[Solved] WEEK 6 MODULE DATA ANALYSIS

Assignment Prompt & Instructions

**Data Analysis**

**Assigned Runric must be use**

**files (3)**

– ## miisingassignment.docx

– ## Module5Assignment-RUBRIC.docx

– Assignment_Week_5.docx

**## miisingassignment.docx**

**1. You DID NOT answer the actual dataset questions**

**❌ Missing:**

· Mean for each variable (age, pre-test, post-test, etc.)

· Standard deviation values

· Interpretation of YOUR dataset

**✅ What YOU need to add:**

Write a paragraph that says:

· “The mean of ___ was…”

· “The standard deviation was…”

· “This means…”

👉 Right now, you
**talk about statistics**, but you don’t
**use them on the data**.

**2. No direct discussion SPSS output**

The assignment specifically says to evaluate your SPSS findings.

**❌ Missing:**

· No mention of what YOU saw in SPSS

· No interpretation of your outputs

**✅ Add:**

· What did SPSS show you?

· Any trends?

· Any surprises?

**3. “What other metrics SPSS offers?”**

You mention software, but not
**specific outputs**.

**❌ Missing:**

· Frequencies

· Graphs

· Correlations

· Confidence intervals

**✅ Add:**

A short paragraph like:

· “SPSS also provides… which helps by…”

**4. T-test explanation is TOO generic**

You explain what it is—but not clearly tied to YOUR data.

**❌ Missing:**

· Why a
**paired t-test specifically**

· Connection to
**pre vs post scores**

**✅ Add:**

· “This dataset would use a paired t-test because…”

· “It compares the same participants…”

**5. No discussion of NORMAL DISTRIBUTION**

The assignment asks:

Did it fall into a normal distribution?

**❌ Missing:**

· No mention of distribution at all

**✅ Add:**

· Are scores spread out or clustered?

· Any outliers?

· Does it
_look_ normal?

**6. No connection back to YOUR DNP project (SDSCA)**

You briefly mention it—but not strongly.

**❌ Missing:**

· Clear link between THIS assignment and YOUR project

**✅ Add:**

· “In my SDSCA project, I would use these same methods to…”

👉 This is what makes it
**DNP-level (not just homework)**

**7. Appendix is COMPLETELY missing**

This is a
**BIG point loss**.

**❌ Missing:**

· Descriptive stats screenshot

· Frequencies screenshot

· Graph screenshot

**✅ You MUST include:**

· Appendix A

· Appendix B

· Appendix C

**## Module5Assignment-RUBRIC.docx**

4/6/26, 1:46 AM Preview Rubric: Graduate Simple Essay Rubric v1 – DNP860 Sect1 Evidence-Based Practice for Quality Improvement – Aspen University Classroom

4/6/26, 1:46 AM Preview Rubric: Graduate Simple Essay Rubric v1 – DNP860 Sect1 Evidence-Based Practice for Quality Improvement – Aspen University Classroom

Graduate Simple Essay Rubric v1

Course: DNP860 Sect1 Evidence-Based Practice for Quality Improvement

Criteria

**Does Not Meet 0%**

**Approaches 70%**

**Meets 80%**

**Exceeds 100%**

**Criterion Score**

Content Weight:

30

%

/ 30

0

points

Topic is inappropri

–

ate to assignment,

inaccurate under

–

standing of con

–

cepts, unclear and

difficult to under

–

stand; does not ad

–

dress many assign

–

ment requirements.

Information has

weak or no connec

–

tion to the assign

–

ment topic.

21

points

Topic is mostly cov

–

ered and appropri

–

ate to assignment,

but does not ade

–

quately demonstrate

accurate under

–

standing of con

–

cepts; mostly clear

and understandable;

lacks some of the

requirements of the

assignment descrip

–

tion and/or provides

little detail;

Information relates

to the main topic,

but few details

and/or examples are

given.

points

24

Topic is covered

completely and ap

–

propriate to assign

–

ment; overview of

key concept dimen

–

sions is evident;

clear and under

–

standable; ad

–

dresses all of the re

–

quirements of the

assignment descrip

–

tion, with adequate

attention to detail.

