Criteria
|
90-100%
Far Above Standards |
80-89%
Above Standards |
70-79%
Meets Standards |
60-69%
Below Standards |
< 60%
Well Below Standards |
Possible Points |
Communication with External Organizations |
9-10 Points
The two external organizations identified and the explanation of the communication between them and the UMUC Family Clinic are clearly appropriate and explained in detail using course vocabulary; demonstrates understanding of course concepts, analysis, and/or critical thinking. |
8 Points
The two external organizations identified and the explanation of the communication between them and the UMUC Family Clinic are appropriate and well explained using course vocabulary; demonstrates understanding of course concepts and critical thinking. |
7 Points
Two external organizations are identified and an explanation of the communication between them and the UMUC Family Clinic is provided.
|
6 Points
Two external organizations are not identified, or are incorrect; and/or explanation of the communication between them and the UMUC Family Clinic may lack demonstration of understanding of course concepts, analysis, and/or critical thinking. |
0-5 Points
Identification of external organizations and/or explanation of communication is incomplete or inadequate. |
15
|
Data and Data Flow |
27-30 Points
More than 5 data elements are correctly identified for each of the two external organizations; the direction of the data flow is appropriate to the case study; strongly demonstrates understanding of course concepts, analysis, and critical thinking. |
24-26 Points
At least 5 data elements are correctly identified for each of the two external organizations; the direction of the data flow is appropriate to the case study; demonstrates understanding of course concepts, analysis, and critical thinking. |
21-23 Points
At least 5 data elements are identified for each of the two external organizations; direction of the flow of data is appropriate to the case study. |
18-20 Points
Fewer than 5 data elements may be presented for each of the two external organizations; flow of data may be less than correct, or not appropriate to the case study.
|
0-17 Points
Data elements and flows are not presented or are not appropriate to the case study, or are otherwise inadequate. |
30 |
Data Interchange Standards |
18-20 Points
Two different data interchange standards are listed and explained, and are applicable to the case study,with complete explanations of the standards, what they require and why they are important. |
16-17 Points
At least one data interchange standard is explained, along with how it applies to the data interchange with both external organizations, is applicable to the case study, with a complete explanation of the standard, what it requires and why it is important. |
14-15 Points
At least one data interchange standard is explained, along with how it applies to the data interchange with both external organizations, is applicable to the case study, with an explanation of the standard, what it requires and why it is important. |
12-13 Points
At least one data interchange standard is explained, but how it applies to the data interchange with both external organizations or to the case study is incomplete; and/or explanation of the standard, what it requires and why it is important may be incomplete. |
0-11 Points
Data interchange standard is not identified, or explanation is severely lacking. |
20 |
Legal, Regulatory, and Ethical Considerations |
27-30 Points
Three legal, regulatory, or ethical considerations that would relate to the identified data exchanges are identified, with a convincing explanation of what needs to be done to ensure compliance with each; both legal/regulatory and ethical considerations are included; demonstrates understanding of course concepts, sophisticated analysis, and critical thinking. |
24-26 Points
Three legal, regulatory, or ethical considerations that would relate to the identified data exchanges are identified, with a good explanation of what needs to be done to ensure compliance with each; both legal/regulatory and ethical considerations are included; demonstrates understanding of course concepts, analysis, and critical thinking. |
21-23 Points
Three legal, regulatory, or ethical considerations that would relate to the identified data exchanges are identified, with an explanation of what needs to be done to ensure compliance with each is provided using course vocabulary and concepts; both legal/regulatory and ethical considerations are included.
|
18-20 Points
Fewer than three legal, regulatory, or ethical considerations are listed; they may not relate to the identified data exchanges; explanations may be incomplete; and/or may not address both legal/regulatory and ethical considerations; may be lacking in demonstration of understanding of course concepts, analysis, and/or critical thinking. |
0-17 Points
List and explanation of legal, regulatory, or ethical considerations may be very incomplete or missing.
|
30 |
External Research |
9-10 Points
More than one source other than the course material is incorporated and used effectively. Sources used are relevant and timely. References are appropriately incorporated and cited using APA style. |
8 Points
At least one source other than the course material is incorporated and used effectively. Source(s) used are relevant and timely. References are appropriately incorporated and cited using APA style. |
7 Points
At least one source other than the course material is incorporated correctly. Reference is cited using APA style. |
6 Points
A source other than the course material may be used, but is not properly incorporated or used; and/or is not effective or appropriate; and/or is not relevant or timely; and/or does not follow APA style for references and citations. |
0-5 Points
No external research is incorporated or reference listed is not cited within text. |
10 |
Report Format |
9-10 Points
Report is very well organized and is easy to read. Very few or no errors; demonstrates correct sentence structure, grammar, and spelling; written in third person and presented in a professional format. |
8 Points
Report reflects effective organization; may have a few errors in sentence structure, grammar, and spelling; written in third person and presented in a professional format. |
7 Points
Report is organized and may have some errors in sentence structure, grammar and spelling. Report is written in third person. |
6 Points
Report is not well organized, and/or contains several grammar and/or spelling errors; and/or report is not written in third person. |
0-5 Points
Report is extremely poorly written; and/or contains many grammar and/or spelling errors; and/or does not convey the information. |
10 |
|
|
|
|
|