- Username
- Password
forgot?

iRubric: EBP project rubric

edit print share Copy to my rubrics Bookmark test run assess... delete Do more...
EBP project EBP project group nursing project, synthesizing results from a literature review to create best practice recommendations Rubric Code: DX6W78A By jgood003 Ready to use Public Rubric Subject: Nursing Type: Presentation Grade Levels: Undergraduate

PICO and Relevance Parts of the project that are structure based or elementary
	Excellent 10 pts	Good 8 pts	Fair 6 pts	Poor 2 pts
PICO statement	Excellent Clear, concise, gives clear picture of purpose of the poster. Discussion of relevance to nursing. PICO well defined. Conclusions well supported by the findings	Good Clear language for depiction of poster, purpose, PICO well defined. Conclusions supported in the report.	Fair Poorly described purpose and little disclosure of contents of poster. Some elements of PICO poorly operationalized. Conclusion unsupported.	Poor No defined purpose. Elements within paper not discussed leaving reader confused. PICO muddled, elements missing or poorly narrowed. Conclusion unsupported.
Relevance to practice	Excellent Well described. Scenario and application of practice element are compelling.	Good Relevance to practice and appropriate setting are described.	Fair Practice or role effected by the element of discovery are described, but need for further study is not compelling.	Poor Poorly described, leaving reader to wonder why the writer has bothered to review the data.
EBP Process
	Excellent (N/A)	Good (N/A)	Fair (N/A)	Enter Title (N/A)
Search/inclusion process	Excellent Key words, databases, and study selection process and criteria are readily outlined	Good Key words, databases, and study selection process and criteria are somewhat outlined	Fair Search and selection process somewhat obscured. Some elements missing.	Enter Title Poor or no description of this process.
Evidence table/representation Need quick glance comparison of the material with so many listed studies.	Excellent Graphical depiction clear and easily legible. Comparison of data logical. Appropriate citations maintained	Good Layout of source information is neat and legible. Appropriate citation.	Fair Some layout or legibility errors.	Enter Title No graphical representation of source data.
Analysis Section Parts of the project that involve critical thinking and evaluation
	Excellent Every element is met. 12 pts	Average Meeting most of standard with minimal errors 9 pts	Fair Meeting a portion of standard or guideline 6 pts	Poor Failing to meet minimum standards 3 pts
Synthesis of findings	Excellent Aptly summarized. Evaluation of the overall findings and any descriptive statistics provided. Correct assessment given about testing of assumptions.	Average All pieces are there but not completely supported with examples from the article AND material learned in class about the methods.	Fair Stated but not well supported. Possibly misinterpreted, error in assumptions.	Poor No evaluation of analysis is given OR it is incorrect OR not supported with evidence from the source material.
Recommendations for practice A valid conclusion may also be NO consensus for practice or change.	Excellent Enough support is found to change or support continued practice.	Average Recommendation for practice based on weak data.	Fair Recommendation made by author is not supported by information given in the document.	Poor No recommendation is described.
Oral Presentation Part of the project that involves articulation of the synthesis
	Excellent Every element is met. 12 pts	Average Meeting most of standard with minimal errors 9 pts	Fair Meeting a portion of standard or guideline 6 pts	Poor Failure to meet minimum standard. 3 pts
Oral Presentation	Excellent Summary is concise, involves all team members speaking, introduces poster very well and does not exceed 5 minute timeframe. Speakers able to answer all questions.	Average Summary is adequate, most members speak or one member dominates. Speakers able to answer most questions.	Fair Summary is incomplete. Most members speak. Speakers unable to answer most questions.	Poor Summary is inadequate. Speakers unable to answer all questions.
APA This section pertains to grammar, organization, clarity, referencing and citations
	Excellent 10 pts	Average 8 pts	Fair 6 pts	Poor 4 pts
Sources	Excellent All primary sources. All sources from top four tiers of hierarchy	Average All primary sources. Majority of sources from top tier of hierarchy	Fair Few secondary sources. Some sources from lower tier of hierarchy.	Poor Few secondary sources. No sources form the top four tiers of hierarchy
Grammar	Excellent Well organized, easy to follow, no awkward transitions. No APA style errors.	Average Writing is clear and succinct. Minor issues with pronoun agreement, verb tenses. No misspelled words. Few (one per section, or less) errors in style.	Fair Writing is generally clear, but unnecessary words are occasionally used. Meaning is sometimes hidden. Paragraph or sentence structure is repetitive. Two to three style errors per page. Repetition of the same error, even in different ways.	Poor Misspelled words, incorrect grammar, and improper punctuation are evident.
Citation	Excellent All citations match references.	Average	Fair All citations match references.	Poor Many style errors in the poster interfering with readability. Citations and references do not match. Errors of this level can be confused with plagiarism.

Subjects:

Nursing

Types:

Discuss this rubric