| Course Code |
Class Code |
Assignment Title |
Total Points |
| NRS-429VN |
NRS-429VN-O501 |
Family Assessment Part II |
150.0 |
| Criteria |
Percentage |
Unsatisfactory (0.00%) |
Less than Satisfactory (75.00%) |
Satisfactory (79.00%) |
Good (89.00%) |
Excellent (100.00%) |
Comments |
Points Earned |
| Content |
80.0% |
| SDOH Affecting Family and Family Health Status |
|
|
| 20.0% |
SDOH affecting family health status, and the direct impact to the family, are not presented. |
SDOH affecting family health status are partially presented. SDOH listed are not relevant to the family. The direct impact to the family, and why the factors are prevalent to the family, are unclear. There are inaccuracies. |
Key SDOH affecting family health status are summarized. The SDOH identified are relevant to the family. The direct impact to the family, and why the factors are prevalent to the family, are generally discussed. More support or rationale is needed in some areas. |
The overall SDOH affecting family health status are accurately identified and described. The SDOH identified are relevant to the family. The direct impact to the family, and why the factors are prevalent to the family, are discussed. |
The SDOH directly affecting family health status are relevant, accurately identified and thoroughly described. The direct impact to the family, and why the factors are prevalent to the family, are discussed in detail. The discussion is well supported and illustrates insight into SDOH and their effect on family health status. |
| Age-Appropriate Screening Recommendations |
20.0%
Age-appropriate screenings are not presented. |
Screenings are presented for some family members. The screenings are not age appropriate. Screenings are not relevant to the information gathered through family health assessment. |
Screenings are presented for each family member. Screenings are generally age appropriate, but entirely not relevant based on the information gathered through family health assessment. More rationale and support is required. |
Screenings presented for each family member are age appropriate. Screenings are relevant and based on the information gathered through family health assessment. Some minor rationale or support is needed. |
Screenings presented for each family member are age appropriate and highly relevant. Screenings correlate to the information gathered through family health assessment. Strong rationale and support is presented. |
| Assessment of Health Model |
20.0%
A health model to assist in the creation of a plan of action is not presented. The model chosen is not a health model. |
A health model is selected to assist in creating a plan of action. The description of the model is incomplete. It is unclear why the chosen model is best for this family. |
A health model is selected and described. A summary of how the model will assist in creating a plan of action is presented. A general overview for why it is best for this family is provided. More rationale and support is required. |
A health model is selected and described. A discussion of how the model will assist in creating a plan of action is presented. Reasons for why it is best for this family are provided. Some rationale or support is needed. |
A health model is selected and thoroughly described. A detailed discussion of how the model will assist in creating a plan of action is presented. Reasons for why it is best for this family are clearly outlined. Strong rationale and support are provided to support reasoning. |
| Application of Health Model |
20.0%
Family-centered health promotion using selected health model is omitted. |
Steps for a family-centered health promotion are partially presented. The health promotion is not based on the health model. Significant aspects are missing. There are major inaccuracies. |
The health model is used to create a general family-centered health promotion. The steps to achieve the desired outcome require more detail to illustrate a clear plan of action. A general plan for communication with the family is presented. More rationale and support is required. |
The health model is used to create a relevant family-centered health promotion. The steps to achieve the desired outcome are illustrated. Strategies for communication with the family are presented. |
The health model is used to create a relevant and viable family-centered health promotion. The steps to achieve the desired outcome are described in detail. Appropriate strategies for communication with the family are clearly presented. The health promotion is well-designed and demonstrates an ability to assimilate findings and appropriately apply theoretical knowledge to achieve desired outcomes. |
| Organization and Effectiveness |
1
|
|
|
| 5.0% |
| Thesis Development and Purpose |
5.0%
Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim. |
Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear. |
Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose. |
Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose. |
Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear. |
| Argument Logic and Construction |
5.0%
Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources. |
Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility. |
Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis. |
Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative. |
Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative. |
| Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) |
5.0%
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used. |
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, or word choice are present. |
Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used. |
Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used. |
Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English. |
Format 5.0%
| Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) |
2.0% |
Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly. |
Template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent. |
Template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present. |
Template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style. |
All format elements are correct. |
| Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) |
3.0% |
Sources are not documented. |
Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors. |
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present. |
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct. |
Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error. |
| Total Weightage |
100% |
