Rubric for Nursing, School of Health
Unit: HLTH520 Assessment Task: Critique a research article Assessment weight: 50%

Assessment Learning Outcomes:

demonstrate mastery of the underlying principles and processes of research-informed practice and reflect critically on evidence-based practice applied to health and social care; investigate, analyse and synthesise practice, client and service delivery problems that can be addressed through the application of evidence to practice or research; apply a range of methods to evaluate and integrate evidence into practice for health care interventions and decisions;
demonstrate complex technical and communication skills to collaborate with other health professionals in evidenced-based decision making and practice; justify methodologies, conclusions and professional decisions to clients and families in the context of shared decision making; and
apply knowledge and skills to plan and execute substantial research-based projects or quality audits that contribute to professional practice
Criteria: HD 20-17% D 16.9-15% C 14.9-13% P 12.9-10% N 9.9-0% Mark (%)

Assessment content (variable criteria and weighting) Demonstrates mastery of the underlying principles of the differences between research and evidence based practice and the implications for health and social care Comprehensively defines and describes the differences between research and evidence based practice and the implications for health and social care There is evidence of detailed definitions and descriptions between research and evidence based practice and the implications for health and social care There are adequate definitions and descriptions between research and evidence based practice and the implications for health and social care There is minimal information about the differences between research and evidence based practice and the implications for health and social care There are no definitions or descriptions of research and evidence based practice and the implications for health and social care /20

Criteria: HD 20-17% D 16.9-15% C 14.9-13% P 12.9-10% N 9.9-0%
Investigate and analyse an appropriate research article that is related to an area of practice. Discuss why it is important and what impact it would have in practice Provides a comprehensive rationale for the choice of the article to be investigated and analysed and relates this to their area of practice. Discusses the importance of the research and how it would impact in practice Provides a detailedrationale for the choice of the article to be investigated and analysed and relates this to their area of practice. Discusses the importance of the research and how it would impact in practice An adequaterationale has been discussed for the choice of the article to be investigated and analysed, and is related to an area of practice. Discusses the importance of the research and how it would impact in practice The rationale is minimal in relation to the choice of article to be critiqued. There is very little discussion of which area of practice it would be suitable for.Minimal discussion on the importance of the research and how it would impact in practice There is no rationale for the choice of article and no discussion about the area of practice. No discussion on the importance of the research and how it would impact in practice /20

Criteria: HD 20-17% D 16.9-15% C 14.9-13% P 12.9-10% N 9.9-0%
Identifies the study design and justifies the appropriateness of the design to the study There is evidence of a comprehensive discussion in relation to the study design which is correctly identified as qualitative, quantitative, mixed methods or systematic review There is a detailed discussion in relation to the study design which is correctly identified as qualitative, quantitative, mixed methods or systematic review There is an adequate discussion in relation to the study design which is correctly identified as qualitative, quantitative, mixed methods or systematic review There is minimal discussion in relation to the study design which is correctly identified as qualitative, quantitative, mixed methods or systematic review There is no discussion in relation to the study design which has not been correctly identified /20

Criteria: HD 20-17% D 16.9-15% C 14.9-13% P 12.9-10% N 9.9-0%
Apply methods (tools) to appraise and evaluate methodologies and methods used within a research article to ensure the validity and trustworthiness of the research There is evidence of a comprehensive critical appraisal and evaluation of the research article using an appropriate tool such as CASP A detailed critical appraisal and evaluation has been undertaken of a research article using an appropriate tool such as CASP An adequate appraisal and evaluation has been undertaken of a research article using an appropriate tool such as CASP There is a minimal appraisal and evaluation that has been undertaken of a research article using an appropriate tool such as CASP There is no appraisal or evaluation of the research article or no CASP tool or others have been applied /20

Criteria: Writing – 10% HD 10-8.5% D 8.4-7.5% C 7.4-6.5% P 6.5-5% N 4.9-0% Mark (%)
Writing and APA (fixed criteria and weighting) Follows requirements for structure, presentation grammar and spelling. Accurately and consistently adheres to essay format writing conventions, grammatical conventions with no errors and is a logical / well and succinctly structured assignment Mostly accurate and consistent adherence to essay format writing conventions, adheres to grammatical conventions with few errors and is a logical and well-structured assignment Partial but close adherence to essay format writing conventions, adheres to grammatical conventions, but with frequent errors, mainly a well- structured assignment, lacking cohesion in places Minimal adherence to essay format writing conventions, minimal adherence to grammatical conventions with multiple errors, a weakly structured assignment, frequently lacking cohesion Little attempt to adhere to essay format writing conventions, multiple grammatical errors with minimal attention to writing / spelling conventions that significantly distract the reader from the content. A poorly structured assignment, lacking cohesion /10

Criteria APA – 10% HD 10-8.5% D 8.4-7.5% C 7.4-6.5% P 6.5-5% N 4.9-0% Mark (%)
Follows requirements for referencing (APA 6th Edition) and the application of evidence Accurately and consistently adheres to APA referencing conventions for the in-text and reference list Explicitly acknowledges all sources used throughout the assignment Mostly offers accurate and consistent APA referencing conventions for the in-text and reference list Principally acknowledges sources used throughout the assignment A number of inaccurate and inconsistent APA references in the in-text and reference list Mostly acknowledges sources used throughout the assignment