Reading Research Literature (RRL) Worksheet (graded) Medicine Paper

Week 6 Assignment: Reading Research Literature (RRL) Worksheet (graded)
Purpose
Reading, understanding, and appreciating original nursing research literature is essential for evidence-based practice (AACN, 2008; QSEN, 2018). This assignment provides a learning activity for students to read an original research study and complete a worksheet to demonstrate understanding of the study purpose, design, sample, data collection, analysis, limitations, conclusions, and the importance of reading research literature.
Course Outcomes
This assignment enables the student to meet the following Course Outcomes.
CO1: Examine the sources of evidence that contribute to professional nursing practice. (PO 7)
CO2: Apply research principles to the interpretation of the content of published research studies. (POs 4 & 8)
CO4: Evaluate published nursing research for credibility and significance related to evidence-based practice. (POs 4, 8)
CO5: Recognize the role of research findings in evidence-based practice. (POs 7 & 8)
Due Date
Submit the completed RRL Worksheet by Sunday, 11:59 p.m. MT at the end of Week 6.
Points
This assignment is worth 200 points.
Assignment Directions
Read over each of the following directions, the required Reading Research Literature worksheet, and grading rubric (listed below).
Review the following link which contains a tutorial for your Week 6 Assignment. Tutorial may look slightly different session to session. Grading criteria and rubric will be the same. Click here for transcript. (Links to an external site.)
https://lms(dot)courselearn(dot)net/lms/video/player.html?video=0_jhxsfia6 (article below)
Download and complete the required Reading Research Literature (RRL) worksheet (Links to an external site.). This must be used.
Download or access the REQUIRED ARTICLE below. This must be used.
Diacon, A. & Bell, J. (2014). Investigating the recording and accuracy of fluid balance monitoring in critically ill patients. Southern African Journal of Critical Care, 30(2), 55-57. https://chamberlainuniversity(dot)idm(dot)oclc(dot)org/login?url=https://search(dot)ebscohost(dot)com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edsdoj&AN=edsdoj.2db92a9d728747eaa508e67b298f67bd&site=eds-live&scope=site (Links to an external site.)
TRANSCRIPT:
Hello everyone! I want to welcome you to your final assignment you have due for your NR439 course! Can you believe it? This is your last one, so Kudos to you! My name is Dr. Susan Thomas, course leader for NR439 and I have created for you a short tutorial for your week 6 reading research literature worksheet.
Your week 6 assignment is located in your week 6 module; if you click on the link it will take you to your guidelines and directions. As always, you will find your rationale and purpose for completing the learning activity. I created this worksheet assignment to help you demonstrate your understanding of how to read an original research article that has been assigned for you and then answer specific questions about the research study. The worksheet is designed to help you appreciate and value the importance of reading research literature. As a take away, you can use this worksheet to help you critique any research literature of interest in your future.
The week 6 reading research literature assignment is based off of a culmination of your learning so far in your course. Please refer back to your learning in the course to help you with the questions for the activity. I designed this learning activity using your AACN standards for professional practice which requires a BSN to appreciate, read, and understand original nursing research literature as this is an essential for creating an evidence-base practice.
The assignment directions and rubric are located under your week six assignment. It is essential that you read over the directions as these have key instructions and helpful hints to complete the required week 6 reading research literature worksheet. The worksheet is located here and you must use the worksheet that is assigned in your session you are taking the course. The worksheet can change from session to session and so it is important that you use the one that is assigned during the session you are taking the course. This assignment requires that you read an assigned research article that is located here and then answer the questions after you have read the article. Be sure you are using the assigned article for the session you are taking the course. The article can change from session to session so it is important you access the assigned article that is linked in the course located here. I encourage you to read all the directions first, and then read over your grading rubric which is located beneath the assignment directions. Be sure that you are using your grading rubric to complete the required assignment. Your instructor will use the grading rubric to evaluate each of the criteria you will be completing. You want to use the first column to be sure you are capturing all available points for that criteria.
All assignments at Chamberlain require Academic Integrity which means the work that you produce is your own. As you know in practice and in school, integrity matters. Therefore, it is imperative you are using your own words to answer the questions after you have read the assigned article. You want to pay attention to the scholarly writing area and the APA area for the assignment. You can paraphrase some of the information you will discuss from the article. Paraphrasing means you are using your own words to describe what the author has discussed. You can use 1-2 short direct quotes but I highly encourage you to paraphrase instead in order to prevent any academic integrity concerns. You must use APA in-text citations which means you must cite the sentence you paraphrased using your own words. You can use other scholarly sources to support your answers to demonstrate your knowledge of how to read a research article. If you use an outside scholarly source or any other source, please list the resource below the worksheet. Listing the resource at the end without citing does not demonstrate integration of the resource. Be sure you are fully citing the resource; posting a link will not be accepted as a scholarly source as your instructor can not determine from a link the quality of the resource.
The assignment is worth 200 points. I want to point out that you need to use scholarly writing, spelling, grammar, and complete sentences. Again, use your own words to write about the criteria to demonstrate your understanding of the article and use in-text APA citations for any sentences that you use from resources. It is important that you are using the assigned worksheet and article in the session you are taking the course; if you do not, points will be deducted from the elements listed here in your grading rubric. Resources: You can find APA resources as well as writing assistance in your resources tab and your Chamberlain library. Your Chamberlain library is a great database to find current evidence to support your writing. The link to the library is located here.
Students, again Kudo’s to each of you for your persistence and all of your valuable work you are doing in NR439. We appreciate each of you and know that you are expanding your knowledge and skill set related to practicing as a BSN. The course was created to help support your knowledge, skills, and awareness of how to utilize and practice with an evidence-based approach and way of thinking as you move towards achieving your BSN. As always, please contact your NR439 instructor if you have any questions. Enjoy your final assignment!
This assignment contains:
Purpose of the Study: Using information from the required article and your own words, summarize the purpose of the study. Describe what the study is about.
Research & Design: Using information from the required article and your own words, summarize the description of the type of research and the design of the study. Include how it supports the purpose (aim or intent) of the study.
ARTICLE:
Investigating the recording and accuracy of fluid balance
monitoring in critically ill patients
A Diacon, MCur; J Bell,' 3 MCur, BCur, PGDN
1Division o f Nursing, Faculty o f Medicine and Health Sciences, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South Africa
3TASK Applied Science, Karl Bremer Hospital, Bellville, Cape Town, South Africa
3Department o f Nursing Science, School o f Clinical Care Sciences, Faculty o f Health Sciences, Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University,
Port Elizabeth, South Africa
Corresponding author: A Diacon ([email protected])
Background. The accurate assessment of fluid balance data collected during physical assessment as well as during m onitoring and
record-keeping forms an essential part of the baseline patient information that guides medical and nursing interventions aimed at
achieving physiological stability in patients. An informal audit of 24-hour fluid balance records in a local intensive care unit (ICU) showed
that seven out of ten fluid balance calculations were incorrect.
Objective. To identify and describe current clinical nursing practice in fluid balance m onitoring and measurement accuracy in ICUs,
conducted as part of a broader study in partial fulfilm ent of a Master of Nursing degree.
Methods. A quantitative approach utilising a descriptive, exploratory study design was applied. An audit of 103 ICU records was
conducted to establish the current practices and accuracy in recording of fluid balance m onitoring. Data were collected using a
purpose-designed tool based on relevant literature and practice experience.
Results. Of the original recorded fluid balance calculations, 79% deviated by more than 50 mL from the audited calculations. Furthermore, a significant relationship was shown between inaccurate fluid balance calculation and administration of diuretics (p=0.01).
Conclusion. The majority of fluid balance records were incorrectly calculated.
S AfrJCrit Care 2014;30(2):55-57. DOI:10.7196/SAJCC.193
M aintaining a balance between fluid intake and
output plays an im portant role in the management
of a critically ill patient. The accurate assessment
of the fluid balance data collected during physical
assessment as well as during m onitoring activities
and record-keeping forms an essential part of the baseline patient
inform ation that guides medical and nursing interventions to
achieve physiological stability in a patient. Changes in a critically ill
patient's fluid balance can complicate the patient's clinical condition.
It is, therefore, necessary that fluid balance parameters are accurately monitored and recorded for all patients in intensive care units
(ICUs).111
A daily observation sheet is used to record all vital signs, nursing
interventions, medical procedures and the fluid balance for each
24-h period of a day. The fluid balance record comprises records of
the intake and output of fluids by a patient over a 24-h period. The
difference between the volumes is calculated to provide the 24-h
fluid balance.121 The monitoring of a patient's fluid balance is of great
importance in understanding and managing a patient's clinical status
and, as such, accurate monitoring and recording of fluid balance data
plays an essential role in patient care management.131
Several studies have considered the relationship between
fluid imbalances and patient outcomes in critical care. The Sepsis
Occurrence in Acutely III Patients (SOAP) study by Vincent et al.,m
conducted across 198 ICUs in Europe in 2002, determined that a
positive fluid balance is a strong prognostic factor for death in critically ill patients. Similarly, research by Alsous et a/.,151 Boyd et al.m
and Payen et o/.I7] concluded that a more positive fluid balance
is associated with an increased risk of m ortality in patients with
septic shock or acute renal failure. Furthermore, Rosenberg et a/.181
determined that a cumulative negative fluid balance in patients
with acute lung injury is associated with lower mortality. The
conclusions offered by these studies require that monitoring and
recording of fluid balance data must be complete and accurate,
with assessment of a patient's fluid balance being recognised as an
important component of nursing any critically ill patient.
In South Africa (SA), the practice of a registered nurse is regulated
by the Scope of Practice drawn up by the SA Nursing Council.191
Chapter 2, section 2(i) of these regulations identifies that fluid balance
monitoring is part of the scope of practice of a registered nurse.
Therefore, a registered nurse working in a critical care environment
is responsible and accountable for the accurate recording and
calculation of fluid balance when caring for and managing a critically
ill patient. Managing a patient's fluid balance is as equally important
as carrying out any other patient care activity for the critically ill, such
as administering a medication prescription or providing nutrition.121
Fluid balance management in ICU patients is complex. Monitoring
and measurement of fluid balance requires close attention to ensure
that current methods are applied accurately and consistently to
provide the most complete data, upon which patient management
decisions can be based.
Based on practice experience and underpinned by an informal
audit of 24-h fluid balance charts in a local ICU, where seven out of
ten calculated totals were incorrect, the research question posed was:
What are the current practices of registered nurses in ICUs with regard
to fluid balance monitoring?
SAJCC November 2014, Vol. 30, No. 2 55
Methods
A quantitative approach utilising an
exploratory, descriptive study design was
applied. The study was conducted in ICUs
across three purposively selected hospitals
of one private sector hospital group. The
ICUs of these hospitals were similar in terms
of their patient admission profiles, with the
same nursing documentation and policies
applied at all three hospitals.
An audit tool was developed from
relevant literature and clinical experience
to assess particular aspects of the sampled
fluid balance records. Two critical care nurse
experts evaluated the content and face
validity of the audit tool; no changes were
required. A pretest of the audit tool was
conducted at one additional ICU of the same
hospital group to determine the accuracy
and relevance of the measurements;
no changes were required. The pretest
data were not included in the study data.
A statistician determined the tool to be
appropriate and adequate for data collection
and analysis purposes.
Ethical approval for the study was
obtained from the Human Research Ethics
Committee at the Faculty of Medicine and
Health Sciences, Stellenbosch University,
as well as the relevant committee of the
hospital group.
The population for this study was critical
care patient records. The study sample was
drawn from fluid balance records according
to the following inclusion criteria:
• Nursing records of admissions to ICUs for
the first 48 h of the patient's stay, from
1 July to 31 December 2011
• Patients over the age of 18 years as per
the definition of an adult in the Children's
Act No. 38 of 20051'01
• Patients classified as 'intensive care':
activity 1 or 2 on the patient classification
system of this hospital group. This
classification was used by the doctor
to determine financial charges to the
patient. No w ritten policy regarding
this classification was available from the
hospitals.
