three stipulated National Standards (2500 words, grade value

Student: Roshin, Renji 15/40 Independent marker Cheryle Moss Marking criteria for Assessment 1– identify a local quality / patient safety / clinical governance problem or issue of concern that aligns with one of the three stipulated National Standards (2500 words, grade value – 40%) Standards:3. Preventing and controlling healthcare associated infections; 8. Preventing and managing pressure injuries; 9. Recognising and responding to clinical deterioration in acute health care 1. Abstract (4 / 40) Criteria HD [3.2-4.0] D [2.8-3.1] C [2.4-2.7] P [2.0-2.3] Not pass [< 2.0] • A succinct outline and summary of the paper in your own words • Writing style, grammar, spelling & expression Exemplary achievement in crafting and presenting a succinct outline and summary of the paper. High level of achievement in crafting and presenting a succinct outline and summary of the paper. Good level of achievement in crafting and presenting a succinct outline and summary of the paper. Acceptable level of achievement in crafting and presenting a succinct outline of the paper Did not reach an acceptable level of achievement in crafting and presenting a succinct outline and summary of the paper. 2. Introduction (4 / 40) Criteria HD [3.2-4.0] D [2.8-3.1] C [2.4-2.7] P [2.0-2.3] Not pass [< 2.0] • Succinct introductory outline to paper • Statement of what is the local problem/concern and why, and who is impacted most • National standard • Writing style, grammar, spelling & expression Exemplary achievement in crafting and presenting an introduction to the paper, including what is the local clinical governance problem/issue and why, who is impacted most. High level of achievement in crafting and presenting an introduction to the paper, including what is the local clinical governance problem/issue and why, who is impacted most. Good level of achievement in crafting and presenting an introduction to the paper, including what is the local clinical governance problem/issue and why, who is impacted most. Acceptable level of achievement in crafting and presenting an introduction to the paper, including what is the local clinical governance problem/issue and why, who is impacted most. Did not reach an acceptable level of achievement in crafting and presenting an introduction to the paper, including what is the local clinical governance problem/issue and why, who is impacted most. 3. Review of the literature (15 / 40) Criteria HD [12.0-15.0] D [10.5-11.9] C [9.0-10.4] P [7.5-8.9] Not pass [<7.5] • Review of recent literature on the clinical governance problem or issue of concern • Includes search terms and databases used • known extent and causative factors, andknown approaches to its prevention and minimisation • Writing style, grammar, spelling & expression Exemplary achievement in crafting and presenting a review of the recent literature, including known causative factors and known approaches to prevention & minimisation. High level of achievement in crafting and presenting a review of the recent literature, including known causative factors and known approaches to prevention & minimisation. Good level of achievement in crafting and presenting a review of the recent literature, including known causative factors and known approaches to prevention & minimisation. Acceptable level of achievement in crafting and presenting a review of the recent literature, including known causative factors and known approaches to prevention & minimisation. Did not reach an acceptable level of achievement in crafting and presenting the background to the problem / issue, the rationale for the project, and a clear and descriptive aim statement.   4. Discussion (7 / 40) Criteria HD [5.6-7.0] D [4.9-5.5] C [4.2-4.8] P [3.5-4.1] Not pass [<3.5] • Relevance and significance of findings in preventing or minimising the likelihood and consequences of the problem / issue • Writing style, grammar, spelling & expression Exemplary achievement in crafting and presenting a discussion on the relevance and significance of findings in preventing or minimising the problem/issue. High level of achievement in crafting and presenting a discussion on the relevance and significance of findings in preventing or minimising the problem/issue. Good level of achievement in crafting and presenting a discussion on the relevance and significance of findings in preventing or minimising the problem/issue. Acceptable level of achievement in crafting and presenting a discussion on the relevance and significance of findings in preventing or minimising the problem/issue. Did not reach an acceptable level of achievement in crafting a discussion on the relevance and significance of findings in preventing or minimising the problem / issue. 5. Conclusion (4 / 40) Criteria HD [3.2-4.0] D [2.8-3.1] C [2.4-2.7] P [2.0-2.3] Not pass [< 2.0] • Succinct summation and concluding remarks • Writing style, grammar, spelling & expression Exemplary achievement in crafting and presenting a conclusion to the paper. High level of achievement in crafting and presenting a conclusion to the paper. Good level of achievement in crafting and presenting a conclusion to the paper. Acceptable level of achievement in crafting and presenting a conclusion to the paper. Did not reach an acceptable level of achievement in crafting and presenting a conclusion to the paper. 6. Structure, presentation and referencing (6 / 40) Criteria HD [4.8-6.0] D [4.2-4.7] C [3.6-4.1] P [3.0-3.5] Not pass [<3.0] • Structure, including cover page and table of contents • Presentation • Word limit • Referencing Exemplary achievement in adhering to the structure, presentation, word limit and referencing requirements. High level of achievement in adhering to the structure, presentation, word limit and referencing requirements. Good level of achievement in adhering to the structure, presentation, word limit and referencing requirements. Acceptable level of achievement in adhering to the structure, presentation, word limit and referencing requirements. Did not reach an acceptable level of achievement in adhering to the structure, presentation, word limit and referencing requirements. The topic is great, and the student has clearly undertaken research and reading to deliver this assignment. However, overall this is a weak and flawed academic paper. There are issues with clarity in expression and the standard of academic and professional expression is low. The arguments are low level and insufficient standard and quality for master’s level work. Referencing and presentation errors are too many, and should not be present to this degree at this stage of study. I suggest an appointment for academic review and development of a plan to improve the quality and standard of academic work. Cheryle Moss

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *