Structure 25%

Efficacy and organisation 10%  (5% per section)

An articulate and precise argument. The student’s argument is succinct and compelling. 

Their arguments are logical and easy to follow.

The student demonstrates active listening skills. 

(Active listening skills: They do not interrupt their colleagues, but may ask clarifying questions; they take notes, they are willing to change their minds based on new evidence.)

A well-constructed argument.  The student is compelling but not succinct.

Their arguments are logical and easy to follow.

The student mostly demonstrates active listening skills (1 or 2 instances of contravening behaviour). 

An appropriate argument.  The student mostly proceeds logically with their argument which is mostly easy to follow.

The student mostly demonstrates active listening skills (3 or 4 instances of contravening behaviour). 

Adequately articulated argument.  The student makes themselves understood, but their argument does not follow a logical format.  The argument may be repetitive or disconnected.

The student sometimes demonstrates active listening skills (4 or 5 instances of contravening behaviour). 

The argument is not apparent.  The student does not make themselves understood.  The argument is absent or illogical.

The student has difficulty demonstrating active listening skills (more than 5 instances of contravening behaviour). 

Assignment worksheet is very clear and comprehensive. 

Assignment worksheet mostly clear and comprehensive. 

Assignment worksheet somewhat clear and comprehensive. 

Assignment worksheet is not clear or comprehensive.

Assignment worksheet is not present or is not relevant.

Presentation 10% (5% per section)

Student is very well organised.  They come to the assessment with their worksheet, incidental notes (as necessary), pen and paper for taking notes.

 The student speaks clearly and confidently.  They are respectful to their classmates.  The feedback is constructive (they address the argument, not the person).

The student is organised.  They come to the assessment with their worksheet, incidental notes (as necessary), pen and paper for taking notes.

The student speaks clearly and confidently but may require prompting (once or twice) to repeat themselves.

The student is mostly respectful to their classmates when they provide feedback.  The feedback is constructive (they address the argument, not the person).

The student is organised.  They come to the assessment with their worksheet, incidental notes (as necessary), pen and paper for taking notes.

 The student speaks somewhat clearly and confidently but may require prompting (3 – 5 times) to repeat themselves.

 The student, for the most part, is polite to their classmates when they provide feedback.  At times their feedback is personal.

The student is somewhat organised.  They come to the assessment with their worksheet, incidental notes (as necessary), pen and paper for taking notes.

 The student speaks confidently but may require prompting (5 – 7 times) to repeat themselves.

 The student attempts to be polite when they provide feedback but their feedback often addresses their classmate, not the argument.

The student is disorganised.  They come to the assessment without their worksheet, incidential notes (as necessary), pen and paper for taking notes.

The student's speech is unclear. They require prompting (more than seven times) to repeat themselves.   

 The student is impolite or disrespectful when they provide feedback (they criticise the person, not the argument).

The submitted worksheet is very well-presented and is free of errors.

The submitted worksheet is very well-presented and is mostly free of errors (up to 2 consistent spelling/grammar/formatting issues). The errors do not obscure the meaning of the student’s work.

The submitted worksheet is well presented and is mostly free of errors (up to 3-4 consistent spelling/grammar/formatting issues). Overall, the errors do not obscure the meaning of the student’s work.

The submitted worksheet has spelling/grammar/formatting issues that make it difficult to understand the students work.

The correct worksheet is not submitted, or has spelling/grammar/formatting issues which mostly obscure the meaning of the student’s work.

Evidence & Referencing  5% (2.5% per section)

Consistent judicious use of up-to-date, valid and peer-reviewed sources of evidence to support and reflect ideas and arguments. A minimum of 10 contemporary* journal articles have been used.  Journal articles are highly relevant.

Seminal documents presented in the unit curricula are also referred to.

5 references = literature review

5 references = Transformational Leadership & Patient-Centred Care & Other arguments (e.g. Evidence Pyramid, CASP, PICO)

Judicious use of mostly up-to-date, valid and peer-reviewed sources of evidence to support and reflect ideas and arguments. 10 contemporary* journal articles have been used, however selection of 1 or 2 of the articles is not judicious (they are not relevant or have little relevance).

Seminal documents presented in the unit curricula are referred to when prompted.

5 references = literature review

5 references = Transformational Leadership & Patient-Centred Care

Partial and somewhat judicious up-to-date references/citations to support and reflect ideas, factual information and quotations.  Between 8- 9 relevant contemporary* journal articles have been cited.   

OR more than 10 articles are used but their inclusion is often not judicious (they are not relevant or have little relevance).

Seminal documents presented in the unit curricula are usually referred to.

5 references = literature review

3-4 references = Transformational Leadership & Patient-Centred Care 

Occasionally integrates up-to-date peer-reviewed sources of evidence to support and reflect their ideas, and arguments.  Between 6-7 relevant contemporary* journal articles have been cited.

OR more than 10 articles are used but their inclusion is mostly not judicious (they are not relevant or have little relevance).

Seminal documents presented in the unit curricula are sometimes referred to. 

5 references = literature review

3-4 references = Transformational Leadership & Patient-Centred Care

Fails to or infrequent attempts to integrate up-to-date peer-reviewed sources of evidence to support and reflect their ideas, and arguments.  Less than 5 contemporary* journal articles have been cited.

 OR more than 10 articles are used but their inclusion is not judicious (they are not relevant or have little relevance).

Seminal documents presented in the unit curricula are not referred to.

 Less than 5 references = literature review

Less than 2 references = Transformational Leadership & Patient-Centred Care

Accurate APA referencing. No errors.

Mostly accurate APA referencing. 1-2 consistent errors (may be made multiple times).

Somewhat accurate APA referencing. 3 consistent errors (may be made multiple times).

Occasionally accurate APA referencing. 4 consistent errors (made multiple times).

APA referencing not used, or more than 5 inaccuracies.

Approach and Argument 75%

Relevancy and depth 15% (7.5% for each item)

Content is entirely relevant to the topic; the approach comprehensively addresses the task and the argument/conversation proceeds logically.   

Content is very relevant to the topic; the approach addresses the task (but may not be concise) and the argument/conversation proceeds logically.

Content is appropriate to the topic; the approach mostly addresses the task and the argument/conversation for the most part proceeds logically and is within the set time limit and word count.

Content addresses the topic but the argument/conversation is at times repetitive or lacks cohesion.

The student is redirected or prompted by the marker to provide more or fewer details.   

Content is irrelevant and or does not address the topic and the argument/conversation lacks cohesion. Student requires constant prompting by the marker to provide more or appropriate details.

Student’s critical analysis of their own and classmates’ research findings (demonstrated through the questions they ask, comments they make, recommendations they put forward etc) is relevant, well-informed and expressed clearly and concisely.

Relevant = relates to the evidence not only their prior nursing background.

Well informed = student links back to sources of evidence.

Student’s critical analysis of their own and classmates’ research findings (demonstrated through the questions they ask, comments they make, recommendations they put forward etc) is relevant and well-informed.  Their expression is mostly clear and concise.

Student’s critical analysis of their own and classmates’ research findings (demonstrated through the questions they ask, comments they make, recommendations they put forward etc) is somewhat relevant and usually well-informed.

Student’s critical analysis of their own and classmates’ research findings (demonstrated through the questions they ask, comments they make, recommendations they put forward etc) is sometimes relevant and well-informed.

Student’s critical analysis of their own and classmates’ research findings (demonstrated through the questions they ask, comments they make, recommendations they put forward etc) not relevant and not informed.

Knowledge of Best Practice 25% (5% per item)

Nursing intervention clearly and concisely explained.

Nursing intervention explanation is clear but not concise.

Nursing intervention is mostly clearly identified. 

Nursing intervention is addressed but not clearly identified. 

Nursing intervention is not addressed or is not relevant. 

The research question is relevant and clearly articulated (using PICO/PEO).

The research question is relevant and appropriately articulated (using PICO/PEO).

The research question is mostly relevant and well-articulated (using PICO/PEO).

The research question is somewhat relevant and but lacks cohesion (using PICO/PEO).

The research question is not relevant and lacks cohesion (using PICO/PEO).