30

points

In-depth coverage

of topic; outstand

–

ing clarity and ex

–

planation of con

–

cepts demonstrated

in information pre

–

sented; approaches

assignment with

depth and breadth,

without redundancy,

using clear and fo

–

cused details.

| | | | | | |
| — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Organization<br>Weight: 25% | 0 points<br>Organization is confusing and interferes with reader’s ability to follow ideas.<br>Weak or no introduction of topic or purpose is unclear, weak, or missing. Conclusion lacks a summary of topic, or is missing or irrelevant. | 17.5 points<br>Ideas are sometimes disorganized or irrelevant; Flow is sometimes choppy; somewhat clear organization. Basic introduction that states topic but is presented in an uninteresting way. Conclusion contains basic summary of topic without final concluding ideas, may inappropriately introduces new information. | 20 points<br>Structures ideas in a coherent, organized order that has good flow and an obvious framework.<br>Proficient introduction that is interesting and states topic. Conclusion contains good summary of topic with credible concluding ideas and introduces no new information. | 25 points<br>Exceptionally clear, logical, mature, and thorough organization permitting smooth flow of ideas; Introduction that grabs interest of reader and states topic in clear, unambiguous terms.<br>Excellent concluding summary with succinct and precise ideas that impact reader. | / 25 |
| Logic/Argument<br>Weight: 15% | 0 points<br>Demonstrates little logical reasoning for the claims and thoughts within assignment; Many claims are weak or illogical. | 10.5 points<br>Lacks some logical reasoning for the claims and thoughts within the assignment; Some claims are weak. | 12 points<br>Uses solid logical reasoning for the claims and thoughts within the assignment. | 15 points<br>Provides exemplary logical reasoning for the claims and thoughts within the assignment. | / 15 |

| | | | | | |
| — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Support Weight:<br>20% | 0 points<br>Lacks support; Uses poor sources for references; Citations lack credibility, relevance, or academic quality or are not current; Does not meet the minimum number of required citations in assignment description.<br>APA format and style are not evident. | 14 points<br>Provides weak support or not enough support; Citations are not consistently credible, current, relevant or academic; Meets the minimum number of required citations in assignment description Missing APA elements; in-text citations, where necessary, are used but formatted inaccurately and not referenced. | 16 points<br>Provides sufficient support with credible, current, relevant academic citations; Meets the minimum number of required citations in assignment description. ; In-text citations and a reference page are present with few format errors. Mechanics of writing are reflective of APA style. | 20 points<br>Provides very strong support from credible, current, relevant, academic citations; Meets or exceeds the minimum number of required citations in assignment description.<br>Accurate citations and references are presented. No APA errors are evident. | / 20 |

Total

/ 100

Quality of

Written

Communication

Weight: 10%

/ 10

0

points

Style and voice inap

–

propriate or do not

address given audi

–

ence, purpose, etc.

Word choice is ex

–

cessively redundant,

clichéd, and unspe

–

cific. Inconsistent

grammar, spelling,

punctuation, and

paragraphing.

Surface errors are

pervasive enough

that they impede

communication of

meaning.

points

7

Style and voice are

somewhat appropri

–

ate to given audi

–

ence and purpose.

Word choice is of

–

ten unspecific,

generic, redundant,

and clichéd.

Repetitive mechani

–

cal errors distract

the reader.

Inconsistencies in

language, sentence

structure, and/or

word choice are

present.

8

points

Style and voice are

appropriate to the

given audience and

purpose. Word

choice is specific

and purposeful, and

somewhat varied

throughout. Minimal

mechanical or typo

–

graphical errors are

present, but are not

overly distracting to

the reader. Correct

sentence structure

and audience-appro

–

priate language are

used.

points

10

Style and voice are

not only appropriate

to the given audi

–

ence and purpose,

but also show origi

–

nality and creativity.

Word choice is spe

–

cific, purposeful, dy

–

namic and varied.

Free of mechanical

and typographical

errors. A variety of

sentence structures

and effective figures

of speech are used.

Writer is clearly in

command of stan

–

dard, written, aca

–

demic English.

4/6/26, 1:46 AM Preview Rubric: Graduate Simple Essay Rubric v1 – DNP860 Sect1 Evidence-Based Practice for Quality Improvement – Aspen University Classroom

Criteria

**Does Not Meet 0%**

**Approaches 70%**

**Meets 80%**

**Exceeds 100%**

**Criterion Score**

Criteria

**Does Not Meet 0%**

**Approaches 70%**

**Meets 80%**

**Exceeds 100%**

**Criterion Score**

1/5

https://classroom.aspen.edu/d2l/le/content/118315/viewContent/6269459/View 1/5

1/5

**Overall Score**

**Level 1**

0

points minimum

**Level 2**

70

points minimum

**Level 3**

80

points minimum

**Level 4**

100

points minimum

https://classroom.aspen.edu/d2l/le/content/118315/viewContent/6269459/View 1/5

https://classroom.aspen.edu/d2l/le/content/118315/viewContent/6269459/View 1/5

**Assignment_Week_5.docx**

This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/assignment-week-5-docx-10532515)

**Assignment_Week_5.docx**

This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/assignment-week-5-docx-10532515)

**## miisingassignment.docx**

**1. You DID NOT answer the actual dataset questions**

**❌ Missing:**

· Mean for each variable (age, pre-test, post-test, etc.)

· Standard deviation values

· Interpretation of YOUR dataset

**✅ What YOU need to add:**

Write a paragraph that says:

· “The mean of ___ was…”

· “The standard deviation was…”

· “This means…”

👉 Right now, you
**talk about statistics**, but you don’t
**use them on the data**.

**2. No direct discussion SPSS output**

The assignment specifically says to evaluate your SPSS findings.

**❌ Missing:**

· No mention of what YOU saw in SPSS

· No interpretation of your outputs

**✅ Add:**

· What did SPSS show you?

· Any trends?

· Any surprises?

**3. “What other metrics SPSS offers?”**

You mention software, but not
**specific outputs**.

**❌ Missing:**

· Frequencies

· Graphs

· Correlations

· Confidence intervals

**✅ Add:**

A short paragraph like:

· “SPSS also provides… which helps by…”

**4. T-test explanation is TOO generic**

You explain what it is—but not clearly tied to YOUR data.

**❌ Missing:**

· Why a
**paired t-test specifically**

· Connection to
**pre vs post scores**

**✅ Add:**

· “This dataset would use a paired t-test because…”

· “It compares the same participants…”

**5. No discussion of NORMAL DISTRIBUTION**

The assignment asks:

Did it fall into a normal distribution?

**❌ Missing:**

· No mention of distribution at all

**✅ Add:**

· Are scores spread out or clustered?

· Any outliers?

· Does it
_look_ normal?

**6. No connection back to YOUR DNP project (SDSCA)**

You briefly mention it—but not strongly.

**❌ Missing:**

· Clear link between THIS assignment and YOUR project

**✅ Add:**

· “In my SDSCA project, I would use these same methods to…”

👉 This is what makes it
**DNP-level (not just homework)**

**7. Appendix is COMPLETELY missing**

This is a
**BIG point loss**.

