope of practice impacts or is impacted by these considerations. Demonstrates exemplary understanding of ethical and cultural considerations. Discussion is well- supported by literature. (4.7 – 5 points total) | Partially addresses the ethical and cultural considerations related to the health issue and/or case study. Sufficiently identifies and defines the ethical principles that guide the approach to ethical considerations within practice. Partially incorporates role and specialization. Demonstrates sufficient understanding of ethical and cultural considerations. Discussion is partially supported by literature. (4.2 – 4.6 points) | Paper fails to sufficiently address the ethical and cultural considerations related to the health issue and/or case study. Ethical principles are not clearly identified or defined or are incorrectly identified or defined. Role and specialization are minimally or incorrectly incorporated. Demonstrates insufficient understanding of cultural and ethical considerations. Discussion is poorly supported by literature. (0 – 4.1 points total) | |
| Health Policy & Leadership (10 points total) | Clearly identifies a policy issue related to the health topic chosen and/or client population served. Describes how the advanced practice nurse could demonstrate leadership regarding the policy. Includes the historical perspective of the policy and the impact of the policy on the health issue/population. Aspects of policy leadership discussion may include items such as policy implementation, resources for changing policy, finance, oversight and/or management related to policy, quality improvement, etc. Discuss how graduates of this program with their particular preparation can take a leadership role in formulating, managing or changing health policy related to the chosen topic. Leadership examples go beyond the level of direct patient care to system- level leadership. Discussion is supported by literature. (9.3 – 10 points) | Partially identifies policy issue in relation to health topic chosen and/or client population served. Historical perspective of the policy partially addressed; partially addresses policy change. Leadership discussion is sufficient but lacking in detail, clarity or applicability to health topic or population served. Examples of leadership are appropriate but confined to the level of direct patient care. Discussion is only partially supported by literature. (8.3 – 9.2 points) | Policy issue identified is not clearly related to health topic chosen or client population served. Discussion lacks sufficient historical perspective. Policy change is minimally or incorrectly addressed or is omitted. Discussion of leadership is not clearly related to policy or is insufficiently addressed. Discussion is poorly supported by literature. (0 – 8.2 points) | |
| Conclusion (5 points) | Conclusion concisely summarizes the paper’s content. Includes a description of how writing the Master’s Synthesis supports the student’s professional development and preparation for practice. (4.7 – 5 points) | Includes well-written conclusion but it does not summarize the paper’s content or reference the student’s professional development. (4.2 – 4.6 points) | Conclusion is minimal, is poorly written or is omitted. (0 – 4.1 points) |
| Writing Style, References, and APA (10 points) | Appropriate APA writing style for a synthesis paper includes an ABSTRACT. This will be approximately 200 – 300 words. Throughout the document references are appropriate, current and accurate. In-text citations and reference lists are correct and congruent. Writing, (including grammar, spelling, and punctuation) is correct. APA style is used accurately, per 7th edition of APA manual (2019). (9.3 – 10 points total) | Abstract and introduction are overly similar or are the same. Majority of references are appropriate, current and accurate. In-text citations are mostly correct and are most are congruent with reference list. Several mistakes in writing, including grammar, spelling and punctuation, are noted but paper is readable. Failure to use spell check application is evident. 7th-edition APA style is used accurately in most instances. (8.3 – 9.2 points total) | Missing ABSTRACT References are inappropriate, out of date and/or insufficiently or poorly utilized. In-text citations and reference list are incorrect or missing. Multiple errors in writing, including grammar, spelling, and punctuation make paper difficult to read. Failure to use spell-check application is evident. APA style is used inaccurately. (0 – 8.2 points total) |
| Total Grade |
ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE CLASS – MS Synthesis Paper
Who we are
We are a professional custom writing website. If you have searched for a question and bumped into our website just know you are in the right place to get help with your coursework.Do you handle any type of coursework?
Yes. We have posted our previous orders to display our experience. Since we have done this question before, we can also do it for you. To make sure we do it perfectly, please fill out our Order Form. Filling the order form correctly will assist our team in referencing, specifications, and future communication.Is it hard to Place an Order?
- 1. Click on “Order Now” on the main Menu and a new page will appear with an order form to be filled.
- 2. Fill in your paper’s requirements in the “PAPER INFORMATION” section and the system will calculate your order price/cost.
- 3. Fill in your paper’s academic level, deadline, and the required number of pages from the drop-down menus.
- 4. Click “FINAL STEP” to enter your registration details and get an account with us for record-keeping and then, click on “PROCEED TO CHECKOUT” at the bottom of the page.
- 5. From there, the payment sections will show, follow the guided payment process and your order will be available for our writing team to work on it.
SCORE A+ WITH HELP FROM OUR PROFESSIONAL WRITERS – MS Synthesis Paper
We will process your orders through multiple stages and checks to ensure that what we are delivering to you, in the end, is something that is precise as you envisioned it. All of our essay writing service products are 100% original, ensuring that there is no plagiarism in them. The sources are well-researched and cited so it is interesting. Our goal is to help as many students as possible with their assignments, i.e. our prices are affordable and services premium.- Discussion Questions (DQ)
- Weekly Participation
- APA Format and Writing Quality
- Use of Direct Quotes
- LopesWrite Policy
- Late Policy
- Communication