A simple random sampling technique was
implemented to select patient records for
the audit: all the admission numbers of
patients meeting the inclusion criteria were
identified through the hospital information system and admission record book
of the ICU. The patient record file that
was connected with every third patient
admission number was drawn until the
required sample was achieved. The sample
size was calculated to ensure adequate
precision in population estimates, using 95%
confidence intervals (CIs). A sample size of 80
fluid balance records would have resulted in
6% precision in the 95% Cl width, assuming
a 10% error rate in the calculation ofthefluid
balance. This was well within the accepted
precision of between 5% and 10%. A sample
size of N= 103 was selected and divided
specifically among the various units under
the guidance of the statistician (Table 1).
Descriptive statistics were recorded and
the Mann-Whitney U-test was used to test
associations between recorded variables
and fluid balance calculation accuracy.
Data were recorded on the study audit
tool by the researcher and a field worker
together in the three hospitals. The fluid
balance calculation recorded in each
patient record for a 24-h period during
the first 48 h of a patient's stay was noted
on the audit tool. A control calculation of
each recorded fluid balance total was done
by the researcher and verified by the field
worker. These audited calculations were
recorded in the audit tool. The deviation
between the original calculations and the
audited calculations was determined and
recorded.
In addition to the fluid balance
calculation, baseline vital sign data, modes
of fluid output (e.g. diarrhoea), specific
data regarding the administration of blood
products, and the number of continuous
intravenous infusions were recorded on
the audit tool.
Results
24-h calculated fluid
balance totals
The original recorded 24-h fluid balance
total was compared with the audited fluid
balance total performed by the researcher
and field worker. The difference in calculation was referred to as the deviation in fluid
balance calculation, and is presented in
Table 2 for descriptive reasons.
In the audit of 103 fluid balance
documents, a total of 71 (68.9%) recorded
calculated fluid balance totals were within
a 500 mL deviation from the fluid balance
calculated by the researcher. Fourteen
recorded calculations (13.5%) were found
Table 1. Sam pling fram ew o rk
Hospital Intensive-care beds, n
Admissions:
July - December 2011, n Records sampled, n
A 26 1 020 34
B 28 1 027 34
C 38 1 022 35
D 12 300 Pilot study
Table 2. Deviation in fluid balance (A/=103)
Calculated deviation
Overall
0 - 3 706 0 - 50 51 - 500 501 - 1 000 1 001 - 2 000 >2001 No record
n 98 22 49 14 7 6 5
Percentage 95.1 21 48 13.5 6.8 5.8 4.9
Median deviation (mL) 167 20 146 754 1 249 3 310 -
Mean deviation (mL) 493 21 184 754 1 371 3 116 -
Range (mL) 0 - 3 706 0-46 61 -463 501 - 984 1 008- 1 928 2 260 - 3 706 -
56 SAJCC November 2014, Vol. 30, No. 2
Table 3. Comparison of accurate and inaccurate fluid calculation
Inaccurate fluid calculation, median (IQR)
Variable Yes No p-value
Received blood products 180.5 (60- 1 312) 167 (61 -530) 0.95
CVP measured 202.5 (90 - 764) 119 (41 -320) 0.09
Matched doctor's prescription 155 (60 - 530) 201 (63 - 708) 0.61
Diuretic administered 279(102-996) 106 (46 - 350) 0.01
Received >2 intravenous drugs 257 (75 -708) 138 (60-435) 0.16
IQR = interquartile range; CVP = central venous pressure.
to deviate between 500 mL and 1 000 mL,
while seven recorded calculations (6.8%)
were found to deviate between 1 000 mL
and 2 000 mL. Six recorded calculations
(5.8%) were found to have a deviation of
>2 000 mL.
There was a significant association
between the administration of diuretics
and inaccurate fluid balance calculation
(p=0.01), but there was no association
between other variables and the outcome
of interest (Table 3).
Discussion
The definition of a net positive fluid balance
as a volume >500 mL used in the study by
Alsous eta/.151 was applied in this study. Of
great concern were the 27/103 documents,
more than 25% of the sample, with a
deviation of >500 mL between the recorded
calculation and the control calculation.
Equally of concern were the five patient
records where no fluid balance calculation
was available at all. These findings represent a risk for the critically ill patient when
one considers the findings of previous
studies related to positive fluid balance and
patient mortality.14'81 The findings of this
study showed that fluid balance calculation
is not treated as a priority in the nursing
management of a critically ill patient.
The incorrect calculation of fluid balance
means that every patient management
decision utilising these fluid balance data
was influenced by inaccurate information.
Perren et al.1" 1 performed a similar study in
Switzerland and expressed their concern
about the accuracy of fluid balances in
critically ill patients.1111
Additionally, the significant association
between inaccurate fluid balance calculation and diuretic administration (p=0.01)
suggests that when diuretics are administered, there is a higher chance of the
calculated fluid balance being incorrect.This
finding supports the researcher's concern
that a careful and accurate approach to
fluid balance does not enjoy high priority
in managing critically ill patients in this
context. Diuretic therapy is a commonly
prescribed therapeutic modality; in this
study, 38.8% (40/103) of critically ill patients
had diuretics recorded as being administered during the first 48 h of their admission.
Inaccurate fluid balance data may result in
inappropriate application of diuretic therapy,
resulting in fluid imbalances that affect the
haemodynamic stability of patients.
The findings of this study are limited by
the focus on one hospital group and may
be regarded as a pilot study for further
development.
Conclusions
in this study, the majority of audited 24-h
fluid balance calculations were shown to
be incorrect; 79% (81/103) of the original
recorded fluid balance calculations deviated
by >50 mL from the audited calculation. The
accuracy of the 24-h balance calculated is
questionable, with only 21% of the original
fluid balance totals deviating by <50 mL
from the audit calculations. This is of great
concern. Several studies14'81 have noted
a relationship between fluid imbalance
and mortality in critically ill patients. The
findings indicate that treatment decisions
are often based on inaccurate fluid balance
information, which may lead to negative
consequences for the patient.
A significant association was shown
between the administration of diuretics and
inaccurate 24-h fluid balance calculations.
With diuretics prescribed specifically to
manage fluid imbalance, this finding
indicates that the accuracy of the calculated
fluid balance must be confirmed prior to
diuretics being prescribed or administered.
Within the context of limited resources, any
clinical recommendations must be realistic
and practical. One suggested example
is instituting a system of checking fluid
balance calculations at specific intervals,
such as during patient handover at shift
change, during the patient assessment
process or during patient management
discussions. Awareness around the potential consequences of calculation errors must
be reinforced during patient discussions
and continuing education sessions.
The requirement to provide accurate,
correct fluid balance monitoring and
recording as part of the patient's vital sign
data must be established as a fundamental
standard of practice for every nurse
practising in an ICU. Regular outcomedriven audits will assist in identifying
where and when errors occur, allowing for
specific interventions to be designed and
implemented.
Further studies may assist in refining
the particular challenges of accurate fluid
balance recording
Sample: Using information from the required article and your own words, summarize the population (sample) for the study; include key characteristics, sample size, sampling technique.
Data Collection: Using information from the required article and your own words, summarize one data that was collected and how the data was collected from the study.
Data Analysis: Using information from the required article and your own words, summarize one of the data analysis/ tests performed or one method of data analysis from the study; include what you know/learned about the descriptive or statistical test or data analysis method.
Limitations: Using information from the required article and your own words, summarize one limitation reported in the study.
Findings/Discussion: Using information from the required article and your own words, summarize one of the authors' findings/discussion reported in the study. Include one interesting detail you learned from reading the study.
Reading Research Literature: Summarize why it is important for you to read and understand research literature. Summarize what you learned from completing the reading research literature activity worksheet.
