CRITICAL Literаture Review Your mаjor assignment for this subject is a literature review, detailing what is alreadу known about your toрic of choice. Conduct a search of the available literature on your chosen topic, 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 compare or contrast some conclusions. NOTE MY TOPIC IS ON CLINICAL AUDIT PATHWAY AND MY CLINICAL AUDIT QUESTION IS:::: Do nurses in an acute care setting in xx hospital comply with the best practice hand hygiene? ASSESSMENT 2 RUBRIC. CRITERIA Excellent (> 80 %) Very good (70 – 79%) Good (60 – 69%) Fair (50 – 59%) Poor (<50%) MARK Structure & organisation (20% of total mark) ? 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. (1620 marks) ? 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. (1415 marks) ? 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. (1213 marks) ? 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. (1011 marks) ? 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. (<10 marks) /20 Selection of literature (30% of total mark) ? Each source is relevant and credible to the topic – primary source, professionallyoriented, peerreviewed. ? Majority of sources within past 57 years. ? Literature is appropriate to the task. (2630 marks) ? Each source is relevant and credible to the topic. ? Majority of sources within past 57 years. ? Literature predominantly appropriate to the task. (2125 marks) ? Majority of sources are relevant and credible to the topic. ? Majority of sources within past 57 years. ? Literature mostly appropriate to the task. (1820 marks) ? Few sources are relevant and credible to the topic. ? Many sources not within past 57 years. ? Literature may not be appropriate to the task. (1517 marks) ? Majority of sources neither relevant nor credible to the topic. ? Majority of sources not within past 57 years. ? Majority of sources are inappropriate to the task. ? Majority of the topic not addressed. (< 15 marks) /30 Use of literature (40% of total mark) ? 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. (3240 marks) ? 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. (2831 marks) ? 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. (2427 marks) ? 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. (2023 marks)) ? 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. (<20 marks) /40 Quality of submission – format, referencing, grammar and spelling (10% of total mark) ? Well supported with sufficient and appropriate material from relevant and credible sources; ? Correct referencing (APA 6) used throughout; ? Excellent grammar & spelling. (810 marks) ? Well supported with sufficient and appropriate material from relevant and credible sources; ? Correct referencing (APA 6); ? Good grammar & spelling. (7 marks) ? Mostly supported with sufficient and appropriate material from relevant and credible sources; ? Mostly correct referencing (APA 6); ? Good grammar & spelling. (6 marks) ? Some inappropriate reference material and/or from poor quality sources; ? Mostly correct referencing (APA 6); ? Some grammar & spelling errors. (5 marks) ? Poorly supported with references (APA 6); ? Much inappropriate reference material and/or from poor quality sources ? Poor spelling and grammar. (< 5 marks) /10 Examiner: ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: TOTAL MARK /100 Selecting your literature 1. At least 20 to 25 quality references, the majority retrieved from peerreviewed journals are needed for this assignment. 2. References should be recent (not older than 7 years). 3. Older references are appropriate, only if you are describing a historical perspective. 4. No more than 3 references should originate from textbooks or reputable academic websites
