+1 862 207 3288 Critical discussion of the self-management strategies using a person centered approach.
Wide use of recent evidenced based references to support discussion. (F- 0-9 marks)
Little or no discussion on self management;
Not supported by evidence. (P- 10-13 marks)
Minimal discussion on self-management strategies; person centeredness not discussed; supported by minimal evidence. (C- 14-15 marks)
Good discussion of self-management strategies- developing critical analysis; Good discussion on person centered approach to care; supported by a range of evidence based resources. (D- 16-17 marks)
Thorough critical discussion on self management strategies,
Thorough discussion on person centered approach to care; effective use of a wide range of evidence to support discussion. (HD-18-20 marks)
Outstanding critical discussion on self-management strategies of chosen disease, using a person-centred approach. Excellent use of evidence to support discussion using a wide range of high quality resources.
/20
Provides a nursing care plan considering psychological, social, cultural, spiritual and environmental aspects of care. (F- 0-14 marks)
No clear nursing care plan provided or key components on care plan omitted; (P- 15- 18 marks)
Some evidence of nursing care plan provided that includes some of the key components (C- 19-22 marks)
Good nursing plan provided that considers many of the key components of care. (D- 23-25 marks)
Comprehensive nursing care plan that considers all components of holistic care; Evidence of critical analysis and synthesis. (HD- 26-30 marks)
Outstanding holistic nursing care plan provided; strong evidence of critical analysis and synthesis.
/30
Ethical and Legal considerations in the management of this disease discussed.
Wide use of recent evidence based references to support discussion. (F- 0-9 marks)
No clear discussion on key ethical and legal issues;
Not supported by evidence. (P- 10-13 marks)
Some discussion on some of the key ethical and/or legal issues; supported by minimal evidence. (C- 14-15 marks)
Good discussion on most of the key ethical and legal issues; supported by some evidenced based resources. (D- 16-17 marks)
Comprehensive discussion of ethical and legal issues; effective use of a wide range of evidence to support discussion. (HD- 18-20 marks)
Outstanding and very thorough critical discussion of ethical and legal issues. Excellent use of evidence to support discussion using a wide range of high quality resources; excellent analysis and synthesis of literature.
/20
Critical discussion of inter-professional team members involved in the care of the person with chosen chronic disease/cancer.
Wide use of recent evidence based references to support discussion. (F- 0-9 marks)
No clear discussion of inter-professional members or does not identify roles of team members;
Not supported by evidence. (P- 10-13 marks)
Some discussion of inter-professional members including roles; supported by minimal evidence. (C- 14-15 marks)
Good discussion on inter-professional team members, including roles and responsibilities; supported by some evidenced based resources. (D- 16-17 marks)
Comprehensive discussion of inter-professional team work, including critical discussion of team members roles and responsibilities; effective use of a wide range of evidence to support discussion. (HD- 18-20 marks)
Outstanding critical discussion of inter-professional team involvement in the management of chosen disease. Extensive use of evidence based resources used to support discussion; excellent analysis and synthesis of literature.
/20
Academic Writing: correct assessment structure ie correct sentence and paragraphs, editing.
Referencing: Adheres to APA referencing style
Adheres to required word limit (+/-10%). (- 9-10 marks)
Major problems with academic writing; Major errors in APA referencing- possible Plagiarism/
Academic Misconduct referral;
Does not adhere to word limit. (- 7-8marks)
Several, or recurring errors in academic writing; Several errors in APA referencing in text and in reference list;
Does not adhere to word limit. (- 4-6marks)
Moderate level of errors in academic writing; Inconsistent use of APA referencing in text and/or in reference list; Does not adhere to word limit. (- 1-3marks)
Occasional problems with academic writing; Occasional errors in APA referencing in text or in reference list. (- 0 marks)
Mainly error free or no errors in referencing in text and in reference list; within 10%+/- word limit ( – up to 10 marks)
Total Mark
/100
Final Mark
/40
Markers comments:
