Grand Canyon – NRS 410V Week 5 Complete Work

Unsatisfactory 0-71%

0.00%

Less Than Satisfactory 72-75%

75.00%

Satisfactory 76-79%

79.00%

Good 80-89%

89.00%

Excellent 90-100%

100.00%

Research or evidence-based article not identified.

Research or evidence-based article identified but does not
address a specific diabetic intervention or diagnostic tool.

Research or evidence-based article identified that focuses
on a specific diabetic intervention or diagnostic tool in general.

Research or evidence-based article identified that focuses
on a specific diabetic intervention and a diagnostic tool.

Research or evidence-based article identified that focuses
on a specific diabetic intervention or diagnostic tool in a comprehensive
manner, allowing all criteria of assignment to be fully addressed.

Content is incomplete or omits most of the requirements
stated in the assignment criteria. Does not demonstrate an understanding of
the basic principles. Does not demonstrate critical thinking and analysis of
the overall program subject.

Content is incomplete or omits some requirements stated in
the assignment criteria. Demonstrates shallow understanding of the basic
principles only a surface level of evaluation is offered, methods are
described but flawed or unrealistic and strategies are discussed, but
incomplete.

Content is complete, but somewhat inaccurate and/or
irrelevant. Demonstrates adequate understanding of the basic principles.
Reasonable but limited inferences and conclusions are drawn but lack
development. Supporting research is inadequate in relevance, quality, and/or currentness.

Content is comprehensive and accurate, and definitions are
clearly stated. Sections form a cohesive logical and justified whole. Shows
careful planning and attention to details and illuminates relationships.
Research is adequate, current, and relevant, and addresses all of the issues
stated in the assignment criteria.

Content is comprehensive. Presents ideas and information
beyond that presented through the course, and substantiates their validity
through solid, academic research where appropriate. Research is thorough,
current, and relevant, and addresses all of the issues stated in assignment
criteria. Final paper exhibits the process of creative thinking and
development of proposal. Applies framework of knowledge, practice and sound
research. Shows careful planning and attention to how disparate elements fit
together.

Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing
claim.

Thesis and/or main claim are insufficiently developed
and/or vague; purpose is not clear.

Thesis and/or main claim are apparent and appropriate to
purpose.

Thesis and/or main claim are clear and forecast the
development of the paper. It is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and
appropriate to the purpose.

Thesis and/or main claim are comprehensive; contained
within the thesis is the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the
purpose of the paper clear.

Paragraphs and transitions consistently lack unity and
coherence. No apparent connections between paragraphs are established.
Transitions are inappropriate to purpose and scope. Organization is
disjointed.

Some paragraphs and transitions may lack logical
progression of ideas, unity, coherence, and/or cohesiveness. Some degree of
organization is evident.

Paragraphs are generally competent, but ideas may show
some inconsistency in organization and/or in their relationships to each
other.

A logical progression of ideas between paragraphs is
apparent. Paragraphs exhibit a unity, coherence, and cohesiveness. Topic
sentences and concluding remarks are appropriate to purpose.

There is a sophisticated construction of paragraphs and
transitions. Ideas progress and relate to each other. Paragraph and
transition construction guide the reader. Paragraph structure is seamless.

Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede
communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence
construction are used.

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the
reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure,
and/or word choice are present.

Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but 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.

Inappropriate word choice and lack of variety in language
use are evident. Writer appears to be unaware of audience. Use of ‘primer
prose’ indicates writer either does not apply figures of speech or uses them
inappropriately.

Some distracting inconsistencies in language choice
(register) and/or word choice are present. The writer exhibits some lack of
control in using figures of speech appropriately.

Language is appropriate to the targeted audience for the
most part.

The writer is clearly aware of audience, uses a variety of
appropriate vocabulary for the targeted audience, and uses figures of speech
to communicate clearly.

The writer uses a variety of sentence constructions,
figures of speech, and word choice in distinctive and creative ways that are
appropriate to purpose, discipline, and scope.

No reference page is included. No citations are used.

Reference page is present. Citations are inconsistently
used.

Reference page is present. Citations are inconsistently
used.

Reference page is present and fully inclusive of all cited
sources. Documentation is appropriate and GCU style is usually correct.

In-text citations and a reference page are complete. The
documentation of cited sources is free of error.