| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDevelop a 1- to 2-page case study analysis, examining the patient symptoms presented in the case study. Be sure to address the following as it relates to the case you were assigned (omit section that does not pertain to your case, faculty will give full points for that section):Explain the factors that affect fertility (STDs) |
25 to >22.0 pts Excellent The response accurately and thoroughly describes the patient symptoms. … The response includes accurate, clear, and detailed explanations of the processes related to women’s and men’s health, infections, and hematologic disorders and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. 22 to >19.0 pts Good The response describes the patient symptoms. … The response includes accurate, explanations of the processes related to women’s and men’s health, infections, and hematologic disorders and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. 19 to >17.0 pts Fair The response describes the patient symptoms in a manner that is vague or inaccurate. … The response includes explanations of the processes related to women’s and men’s health, infections, and hematologic disorders, with explanations that are vague or based on inappropriate evidence/research. 17 to >0 pts Poor The response describes the patient symptoms in a manner that is vague and inaccurate, or the description is missing. … The response does not include explanations of the processes related to women’s and men’s health, infections, and hematologic disorders, or the explanations are vague or based on inappropriate evidence/research. |
25 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeExplain why inflammatory markers rise in STD/PID |
20 to >17.0 pts Excellent The response includes an accurate, complete, detailed, and specific analysis of the concepts and principles of pathophysiology across the life span and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. 17 to >15.0 pts Good The response includes an accurate explanation of how the highlighted processes interact to affect the patient and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. 15 to >13.0 pts Fair The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of how the highlighted processes interact to affect the patient, with explanations that are based on inappropriate evidence/research. 13 to >0 pts Poor The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of how the highlighted processes interact to affect the patient, with explanations that are based on inappropriate or missing evidence/research. |
20 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeExplain why prostatitis and infection happen. Also explain the causes of systemic reaction. |
20 to >17.0 pts Excellent The response includes an accurate, complete, detailed, and specific explanation of how the highlighted processes interact to affect the patient and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. 17 to >15.0 pts Good The response includes an accurate explanation of how the highlighted processes interact to affect the patient and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. 15 to >13.0 pts Fair The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of how the highlighted processes interact to affect the patient, with explanations that are based on inappropriate evidence/research. 13 to >0 pts Poor The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of how the highlighted processes interact to affect the patient, with explanations that are based on inappropriate or missing evidence/research. |
20 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeExplain why a patient would need a splenectomy after a diagnosis of ITP. |
10 to >4.0 pts Excellent The response includes an accurate, complete, detailed, and specific explanation of racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. 4 to >3.0 pts Good The response includes an accurate explanation of racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. 3 to >2.0 pts Fair The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning, and/or explanations are based on inappropriate evidence/research. 2 to >0 pts Poor The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning, or the explanations are based on inappropriate or no evidence/research. |
10 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeExplain anemia and the different kinds of anemia (i.e., micro and macrocytic). |
10 to >4.0 pts Excellent The response includes an accurate, complete, detailed, and specific explanation of racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. 4 to >3.0 pts Good The response includes an accurate explanation of racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. 3 to >2.0 pts Fair The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning, and/or explanations are based on inappropriate evidence/research. 2 to >0 pts Poor The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning, or the explanations are based on inappropriate or no evidence/research. |
10 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting – Paragraph Development and Organization: Paragraphs make clear points that support well-developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused—neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement and introduction are provided that delineate all required criteria. |
5 to >4.0 pts Excellent Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity. … A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion are provided that delineate all required criteria. 4 to >3.0 pts Good Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time. … The purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment are stated, yet are brief and not descriptive. 3 to >2.0 pts Fair Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%-79% of the time….The purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment are vague or off topic. 2 to >0 pts Poor Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time. … No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion were provided. |
5 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting – English Writing Standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation |
5 to >4.0 pts Excellent Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors. 4 to >3.0 pts Good Contains a few (1 or 2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. 3 to >2.0 pts Fair Contains several (3 or 4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. 2 to >0 pts Poor Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding. |
5 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting – The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, running heads, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list. |
5 to >4.0 pts Excellent Uses correct APA format with no errors. 4 to >3.0 pts Good Contains a few (1 or 2) APA format errors. 3 to >2.0 pts Fair Contains several (3 or 4) APA format errors. 2 to >0 pts Poor Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors. |
5 pts |
| Total Points: 100 |