**❌ Missing:**

· Descriptive stats screenshot

· Frequencies screenshot

· Graph screenshot

**✅ You MUST include:**

· Appendix A

· Appendix B

· Appendix C

**## Module5Assignment-RUBRIC.docx**

4/6/26, 1:46 AM Preview Rubric: Graduate Simple Essay Rubric v1 – DNP860 Sect1 Evidence-Based Practice for Quality Improvement – Aspen University Classroom

4/6/26, 1:46 AM Preview Rubric: Graduate Simple Essay Rubric v1 – DNP860 Sect1 Evidence-Based Practice for Quality Improvement – Aspen University Classroom

Graduate Simple Essay Rubric v1

Course: DNP860 Sect1 Evidence-Based Practice for Quality Improvement

Criteria

**Does Not Meet 0%**

**Approaches 70%**

**Meets 80%**

**Exceeds 100%**

**Criterion Score**

Content Weight:

30

%

/ 30

0

points

Topic is inappropri

–

ate to assignment,

inaccurate under

–

standing of con

–

cepts, unclear and

difficult to under

–

stand; does not ad

–

dress many assign

–

ment requirements.

Information has

weak or no connec

–

tion to the assign

–

ment topic.

21

points

Topic is mostly cov

–

ered and appropri

–

ate to assignment,

but does not ade

–

quately demonstrate

accurate under

–

standing of con

–

cepts; mostly clear

and understandable;

lacks some of the

requirements of the

assignment descrip

–

tion and/or provides

little detail;

Information relates

to the main topic,

but few details

and/or examples are

given.

points

24

Topic is covered

completely and ap

–

propriate to assign

–

ment; overview of

key concept dimen

–

sions is evident;

clear and under

–

standable; ad

–

dresses all of the re

–

quirements of the

assignment descrip

–

tion, with adequate

attention to detail.

30

points

In-depth coverage

of topic; outstand

–

ing clarity and ex

–

planation of con

–

cepts demonstrated

in information pre

–

sented; approaches

assignment with

depth and breadth,

without redundancy,

using clear and fo

–

cused details.

| | | | | | |
| — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Organization<br>Weight: 25% | 0 points<br>Organization is confusing and interferes with reader’s ability to follow ideas.<br>Weak or no introduction of topic or purpose is unclear, weak, or missing. Conclusion lacks a summary of topic, or is missing or irrelevant. | 17.5 points<br>Ideas are sometimes disorganized or irrelevant; Flow is sometimes choppy; somewhat clear organization. Basic introduction that states topic but is presented in an uninteresting way. Conclusion contains basic summary of topic without final concluding ideas, may inappropriately introduces new information. | 20 points<br>Structures ideas in a coherent, organized order that has good flow and an obvious framework.<br>Proficient introduction that is interesting and states topic. Conclusion contains good summary of topic with credible concluding ideas and introduces no new information. | 25 points<br>Exceptionally clear, logical, mature, and thorough organization permitting smooth flow of ideas; Introduction that grabs interest of reader and states topic in clear, unambiguous terms.<br>Excellent concluding summary with succinct and precise ideas that impact reader. | / 25 |
| Logic/Argument<br>Weight: 15% | 0 points<br>Demonstrates little logical reasoning for the claims and thoughts within assignment; Many claims are weak or illogical. | 10.5 points<br>Lacks some logical reasoning for the claims and thoughts within the assignment; Some claims are weak. | 12 points<br>Uses solid logical reasoning for the claims and thoughts within the assignment. | 15 points<br>Provides exemplary logical reasoning for the claims and thoughts within the assignment. | / 15 |

| | | | | | |
| — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Support Weight:<br>20% | 0 points<br>Lacks support; Uses poor sources for references; Citations lack credibility, relevance, or academic quality or are not current; Does not meet the minimum number of required citations in assignment description.<br>APA format and style are not evident. | 14 points<br>Provides weak support or not enough support; Citations are not consistently credible, current, relevant or academic; Meets the minimum number of required citations in assignment description Missing APA elements; in-text citations, where necessary, are used but formatted inaccurately and not referenced. | 16 points<br>Provides sufficient support with credible, current, relevant academic citations; Meets the minimum number of required citations in assignment description. ; In-text citations and a reference page are present with few format errors. Mechanics of writing are reflective of APA style. | 20 points<br>Provides very strong support from credible, current, relevant, academic citations; Meets or exceeds the minimum number of required citations in assignment description.<br>Accurate citations and references are presented. No APA errors are evident. | / 20 |

Total

/ 100

Quality of

Written

Communication

Weight: 10%

/ 10

0

points

Style and voice inap

–

propriate or do not

address given audi

–

ence, purpose, etc.

