NUR2102 S1 2020 Alternate Assessment Task Sheet Final
1 NUR2102 Alternate Assessment - Written short answer- Criteria Marking Guide Objectives Criteria 1 15-13 12.5-11.5 11.4-9.6 9.5-7.5 7.4-0 MARK Identification and explanation Risk Factors Identifies all of the risk factors noted in the patient case study of Mr Storey Provides clear and logical explanation as to why these are risk factors for him showing links between the identified risk factors, the National Strategic Framework for Chronic conditions and the case study Identifies the risk factors noted in the patient case study of Mr Storey with only minor omissions and minor issues with relevance to Mr Storeys condition. Provides mostly clear and logical explanation as to why these are risk factors for him showing links between the identified risk factors, the National Strategic Framework for Chronic conditions and the case study with only some issues with relevance Identifies most of the risk factors noted in the patient case study of Mr Storey but some of these are not relevant to his condition. Provides an explanation as to why these are risk factors for him showing links between the identified risk factors, the National Strategic Framework for Chronic conditions and the case study but this could have been made clearer, showing stronger links. Identifies some of the risk factors noted in the patient case study of Mr Storey. There needed to be stronger relevance to his condition in the identification. Provides a basic explanation as to why these are risk factors for him showing links between the identified risk factors, the National Strategic Framework for Chronic conditions and the case study but these links often lacked relevance to his condition Limited or no identification of the risk factors noted in the patient case study of Mr Storey Unclear and illogical explanation as to why these are risk factors for him and why they are relevant to the case study or the explanation is missing from the student’s response. /15 Criteria 2 15-13 12.5-11.5 11.4-9.6 9.5-7.5 7.4-0 Identification and explanation Nursing assessments The discussion contains an excellent overview of the nursing assessments that are required for Mr Storey. Provides a clear and logical rationale for the assessments. All interventions are supported by contemporary, relevant evidence- based practice The discussion contains a good overview of of the nursing assessments that are required for Mr Storey. Provides a mostly clear and logical rationale for the assessments. Most interventions are supported by relevant contemporary, evidence- based practice. The discussion contains a moderately sound overview of the nursing assessments that are required for Mr Storey. Provides some logical rationale for the assessments. Interventions are supported by some evidence based practice, but not all sources are relevant or contemporary. The discussion contains a minimal overview of the nursing assessments that are required for Mr Storey. Provides basic rationales for the assessments. There is some support for the interventions with evidence- based practice but sources were not always relevant or contemporary and some were questionable in terms of scholarly merit. The discussion contains no identification of the nursing assessments that are required for Mr Storey. Provides unclear and illogical rationales for the assessments. Unsupported with evidence or evidence is irrelevant, old or questionable in terms of scholarly merit /15 2 Criteria 3 15-13 12.5-11.5 11.4-9.6 9.5-7.5 7.4-0 Analysis Promote health and reduce risk. A well-structured discussion of self- management priorities strongly linked to the National Strategic Framework for Chronic conditions and the case study. All priorities are supported by contemporary, relevant evidence- based practice. A mostly well- structured discussion of self-management priorities linked to the National Strategic Framework for Chronic conditions and the case study. Most priorities are supported by relevant contemporary, evidence- based practice. A satisfactory discussion of self-management priorities with sound links to both the National Strategic Framework for Chronic conditions and the case study. Priorities are supported by some evidence based practice, but not all sources are relevant or contemporary. A basic discussion of self- management priorities with basic links to either the National Strategic Framework for Chronic conditions or the case study. There is some support for the priorities with evidence-based practice but sources were not always relevant or contemporary and some were questionable in terms of scholarly merit. Limited or no discussion of self-management priorities with no or limited links to either the National strategic Framework for Chronic conditions and the case study. Unsupported with evidence or evidence is irrelevant, old or questionable in terms of scholarly merit. /15 Criteria 4 15-13 12.5-11.5 11.4-9.6 9.5-7.5 7.4-0 Application Apply SMART goals (Specific, Measureable, Actions, Realistic and Timely) Comprehensive demonstration of goal setting applying all of the SMART elements accurately. Provides strong links to the priorities and strong rationales for goal selection Mostly clear demonstration of goal setting applying most of the SMART elements mostly accurately. Provides mostly strong links to the priorities and rationales for goal selection Sound demonstration of goal setting applying some of the SMART elements with a sound degree of accuracy. Provides sound links to the priorities and rationales for goal selection Basic demonstration of goal setting. Smart elements applied basically Provides basic links to either the priorities and rationales for goal selection Limited or no demonstration of goal setting applying the SMART elements. Provides unclear or illogical links to the priorities and rationales for goal selection /15 Criteria 5 20-17.5 17-15.5 15-13.5 13-10 9.5-0 Explanation Actively engage Highly relevant, logical, clear and concise explanation on the impact of goal setting on the active engagement of patients in their care including consideration of the National Strategic Framework for Chronic conditions. All explanations are supported by contemporary, relevant evidence- based practice Relevant, logical, clear explanation on the impact of goal setting on the active engagement of patients in their care including consideration of the National Strategic Framework for Chronic conditions. Most explanations are supported by relevant contemporary, evidence- based practice Sound explanation on the impact of goal setting on the active engagement of patients in their care including consideration of the National Strategic Framework for Chronic conditions. Explanations are supported by some evidence based practice, but not all sources are relevant or contemporary. Basic explanation on the impact of goal setting on the active engagement of patients in their care including consideration of the National Strategic Framework for Chronic conditions. There is some support for the explanation with evidence-based practice but sources were not always relevant or contemporary and some were questionable in terms of scholarly merit. Limited, or no explanation on the impact of goal setting on the active engagement of patients in their care including consideration of the National Strategic Framework for Chronic conditions. Unsupported with evidence or evidence is irrelevant, old or questionable in terms of scholarly merit. /20 3 Criteria 6 10-8.5 8.4-7.5 7.4-6.5 6.4-5 4.9-0 Structure Academic writing style Expression Very clear expression and no spelling or grammar errors. Structure Accurately adhered to required written style Each main point is very clearly linked to appropriate assignment tasks. Word limit: Adhered to word limit +/- 10% Expression Clear expression ; spelling or grammar errors 1 -3 Structure Missing 1 element of required written style Expression Mostly clear expression; spelling or grammar errors 4 Structure Missing 2 elements of required written style Expression Somewhat clear expression with spelling or grammar errors 5 Structure Missing 3 elements of required written style Expression Used incorrect terminology with numerous mistakes in spelling and/or grammar 6 or more Structure Did not adhere to required written style and is missing more than 3 elements Word limit: Not adhered to /10 Criteria 7 10-8.5 8.4-7.5 7.4-6.5 6.4-5 4.9-0 MARK Referencing Use and integration of evidence Use of APA referencing (6TH or 7th edition) for in- text citations and reference list Overall discussion is logical and clear and well supported with highly relevant literature. APA referencing is used correctly in text and in the reference list. Overall discussion is clear and logical and references to literature are good APA referencing is used in text and in the reference list with minimal errors. Overall discussion is clear and logical and references to literature are satisfactory APA referencing is used in text and in the