15  pts 

Identifies the issue and why the topic is important to explore. –Topic interesting, of appropriate breadth for length of paper & an appropriate topic for research. –Support for thesis complex, complete, & in-depth. –Writer involved with subject, not merely doing an assignment. –Clear and appropriate organization, with effective transitions, introduction, and conclusion.

Topic somewhat broad or narrow for length of paper and /or a questionable topic for research. Support for thesis sufficient, but lacking in depth or complexity. –Organization, transitions, introduction, and conclusion slightly lacking clarity and/or appropriateness.

Topic too broad or narrow for length of paper. –Support for thesis is not substantially sufficient. –Organization, transitions, introduction, and conclusion are inconsistent, lacking clarity and depth

Topic too broad or narrow for length of paper and/or

a poor topic for research. –Support for thesis barely

sufficient, and/or. –Organization, transitions,

introduction, and conclusion lacking clarity and/or

appropriateness. Poor transitions, introduction and/or

conclusion.

 10 points

Determinants of health covered in detail and supported by research. (Political, social, economic and health)

Determinants of health addressed but minimally supported.

Determinants of health cited do not support thesis topic or not addressed in any depth.

Determinants of health not addressed, or are not

specific to the topic and are not addressed in any depth.

10 pts 

All components of the paper covered in-depth. Research in depth and beyond the obvious revealing new insights

All components of the paper are addressed. Research is evidenced based but reveals few new insights.

Components of the paper are incomplete or not addressed in depth or breadth. Majority of research is not evidenced based.

Review of literature does not directly address research

topic. No depth or breadth to the review of literature.

Diagnoses are based on the determinants of health and pathophysiology of the paper’s topic.

Diagnoses are marginally based on the premise of the paper’s topic.

Diagnoses are generalized and not based on data in the paper but are evidenced based.

Diagnoses are not specific in nature to the topic of

the paper and are not supported in evidenced based literature.

Management and patient education are evidenced based and specific to the topic of the paper.

The majority of management strategies and patient education are evidenced based and related to the topic of the paper.

Few management strategies and patient education are evidenced based or are not related to the specific topic of the paper

Strategies are generic and not specifically related to

the content presented in the paper.

Synthesizes the role of the FNP into the chosen topic based upon ANCC core competencies. EBP guidelines provide the basis for management

Describes the role characteristics of the FNP in relation to the chosen topic. General management strategies identified.

Role of FNP addressed but related tangentially to the chosen topic. Management strategies identified but not specific to the topic or referenced from EBP documents.

Role of FNP superficially addressed, incomplete or

inappropriate management strategies addressed. Poor

documentation of strategies. No EBP documentation.

2 or less errors in format or punctuation or capitalization. –Consistent and appropriate voice. — Sophisticated and precise word choice. Paragraph size appropriate –No spelling errors. No slang. –No errors in agreement, pronouns/antecedents, or tense.

4 or less errors in format, punctuation or capitalization. — Voice mostly consistent and appropriate. Lengthy paragraphs — Fairly effective word choice. –No more than 2 spelling errors. –Fewer than 1 errors in agreement, pronouns/antecedents, or tense. —

6 or less errors in format, punctuation or capitalization. Voice somewhat consistent and appropriate. Lengthy paragraphs.  More than 5 spelling errors. –More than 2 errors in agreement, pronouns/antecedents, or tense.

Many errors in format, punctuation or capitalization.

Paper fails to flow in a logical sequence.  Errors distract from readability.

Sources reliable and properly cited. A minimum of 10 references (>6 EBP journal articles. All references correctly cited in the paper and the bibliography. All information relevant to topic.

Sources reliable and properly cited but has secondary references. A minimum of 10 references (<6 EBP journal articles. All references correctly cited in the paper and the bibliography. Information relevant to topic.

Sources reliable and properly cited. Articles do not substantially support your topic. 10 references (>6 EBP journal articles. All information relevant to topic.

Second hand sources and incorrectly cited.

Does not have a minimum of 10 references and/

or have less than 6 EBP journal articles. All information

relevant to topic.