Word choice is ex

–

cessively redundant,

clichéd, and unspe

–

cific. Inconsistent

grammar, spelling,

punctuation, and

paragraphing.

Surface errors are

pervasive enough

that they impede

communication of

meaning.

points

7

Style and voice are

somewhat appropri

–

ate to given audi

–

ence and purpose.

Word choice is of

–

ten unspecific,

generic, redundant,

and clichéd.

Repetitive mechani

–

cal errors distract

the reader.

Inconsistencies in

language, sentence

structure, and/or

word choice are

present.

8

points

Style and voice are

appropriate to the

given audience and

purpose. Word

choice is specific

and purposeful, and

somewhat varied

throughout. Minimal

mechanical or typo

–

graphical errors are

present, but are not

overly distracting to

the reader. Correct

sentence structure

and audience-appro

–

priate language are

used.

points

10

Style and voice are

not only appropriate

to the given audi

–

ence and purpose,

but also show origi

–

nality and creativity.

Word choice is spe

–

cific, purposeful, dy

–

namic and varied.

Free of mechanical

and typographical

errors. A variety of

sentence structures

and effective figures

of speech are used.

Writer is clearly in

command of stan

–

dard, written, aca

–

demic English.

4/6/26, 1:46 AM Preview Rubric: Graduate Simple Essay Rubric v1 – DNP860 Sect1 Evidence-Based Practice for Quality Improvement – Aspen University Classroom

Criteria

**Does Not Meet 0%**

**Approaches 70%**

**Meets 80%**

**Exceeds 100%**

**Criterion Score**

Criteria

**Does Not Meet 0%**

**Approaches 70%**

**Meets 80%**

**Exceeds 100%**

**Criterion Score**

1/5

https://classroom.aspen.edu/d2l/le/content/118315/viewContent/6269459/View 1/5

1/5

**Overall Score**

**Level 1**

0

points minimum

**Level 2**

70

points minimum

**Level 3**

80

points minimum

**Level 4**

100

points minimum

https://classroom.aspen.edu/d2l/le/content/118315/viewContent/6269459/View 1/5

https://classroom.aspen.edu/d2l/le/content/118315/viewContent/6269459/View 1/5

**Assignment_Week_5.docx**

This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/assignment-week-5-docx-10532515)

**## miisingassignment.docx**

**1. You DID NOT answer the actual dataset questions**

**❌ Missing:**

· Mean for each variable (age, pre-test, post-test, etc.)

· Standard deviation values

· Interpretation of YOUR dataset

**✅ What YOU need to add:**

Write a paragraph that says:

· “The mean of ___ was…”

· “The standard deviation was…”

· “This means…”

👉 Right now, you
**talk about statistics**, but you don’t
**use them on the data**.

**2. No direct discussion SPSS output**

The assignment specifically says to evaluate your SPSS findings.

**❌ Missing:**

· No mention of what YOU saw in SPSS

· No interpretation of your outputs

**✅ Add:**

· What did SPSS show you?

· Any trends?

· Any surprises?

**3. “What other metrics SPSS offers?”**

You mention software, but not
**specific outputs**.

**❌ Missing:**

· Frequencies

· Graphs

· Correlations

· Confidence intervals

**✅ Add:**

A short paragraph like:

· “SPSS also provides… which helps by…”

**4. T-test explanation is TOO generic**

You explain what it is—but not clearly tied to YOUR data.

