implementing practice change

Order Description

Prеferred language style: English (U.S.) <br /><br />ASSIGNMENT 2.<br /><br />Assessment 2 instruсtions<br /><br /> CRITICAL Literature Review<br /><br />Your major
assignment for this subjeсt is a literature review, detailing what is already known about your toрic of choice. Conduct a search of the available literature on your
chosen toрic, and then write a review, summarising the findings of the community of scholars. You may find conflicting results in some cases, so you may find it
relevant to comрare or contrast some conclusions. NOTE MY TOPIC IS ON CLINICAL AUDIT PATHWAY AND MY CLINICAL AUDIT QUESTION IS::::<br /><br />Do nurses in an acute
care setting in xx hospital comply with the best practice hand hygiene?<br /><br /><br />ASSESSMENT 2 RUBRIC.<br />CRITERIA <br /> <br />Excellent (> 80 %) Very good
(70 – 79%) Good (60 – 69%) Fair (50 – 59%) Poor (<50%) MARK <br />Structure & organisation <br /> <br />(20% of total mark) <br />? Introduction succinctly identifies
the relevance, scope and focus of the paper. ? Body well structured, with coherent and logical development of key ideas in appropriate sections or paragraphs. ?
Effective use of headings. ? Conclusion appropriate to type and format of response. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />(16-20 marks) <br />? Introduction
identifies relevance, scope and focus of paper but may not be succinct. ? Body well structured, with predominantly coherent and logical development of key ideas in
appropriate sections or paragraphs. ? Effective use of headings. ? Conclusion predominantly appropriate to type and format of response. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />(14
-15 marks) <br />? Introduction largely appropriate to the task, but doesn’t clearly identify the relevance, scope and focus of the paper. ? Body well structured, with
mostly coherent and logical development of key ideas in appropriate sections or paragraphs. ? Effective use of headings. ? Conclusion largely appropriate to type and
format of response. <br /> <br /> <br />(12-13 marks) <br />? Introduction may not be appropriate to the task, and doesn’t clearly identify the relevance, scope and
focus of the paper. ? Body may not be well structured, with limited coherence and logical development of key ideas in appropriate sections or paragraphs. ? Some
inappropriate use of headings. ? Conclusion may not be appropriate to type and format of response. (10-11 marks) <br />? Introduction inappropriate to type and format
of response, or not evident. ? Body poorly structured and lacks coherent and logical development of key ideas in appropriate sections or paragraphs. ? Inappropriate
use of headings. ? Conclusion inappropriate to type and format of response or not evident. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />(<10 marks) <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />
<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />/20 <br />Selection of literature <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />(30% of total mark) <br />? Each
source is relevant and credible to the topic – primary source, professionally-oriented, peer-reviewed. ? Majority of sources within past 5-7 years. ? Literature is
appropriate to the task. <br /> <br /> <br />(26-30 marks) <br /> <br />? Each source is relevant and credible to the topic. ? Majority of sources within past 5-7
years. ? Literature predominantly appropriate to the task. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />(21-25 marks) <br />? Majority of sources are relevant and credible to the
topic. ? Majority of sources within past 5-7 years. ? Literature mostly appropriate to the task. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />(18-20 marks) <br />? Few sources are
relevant and credible to the topic. ? Many sources not within past 5-7 years. ? Literature may not be appropriate to the task. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />(15-17
marks) <br />? Majority of sources neither relevant nor credible to the topic. ? Majority of sources not within past 5-7 years. ? Majority of sources are inappropriate
to the task. ? Majority of the topic not addressed. <br /> <br />(< 15 marks) <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />/30 <br /><br /> <br /> <br />Use
of literature <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />(40% of total mark) <br />? Demonstrated an excellent understanding of links between the necessary
concepts. ? Demonstrated clear and consistent evidence of critical appraisal of source material. ? Evidence of synthesis of information and logical development of
arguments. ? Literature used effectively to support key ideas. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />(32-40 marks) <br />? Demonstrated a very good understanding of links
between the necessary concepts. ? Demonstrated some evidence of critical appraisal of reference material. ? Some evidence of synthesis of information and logical
development of arguments. ? Literature predominantly used effectively to support key ideas. <br /> <br />(28-31 marks) <br />? Demonstrated a good understanding of
links between the necessary concepts. ? Demonstrated inconsistent evidence of critical appraisal of reference material. ? Inconsistent evidence of synthesis of
information and logical development of arguments. ? Literature inconsistently used effectively to support key ideas.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br />(24-27 marks) <br />?
Demonstrated limited understanding of links between the necessary concepts. ? Demonstrated limited evidence of critical appraisal of reference material. ? Limited
evidence of synthesis of information and logical development of arguments. ? Literature poorly used to support key ideas. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />(20-23
marks)) <br />? Demonstrated lack of understanding of links between the necessary concepts. ? No evidence of critical appraisal of reference material. ? No evidence of
synthesis of information and logical development of arguments overreliance on direct quotes ? Key ideas not supported with the literature. <br /> <br /> <br />(<20
marks) <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />/40 <br /> <br />Quality of submission – format, referencing, grammar and spelling
<br /> <br />(10% of total mark) <br />? Well supported with sufficient and appropriate material from relevant and credible sources; ? Correct referencing (APA 6) used
throughout; ? Excellent grammar & spelling. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />(8-10 marks) <br />? Well supported with sufficient and appropriate material from relevant and
credible sources; ? Correct referencing (APA 6); ? Good grammar & spelling. <br /> <br /> <br />(7 marks) <br />? Mostly supported with sufficient and appropriate
material from relevant and credible sources; ? Mostly correct referencing (APA 6); ? Good grammar & spelling. <br /> <br /> <br />(6 marks) <br />? Some inappropriate
reference material and/or from poor quality sources; ? Mostly correct referencing (APA 6); ? Some grammar & spelling errors. <br /> <br /> <br />(5 marks) <br />?
Poorly supported with references (APA 6); ? Much inappropriate reference material and/or from poor quality sources ? Poor spelling and grammar. <br /> <br /> <br /> (<
5 marks) <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />/10 <br />Examiner: ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />TOTAL MARK <br /> <br />/100 <br /><br
/>Selecting your literature<br />1. At least 20 to 25 quality references, the majority retrieved from peer-reviewed journals are needed for this assignment.<br />2.
References should be recent (not older than 7 years).<br />3. Older references are appropriate, only if you are describing a historical perspective.<br />4. No more
than 3 references should originate from textbooks or reputable academic websites.