Communication of the results of literature search is clear and concise.

Communication of the results of literature search is clear.

Communication of the results of literature search is mostly clear.

Communication of the results of literature search is at times unclear.

Communication of the results of literature is not present or is unclear.

Critical analysis of the literature is clear.

Critical analysis of the literature is mostly apparent.

Critical analysis of the literature is often apparent.

Critical analysis of the literature is sometimes apparent.

Critical analysis of the literature is not present or is unclear.

Direction regarding best practice is relevant and well-articulated.

Direction regarding best practice is relevant.

Direction regarding best practice is mostly relevant.

Direction regarding best practice is somewhat relevant.

Direction regarding best practice is not relevant.

Knowledge of Transformational Leadership 15%

Well-articulated, Person-Centred discussion demonstrating excellent understanding of the principles of Person-Centred Care and Transformational Leadership.

Well-articulated, Person-Centred discussion demonstrating good understanding of the principles of Person-Centred Care and Transformational Leadership.

Well-articulated discussion demonstrating good understanding of the principles of Person-Centred Care and Transformational Leadership.

Plan lacks clarity.  Understanding of the principles of Person-Centred Care and Transformational Leadership is evident but unclear.

Plan lacks clarity or is not present.  Limited or no understanding of the principles of Person-Centred Care and Transformational Leadership is evident.

Application 20%

Expert synthesis of complex information to decide on an evidence-based best practice nursing intervention and implementation strategy.

Mostly expert synthesis of complex information to decide on an evidence-based best practice nursing intervention and implementation strategy.

Some synthesis of complex information to decide on an evidence-based best practice nursing intervention and implementation strategy.

An attempt to synthesise complex information is apparent.  The implementation strategy is adequate.

No apparent synthesis of complex information. The implementation strategy is not apparent or is inadequate.

Structure 20%

Efficacy and organisation 10%

An articulate essay. There is a succinct and compelling introduction which introduces each section and outlines the direction of the paper.  Each section of the essay is cogent and is brought to a compelling conclusion.

A well-written essay. There is a clear and appropriate introduction which introduces each section and outlines the direction of the paper.  Each section of the essay proceeds logically and is brought to a logical conclusion.

Appropriately written essay. There is an appropriate introduction which mostly introduces each section and outlines the direction of the paper.  Each section of the essay mostly proceeds logically and is brought to an appropriate conclusion.

Adequately articulated essay. An introduction to each section is apparent.  There is an attempt made to outline the direction of the paper. 

The individual sections of the essay are, at times, repetitive or lack cohesion.  A conclusion is evident.

The introduction to each section is not apparent or does not attempt to introduce the topic and outline the direction of the argument.  The essay does not flow logically and is not brought to a close.

Presentation 5%

Excellent presentation of assessment. The submitted written material is very well-presented follows the formatting requirements and is free from errors.

A very good presentation of assignment.  The submitted written material is well-presented and mostly follows the formatting requirements. There are minor errors (e.g. 1 or 2 errors in spelling, grammar and paragraph structure).

A good presentation of the assignment that follows the formatting requirements. There are some errors (e.g. 3 or 4 consistent errors with spelling, grammar and paragraph structure).

An adequate presentation that sometimes follows the formatting requirements.  There are 3 or 4 inconsistent errors (spelling, grammar and paragraph structure).

Poorly presented assignment. There are many inaccuracies in formatting spelling, grammar and paragraph structure (> 5 errors).

Referencing 5%

Consistently integrates up-to-date references to support and reflect all ideas, factual information and quotations. A minimum of 10 contemporary* references are used.  These may be peer-reviewed or grey literature.

Generally integrates up-to-date references to support and reflect ideas, factual information and quotations, with 1 or 2 exceptions. A minimum of 10 contemporary* references are used.  These may be peer-reviewed or grey literature.

Partly integrates up-to-date references to support and reflect ideas, factual information and quotations, with 3 or 4 exceptions.

Between 7-9 contemporary* references are used.  These may be peer reviewed or grey literature.

Occasionally integrates up-to-date references to support and reflect ideas, factual information and quotations, with 5 or 6 exceptions.