**❌ Missing:**

· Why a
**paired t-test specifically**

· Connection to
**pre vs post scores**

**✅ Add:**

· “This dataset would use a paired t-test because…”

· “It compares the same participants…”

**5. No discussion of NORMAL DISTRIBUTION**

The assignment asks:

Did it fall into a normal distribution?

**❌ Missing:**

· No mention of distribution at all

**✅ Add:**

· Are scores spread out or clustered?

· Any outliers?

· Does it
_look_ normal?

**6. No connection back to YOUR DNP project (SDSCA)**

You briefly mention it—but not strongly.

**❌ Missing:**

· Clear link between THIS assignment and YOUR project

**✅ Add:**

· “In my SDSCA project, I would use these same methods to…”

👉 This is what makes it
**DNP-level (not just homework)**

**7. Appendix is COMPLETELY missing**

This is a
**BIG point loss**.

**❌ Missing:**

· Descriptive stats screenshot

· Frequencies screenshot

· Graph screenshot

**✅ You MUST include:**

· Appendix A

· Appendix B

· Appendix C

**## Module5Assignment-RUBRIC.docx**

4/6/26, 1:46 AM Preview Rubric: Graduate Simple Essay Rubric v1 – DNP860 Sect1 Evidence-Based Practice for Quality Improvement – Aspen University Classroom

4/6/26, 1:46 AM Preview Rubric: Graduate Simple Essay Rubric v1 – DNP860 Sect1 Evidence-Based Practice for Quality Improvement – Aspen University Classroom

Graduate Simple Essay Rubric v1

Course: DNP860 Sect1 Evidence-Based Practice for Quality Improvement

Criteria

**Does Not Meet 0%**

**Approaches 70%**

**Meets 80%**

**Exceeds 100%**

**Criterion Score**

Content Weight:

30

%

/ 30

0

points

Topic is inappropri

–

ate to assignment,

inaccurate under

–

standing of con

–

cepts, unclear and

difficult to under

–

stand; does not ad

–

dress many assign

–

ment requirements.

Information has

weak or no connec

–

tion to the assign

–

ment topic.

21

points

Topic is mostly cov

–

ered and appropri

–

ate to assignment,

but does not ade

–

quately demonstrate

accurate under

–

standing of con

–

cepts; mostly clear

and understandable;

lacks some of the

requirements of the

assignment descrip

–

tion and/or provides

little detail;

Information relates

to the main topic,

but few details

and/or examples are

given.

points

24

Topic is covered

completely and ap

–

propriate to assign

–

ment; overview of

key concept dimen

–

sions is evident;

clear and under

–

standable; ad

–

dresses all of the re

–

quirements of the

assignment descrip

–

tion, with adequate

attention to detail.

30

points

In-depth coverage

of topic; outstand

–

ing clarity and ex

–

planation of con

–

cepts demonstrated

in information pre

–

sented; approaches

assignment with

depth and breadth,

without redundancy,

using clear and fo

–

cused details.

| | | | | | |
| — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Organization<br>Weight: 25% | 0 points<br>Organization is confusing and interferes with reader’s ability to follow ideas.<br>Weak or no introduction of topic or purpose is unclear, weak, or missing. Conclusion lacks a summary of topic, or is missing or irrelevant. | 17.5 points<br>Ideas are sometimes disorganized or irrelevant; Flow is sometimes choppy; somewhat clear organization. Basic introduction that states topic but is presented in an uninteresting way. Conclusion contains basic summary of topic without final concluding ideas, may inappropriately introduces new information. | 20 points<br>Structures ideas in a coherent, organized order that has good flow and an obvious framework.<br>Proficient introduction that is interesting and states topic. Conclusion contains good summary of topic with credible concluding ideas and introduces no new information. | 25 points<br>Exceptionally clear, logical, mature, and thorough organization permitting smooth flow of ideas; Introduction that grabs interest of reader and states topic in clear, unambiguous terms.<br>Excellent concluding summary with succinct and precise ideas that impact reader. | / 25 |
| Logic/Argument<br>Weight: 15% | 0 points<br>Demonstrates little logical reasoning for the claims and thoughts within assignment; Many claims are weak or illogical. | 10.5 points<br>Lacks some logical reasoning for the claims and thoughts within the assignment; Some claims are weak. | 12 points<br>Uses solid logical reasoning for the claims and thoughts within the assignment. | 15 points<br>Provides exemplary logical reasoning for the claims and thoughts within the assignment. | / 15 |