You are required to complete the worksheet using the productivity tools required by Chamberlain University, which is Microsoft Office Word 2013 (or later version), or Windows and Office 2011 (or later version) for MAC. You must save the file in the ".docx" format. Do NOT save as Word Pad. A later version of the productivity tool includes Office 365, which is available to Chamberlain students for FREE by downloading from the student portal at http://my(dot)chamberlain(dot)edu (Links to an external site.). Click on the envelope at the top of the page.
Submit the completed Reading Research Literature Worksheet to the Week 6 Assignment.
Best Practices
For questions about this assignment, please contact your instructor.
Spell check for spelling and grammar errors prior to final submission. 
Please see the grading criteria and rubrics on this page.
Please use your browser's File setting to save or print this page.
Scholarly Sources and Citations 
Use APA format in citations and references.

**Academic Integrity**
Chamberlain College of Nursing values honesty and integrity. All students should be aware of the Academic Integrity policy and follow it in all discussions and assignments.
By submitting this assignment, I pledge on my honor that all content contained is my own original work except as quoted and cited appropriately. I have not received any unauthorized assistance on this assignment. Please see the grading criteria and rubrics on this page.

References
American Association of Colleges of Nurses. (2008). Executive summary: The essentials of baccalaureate education for professional nursing practice. http://www(dot)aacnnursing(dot)org/Education-Resources/AACN-Essentials
Quality and Safety Education for Nurses. (2018). Quality and safety education for nurses competencies. http://qsen(dot)org/competencies/pre-licensure-ksas/#evidence-based_practice
RUBRIC
NR439 Reading Research Literature Worksheet Rubric
NR439 Reading Research Literature Worksheet Rubric
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePurpose of the Study
Using information from the required article and mostly your words, thoroughly summarize the purpose of the study. Describe what the study is about. Provide details.
30.0 pts
Thoroughly summarizes the criteria in the first column. Excellent details are provided.
26.0 pts
Mostly summarizes the criteria in the first column or one criteria lacks details.
24.0 pts
Minimally summarizes the criteria in the first column or one criteria is missing. Fair details provided.
11.0 pts
Poorly summarizes the criteria in the first column. Vague details provided.
0.0 pts
All criteria from the first column are missing.
30.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeType of Research & the Design
Using information from the required article and your own words, summarize the description of the type of research and the design of the study. Include how it supports the purpose (aim or intent) of the study. Provide details.
20.0 pts
Thoroughly summarizes the criteria in the first column. Excellent details are provided.
18.0 pts
Mostly summarizes the criteria in the first column or one criteria lacks details.
16.0 pts
Minimally summarizes the criteria in the first column one criteria is missing. Fair details provided.
8.0 pts
Poorly summarizes the criteria in the first column. Vague details are provided.
0.0 pts
All criteria from the first column are missing.
20.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSample
Using information from the required article and your own words, summarize the population (sample) for the study; include key characteristics, sample size, sampling technique. Provide details.
20.0 pts
Thoroughly summarizes the criteria in the first column. Excellent details are provided.
18.0 pts
Mostly summarizes the criteria in the first column or one criteria lacks details.
16.0 pts
Minimally summarizes the criteria in the first column or one criteria is missing. Fair details provided.
8.0 pts
Poorly summarizes the criteria in the first column. Vague details are provided.
0.0 pts
All criteria from the first column are missing.
20.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeData Collection
Using information from the required article and your own words, summarize one data that was collected and how the data was collected from the study. Provide details.
20.0 pts
Thoroughly summarizes the criteria in the first column. Excellent details are provided.
18.0 pts
Mostly summarizes the criteria in the first column or one criteria lacks details
16.0 pts
Minimally summarizes the criteria in the first column or one criteria is missing. Fair details are provided.
8.0 pts
Poorly summarizes the criteria in the first column. Vague details are provided.
0.0 pts
All criteria from the first column are missing.
20.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeData Analysis
Using information from the required article and your own words, summarize one of the data analysis/ tests performed or one method of data analysis from the study; include what you know/learned about the descriptive or statistical test or data analysis method. Provide details.
20.0 pts
Thoroughly summarizes the criteria in the first column. Excellent details are provided.
18.0 pts
Mostly summarizes the criteria in the first column or one criteria lacks details.
16.0 pts
Minimally summarizes the criteria in the first column or one criteria is missing. Fair details are provided.
8.0 pts
Poorly summarizes the criteria in the first column. Vague details are provided.
0.0 pts
All criteria from the first column are missing.
20.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeLimitations
Using information from the required article and your own words, summarize one limitation reported in the study. Provide details.
20.0 pts
Thoroughly summarizes the criteria in the first column. Excellent details are provided.
18.0 pts
Mostly summarizes the criteria in the first column or one criteria lacks details.
16.0 pts
Minimally summarizes the criteria in the first column or one criteria is missing. Fair details are provided.
8.0 pts
Poorly summarizes the criteria in the first the column. Vague details are provided.
0.0 pts
All criteria from the first column are missing.
20.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFindings/Discussion
Using information from the required article and your own words, summarize one of the authors' findings/discussion reported in the study. Include one interesting detail you learned from reading the study. Provide details.
20.0 pts
Thoroughly summarizes the criteria in the first column. Excellent details are provided.
18.0 pts
Mostly summarizes the criteria in the first column or one criteria lacks details.
16.0 pts
Minimally summarizes the criteria in the first column or one criteria is missing. Fair details are provided.
8.0 pts
Poorly summarizes the criteria in the first the column. Vague details are provided.
0.0 pts
All criteria from the first column are missing.
20.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeReading Research Literature
Summarize why it is important for you to read and understand research literature. Summarize what you learned from completing the reading research literature activity worksheet. Provide details.
30.0 pts
Thoroughly summarizes the criteria in the first column. Excellent details are provided.
26.0 pts
Mostly summarizes the criteria in the first column or one criteria lacks details.
24.0 pts
Minimally summarizes the criteria in the first column or one criteria is missing. Fair details are provided.
11.0 pts
Poorly summarizes the criteria in the first the column. Vague details are provided.
0.0 pts
All criteria from the first column are missing.
30.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeScholarly Writing, Mechanics, Organization, Spelling, Sentence Structure, Grammar
10.0 pts
Excellent writing, mechanics, organization, spelling, sentence structure, grammar. No errors or 1-2 errors noted.
6.0 pts
Good writing, mechanics, organization, spelling, sentence structure, grammar. A few errors noted.
4.0 pts
Fair writing, mechanics, organization, spelling, sentence structure, grammar. Some errors noted.
3.0 pts
Poor writing, mechanics, organization, spelling, sentence structure, grammar. Many errors noted.
0.0 pts
Very poor writing, mechanics, and organization. Errors throughout are noted. Writing is difficult to understand or follow.
10.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAPA In-Text Formatting for Cited Sentences
10.0 pts
Excellent APA in-text formatting with no errors. Uses mostly your own words with no more than two direct quotes.
5.0 pts
Good APA formatting. Uses APA in-text citation formatting with 1-2 errors noted.
4.0 pts
Fair APA formatting. Uses APA in-text citation formatting with some errors noted or does not use in-text citation formatting.
3.0 pts
Poor APA formatting with many errors noted.
0.0 pts
Very poor APA with errors noted throughout.
10.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeRequired RRL Worksheet and Required Article Use
0.0 pts
0 points deducted Required RRL Worksheet used for this assignment and Required Article used for this assignment. 0 points deducted
0.0 pts
20 points (10%) deducted Required RRL Worksheet NOT used and/or Required Article NOT used for this assignment results in a deduction of 20 points (10%). 20 points deducted
0.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeLate Deduction
0.0 pts
0 point deduction
Submitted on time
0.0 pts
Not submitted on time - Points deducted
1 day late = 10 deduction; 2 days late = 20 deduction; 3 days late = 30 deduction; 4 days late = 40 deduction; 5 days late = 50 deduction; 6 days late = 60 deduction; 7 days late = 70 deduction; Score of 0 if more than 7 days late
0.0 pts
Total Points: 200.0