Posts

• 2) How will the tool be validated (was it validated by a previous study or will expert consultation be sought through stakeholders and the project team)?

DNP Project II: Section II Proposal

Completion of this assignment will result in a contribution to the final DNP project proposal. During designated weeks, sections of the project will be submitted in their final form. The student will receive feedback up to a total of 2 times for each section prior to final submission of that section. If the submitted work does not require further revision after the first or second submission, these attempts will be graded, respectively. On the third submission of each section, it will be considered a final submission and will be graded accordingly based on the following rubric. In order to progress to DNP Project II, the academic mentor and course instructor must approve the final submission of the DNP project proposal at the end of the term, and the student must achieve a passing grade (minimum 83%) in DNP Project I.

Criterion Excellent (100-93%)

Proficient (92-87%)

Meets Standards (86-83%)

Needs Improvement (82-75%)

Unsatisfactory (75% or less)

Interventions (80 points)

Description includes planned interventions in sufficient detail that it could be reproduced. Plan for interventions discussed are realistic with consideration to the timeline of the project. (The full timeline doesn’t need to be included in the paper but your general plan for intervention should be.)

Interventions are developed at a proficient level but content development requires further revision to meet excellent standards.

Description of interventions meets minimum passing standards but requires further revision in a few areas to meet excellent standards.

Interventions need improvement and requires further revision in most areas.

The interventions are poorly developed or not developed at all.

 

 

Tools (80 points)

Discussion includes

tools that will be

necessary for

achieving project

objectives and

carrying out

interventions of the

QI project.

The following

information is

included in detail:

• Who will develop the tool (will an existing/establish ed tool or develop your own)?

• 2) How will the tool be validated (was it validated by a previous study or will expert consultation be sought through stakeholders and the project team)?

The project tools are discussed at a proficient level but content development requires further revision to meet excellent standards.

Discussion of project tools meets minimum passing standards but requires further revision in a few areas to meet excellent standards.

Development of project tools needs improvement and requires further revision in most areas.

Poorly developed project tools or not developed at all.

 

 

• 3) If using an established tool, does the author of the tool require the project lead to seek permission to use the tool? From who?

 

Appendices (80 points)

All tools are

completed and placed

in the appendices of

the paper.

Any appendices

requested by the

project team are

appropriately placed

in the paper.

Appendices are listed

in the order they

appear in your paper.

 

The appendices are nearly completed at a proficient level but minimal content needs to be added to meet excellent standards.

The appendices meet minimum passing standards but a moderate amount of content is required to meet excellent standards

The appendices section needs improvement and requires a large amount of content to be added.

The appendices section is poorly developed or not developed at all

Organization (20 points)

Concise and well-

organized writing.

Ideas are described

clearly and are

Clear organization of

main points.

Ideas are described

clearly and are

Clear organization of

main points but some

areas may stray from

logical sequence.

Writing lacks logical

organization.

Poorly organized,

ideas are not

developed adequately

Does not meet basic writing standards of organization.

 

 

presented in a logical

sequence.

 

Ideas and arguments

are fully supported

and developed

through evidence.

 

Headings are used

appropriately to

indicate new content

areas.

 

 

 

presented in a logical

sequence.

 

Support and

development of ideas

is present but one or

more areas lack

evidence.

 

Headings are used

appropriately to

indicate new content

areas.

Paragraph structure

is appropriate with

logical transitions.

 

 

 

Support of ideas

present but is not

consistent.

 

 

Use of headings is not

consistent.

 

Minimal paragraph

structure issues.

in the paper and lack

unity.

 

Paragraphs headings

are not used

appropriately.

Major paragraph

structure issues.

 

 

Writing Style (30 points)

Sentence structure

clear, with smooth

transitions, correct

grammar and

punctuation. No

spelling errors. Uses

standard English

language.

Overall sentence

structure is clear,

with smooth

transitions

Less than 3 grammar,

punctuation or

spelling errors.

Overall sentence

structure is clear, with

smooth transitions

Less than 5 grammar,

punctuation or

spelling errors.

 

Spelling, punctuation,

and grammatical

errors create

distraction, making

reading difficult;

fragments, comma

splices, run-ons

Writing style does not meet basic standards for English language.

 

 

 

Word choice is

correct, precise and

unambiguous.

 

Introduction has a

clear statement

addressing the topic.

 

Body paragraphs have

topic sentences that

are logical and fully

developed.

Paragraph structure is

appropriate with

logical transitions.

 

Writing does not

reveal discriminatory

bias.

 

Unity of the paper

clearly leads the

reader to the

 

Introduction has a

clear statement

addressing the topic.

 

Body paragraphs

have topic sentences

that are logical and

fully developed.

Paragraph structure

is appropriate with

logical transitions.

 

Writing does not

reveal discriminatory

bias.

 

 

Unity of the paper

clearly leads the

reader to the

conclusion.

 

Introduction has a

clear statement

addressing the topic.

 

Minimal paragraph

structure issues.

Transitions evident

but not used

throughout

 

 

 

Writing does not

reveal discriminatory

bias.

 

 

evident. Errors are

frequent.

 

 

 

Clear bias is evident.

 

 

Ideas lack unity

 

 

 

 

conclusion and stirs

thought regarding the

topic.

APA (35 points)

References are

current and are cited

appropriately

throughout paper.

Paper is formatted

per APA style guide

with no APA errors.

 

References are

current and are cited

appropriately

throughout paper.

Paper is formatted

per APA style guide

with less than 3 APA

errors.

 

 

References are

current and are cited

appropriately

throughout paper.

Paper is formatted per

APA style guide with

less than 5 APA errors.

 

References are not

current and/ or are

not appropriately

cited.

 

Paper is not

consistent with APA

formatting guide.

There is evidence of

plagiarism.

 

APA standards grossly not met.

Total points 325