Between 5-6 contemporary* references are used.  These may be peer reviewed or grey literature.

Fails to or infrequent attempts (>7 errors) to integrate up-to-date references to support and reflect ideas, factual information and quotations. Less than 5 contemporary* references have been cited.

Accurate APA referencing. No errors.

Mostly accurate APA referencing. 1-2 consistent errors (may be made multiple times).

Somewhat accurate APA referencing. 3 consistent errors (may be made multiple times).

Occasionally accurate APA referencing. 4 consistent errors (made multiple times).

APA referencing [SH1] not used, or more than 5 errors.

Approach and Argument 80%

Relevancy and depth 15%

Content is entirely relevant to the topic, the approach comprehensively addresses the task.

The essay is within the set word count.

Content is very relevant, the approach clearly addresses the task. 

The essay is within the set word count.

Content is appropriate to the topic, the approach mostly addresses the task and is within the set word count.

Content addresses the topic and is within the set word count 10% allowance (under or over the set word count).

Content is irrelevant and or does not address the topic and the presentation lacks cohesion. The time limit and word count have not been adhered to.

Knowledge 35% (5% for each section)

Student demonstrates thorough investigation and analysis of the ethical, legal and practical responsibilities of nursing.  The following topics are covered:

•   Scope of practice
• Role of delegation in the nursing context
• Types of delegation
• Roles and responsibilities of the delegator and delegatee
• Levels of supervision
•  Correct identification of the legal/ethical dilemma
• Professional nursing codes and guidelines related to delegation and ethical/legal dilemma

The student demonstrates an investigation and analysis of the ethical, legal and practical responsibilities of nursing.  The following topics are covered:

•   Scope of practice
• Role of delegation in the nursing context
• Types of delegation
• Roles and responsibilities of the delegator and delegatee
• Levels of supervision
•  Correct identification of the   legal/ethical dilemma
• Professional nursing codes and guidelines related to delegation and ethical/legal dilemma

Student demonstrates adequate investigation and some analysis of the legal and practical responsibilities of nursing.  The following topics are adequately covered.

•   Scope of practice
• Role of delegation in the nursing context
• Types of delegation
• Roles and responsibilities of the delegator and delegatee
• Levels of supervision
•  Correct identification of the   legal/ethical dilemma
• Professional nursing codes and guidelines related to delegation and ethical/legal dilemma

Student demonstrates limited investigation and analysis of the legal and practical responsibilities of nursing.  The following topics are covered.

•   Scope of practice
• Role of delegation in the nursing context
• Types of delegation
• Roles and responsibilities of the delegator and delegatee
• Levels of supervision
•  Correct identification of the   legal/ethical dilemma
• Professional nursing codes and guidelines related to delegation and ethical/legal dilemma

There is little/no attempt to investigate and analyse the following topics: 

·       Scope of practice

·       Role of delegation in the nursing context

·       Types of delegation

·       Roles and responsibilities of the delegator and delegatee.

·       Levels of supervision

·       Correct identification of the legal/ethical dilemma

·       Professional nursing codes and guidelines related to delegation and ethical/legal dilemma

Application 30% (15% for each section)

Expert synthesis and application of complex information to create and defend:

A comprehensive student nursing care plan which adheres to the scope of practice and follows the NMBA decision making framework

Mostly expert synthesis and application of complex information to create and defend an effective:

Student nursing care plan which adheres to the scope of practice and follows the NMBA decision making framework

Some synthesis and application of complex information to create and defend a sound:

Student nursing care plan which adheres to the scope of practice and follows the NMBA decision making framework

An attempt to synthesise and apply complex information is apparent.

An attempt has been made to create and defend:

Student nursing care plan which adheres to the scope of practice and follows the NMBA decision-making framework

No apparent synthesis or application of complex information.

Student nursing care plan is not apparent or is inadequate

·       Response and resolution to an ethical/legal dilemma

·       Response and resolution to an ethical/legal dilemma

·       Response and resolution to an ethical/legal dilemma

·       Response and resolution to an ethical/legal dilemma

·       Response and resolution to an ethical/legal dilemma are not apparent or is inadequate