02 Oct Post an explanation of the ethical standards you believe should be used in determining how resources should be allocated for an aging population and end-of-life care. Then, provide an analysis of the ethical challenges related to the preparation for the provision of such health care.

36247Rubric Detail
Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.

Name: NURS_5050_Week_10_Discussion_Rubric
Exit
Grid View
List View
Outstanding Performance Excellent Performance Competent Performance Proficient Performance Room for Improvement
Main Posting:
Response to the discussion question is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.
44 (44%) – 44 (44%)
Thoroughly responds to the discussion question(s)

is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.

supported by at least 3 current, credible sources
40 (40%) – 43 (43%)
Responds to the discussion question(s)

is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth

supported by at least 3 credible references
35 (35%) – 39 (39%)
Responds to most of the discussion question(s)

is somewhat reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

50% of post has exceptional depth and breadth

supported by at least 3 credible references
31 (31%) – 34 (34%)
Responds to some of the discussion question(s)

one to two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed

is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis

somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

post is cited with fewer than 2 credible references
0 (0%) – 30 (30%)
Does not respond to the discussion question(s)

lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria

lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis

does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

contains only 1 or no credible references
Main Posting:
Writing
6 (6%) – 6 (6%)
Written clearly and concisely

Contains no grammatical or spelling errors

Fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style
5.5 (5.5%) – 5.5 (5.5%)
Written clearly and concisely

May contain one or no grammatical or spelling error

Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Written concisely

May contain one to two grammatical or spelling error

Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style
4.5 (4.5%) – 4.5 (4.5%)
Written somewhat concisely

May contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors

Contains some APA formatting errors
0 (0%) – 4 (4%)
Not written clearly or concisely

Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors

Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style
Main Posting:
Timely and full participation
10 (10%) – 10 (10%)
Meets requirements for timely and full participation

posts main discussion by due date
0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
NA
0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
NA
0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
NA
0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not meet requirement for full participation
First Response:

Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.
9 (9%) – 9 (9%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings

responds to questions posed by faculty

the use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives
8.5 (8.5%) – 8.5 (8.5%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings
7.5 (7.5%) – 8 (8%)
Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting
6.5 (6.5%) – 7 (7%)
Response is on topic, may have some depth
0 (0%) – 6 (6%)
Response may not be on topic, lacks depth
First Response:
Writing
6 (6%) – 6 (6%)
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues

Response to faculty questions are fully answered if posed

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources

Response is effectively written in Standard Edited English
5.5 (5.5%) – 5.5 (5.5%)
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues

Response to faculty questions are answered if posed

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources

Response is effectively written in Standard Edited English
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues

Response to faculty questions are mostly answered if posed

Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources

Response is written in Standard Edited English
4.5 (4.5%) – 4.5 (4.5%)
Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication

Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered if posed

Few or no credible sources are cited
0 (0%) – 4 (4%)
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective

Response to faculty questions are missing

No credible sources are cited
First Response:
Timely and full participation
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for timely and full participation

posts by due date
0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
NA
0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
NA
0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
NA
0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not meet requirement for full participation
Second Response:
Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.
9 (9%) – 9 (9%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings * responds to questions posed by faculty

the use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives
8.5 (8.5%) – 8.5 (8.5%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings
7.5 (7.5%) – 8 (8%)
Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting
6.5 (6.5%) – 7 (7%)
Response is on topic, may have some depth
0 (0%) – 6 (6%)
Response may not be on topic, lacks depth
Second Response:
Writing
6 (6%) – 6 (6%)
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues

Response to faculty questions are fully answered if posed

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources

Response is effectively written in Standard Edited English
5.5 (5.5%) – 5.5 (5.5%)
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues

Response to faculty questions are answered if posed

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources

Response is effectively written in Standard Edited English
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues

Response to faculty questions are mostly answered if posed

Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources

Response is written in Standard Edited English
4.5 (4.5%) – 4.5 (4.5%)
Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication

Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered if posed

Few or no credible sources are cited
0 (0%) – 4 (4%)
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective

Response to faculty questions are missing

No credible sources are cited
Second Response:
Timely and full participation
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for timely and full participation

Posts by due date
0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
NA
0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
NA
0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
NA
0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not meet requirement for full participation
Total Points: 100
Name: NURS_5050_Week_10_Discussion_Rubric