| | | | | | |
| — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Support Weight:<br>20% | 0 points<br>Lacks support; Uses poor sources for references; Citations lack credibility, relevance, or academic quality or are not current; Does not meet the minimum number of required citations in assignment description.<br>APA format and style are not evident. | 14 points<br>Provides weak support or not enough support; Citations are not consistently credible, current, relevant or academic; Meets the minimum number of required citations in assignment description Missing APA elements; in-text citations, where necessary, are used but formatted inaccurately and not referenced. | 16 points<br>Provides sufficient support with credible, current, relevant academic citations; Meets the minimum number of required citations in assignment description. ; In-text citations and a reference page are present with few format errors. Mechanics of writing are reflective of APA style. | 20 points<br>Provides very strong support from credible, current, relevant, academic citations; Meets or exceeds the minimum number of required citations in assignment description.<br>Accurate citations and references are presented. No APA errors are evident. | / 20 |

Total

/ 100

Quality of

Written

Communication

Weight: 10%

/ 10

0

points

Style and voice inap

–

propriate or do not

address given audi

–

ence, purpose, etc.

Word choice is ex

–

cessively redundant,

clichéd, and unspe

–

cific. Inconsistent

grammar, spelling,

punctuation, and

paragraphing.

Surface errors are

pervasive enough

that they impede

communication of

meaning.

points

7

Style and voice are

somewhat appropri

–

ate to given audi

–

ence and purpose.

Word choice is of

–

ten unspecific,

generic, redundant,

and clichéd.

Repetitive mechani

–

cal errors distract

the reader.

Inconsistencies in

language, sentence

structure, and/or

word choice are

present.

8

points

Style and voice are

appropriate to the

given audience and

purpose. Word

choice is specific

and purposeful, and

somewhat varied

throughout. Minimal

mechanical or typo

–

graphical errors are

present, but are not

overly distracting to

the reader. Correct

sentence structure

and audience-appro

–

priate language are

used.

points

10

Style and voice are

not only appropriate

to the given audi

–

ence and purpose,

but also show origi

–

nality and creativity.

Word choice is spe

–

cific, purposeful, dy

–

namic and varied.

Free of mechanical

and typographical

errors. A variety of

sentence structures

and effective figures

of speech are used.

Writer is clearly in

command of stan

–

dard, written, aca

–

demic English.

4/6/26, 1:46 AM Preview Rubric: Graduate Simple Essay Rubric v1 – DNP860 Sect1 Evidence-Based Practice for Quality Improvement – Aspen University Classroom

Criteria

**Does Not Meet 0%**

**Approaches 70%**

**Meets 80%**

**Exceeds 100%**

**Criterion Score**

Criteria

**Does Not Meet 0%**

**Approaches 70%**

**Meets 80%**

**Exceeds 100%**

**Criterion Score**

1/5

https://classroom.aspen.edu/d2l/le/content/118315/viewContent/6269459/View 1/5

1/5

**Overall Score**

**Level 1**

0

points minimum

**Level 2**

70

points minimum

**Level 3**

80

points minimum

**Level 4**

100

points minimum

https://classroom.aspen.edu/d2l/le/content/118315/viewContent/6269459/View 1/5

https://classroom.aspen.edu/d2l/le/content/118315/viewContent/6269459/View 1/5

**Assignment_Week_5.docx**

This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/assignment-week-5-docx-10532515)