Assignment 4

The final capstone project is a culmination of the written research-based assignments completed throughout the course. Each written assignment contributes to the final Evidenced-Based Proposal paper. This is the fourth written assignment.

Write a paper of 500-750 words in which you: 

  1. Disseminate evidence: Summarize plans for disseminating evidence.
  2. Include which professional organizations, conferences, journals, or employers you would present your findings to.
  3. Include one professional publication or conference in your dissemination plan and explain why you chose this professional venue over another. 

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

Running head: EVALUATION PLAN 1

EVALUATION PLAN 4

Top of FormDissemination of Evidence 1 Unsatisfactory 0.00%2 Less than Satisfactory 35.00%3 Satisfactory 75.00%4 Good 85.00%5 Excellent 100.00%70.0 %Content20.0 %Summary of Plan for Disseminating Evidence-Based Proposal, Including List of Various Venues for PresentationProblem is poorly or not described; no relevance to patient-care or quality of practice given; no correlated references.Solution is presented such that the reader cannot clearly see its correlation to or potential for impact on the problem; is vague or incomplete. Solution does not seem to be supported by the evidence that was previously submitted.Solution is presented such that the reader can see its correlation to the problem and how it might have the proposed impact. Solution is supported by the previously submitted evidence.Solution is presented such that the reader understands how it will likely have a positive impact. Solution is supported by the previously submitted evidence.Solution is presented such that the reader is convinced it is the best choice and will have the greatest impact. Solution is supported by the previously submitted evidence.20.0 %Identification of Specific Venue Chosen for Presentation, Including ExplanationPlan lacks identification of many necessary events, or they are poorly stated; sequence of events presented in the plan lacks logical order. Plan misses identification of many necessary resources.Plan lacks identification of some necessary events; sequence of events presented in the plan lacks some logical order; plan is somewhat vague or incomplete. Plan misses identification of some necessary resources.Plan clearly outlines necessary events in a logical sequence. Minimal acceptable details are provided and are mostly applicable to the subject. Plan identifies basic necessary resources.Plan outlines in detail all of the necessary events in a logical sequence; plan considers appropriate entities and organizations that must be included. Plan thoroughly identifies necessary resources.Plan outlines in detail all of the necessary events in a logical sequence; plan considers appropriate entities and organizations that must be included; plan considers hurdles to implementation and alternative strategies to implementation. Plan thoroughly identifies all necessary resources.20.0 %Description of Evaluation Plan, Including Evaluation Methods, Variables to Be Assessed, and Projected OutcomesPlan does not explain how the project will be evaluated; Anticipated outcomes are not identified or well-defined.Plan does not clearly explain how the project will be evaluated; Anticipated outcomes are identified but weakly defined; plan is somewhat vague or incomplete. Subject knowledge is unclear or inconsistent.Plan provides basic explanation of how the project will be evaluated as well as anticipated outcomes. Minimal acceptable details are provided and are mostly applicable to the subject. Some subject knowledge is evident.Plan explains in detail how the project will be evaluated as well as clearly states anticipated outcomes. Subject knowledge appears to be good.Plan explains in detail how all aspects of the project will be evaluated and its anticipated outcomes. Further, plan describes possible outcomes that may not be directly related to the initial intent of the project. Plan demonstrates thorough subject knowledge and understanding.10.0 %Research Sources (Sources are appropriate, relevant, etc. Also, sources meet assignment quantity and type specifications, including evidence-based resources.)Sources are not used or cited as required in the assignment instructions. Uses noncredible sources.Source relevance is vague or inconsistent. Does not include references from appropriate sources (e.g., evidenced-based resources).Source relevance is mostly applicable and appropriate. Includes references from appropriate sources (e.g., evidence-based resources).Source relevance is applicable and appropriate in all instances. Includes references from appropriate sources (e.g., evidence-based resources).Source relevance is applicable and appropriate in all instances as well as sparking interest in the reader to pursue further investigation. Includes references from appropriate sources (e.g., evidence-based resources).20.0 %Organization and Effectiveness7.0 %Thesis Development and PurposePaper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.20.0 %Organization and Effectiveness8.0 %Argument Logic and ConstructionStatement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent.Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic.Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.Argument shows logical progression. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion.Clear and convincing argument presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner.20.0 %Organization and Effectiveness5.0 %Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)Does not meet minimum assigned length; numerous errors in spelling, punctuation, and grammar; Inappropriate in three or more of the following: appearance of document (font size or style, use of white space, use of headings), tone, word choice, or sentence structure (incomplete sentences; run-on sentences; incorrect subject-verb agreement, etc.).Does not meet minimum assigned length; repeated specific types of errors in spelling, punctuation or grammar (e.g., paper consistently has subject-verb disagreement); Inappropriate in two of the following: appearance of document (font size or style, use of white space, use of headings), tone, word choice, or sentence structure.Meets assigned length criteria; Occasional errors in spelling, punctuation, and grammar; Inappropriate in one of the following: appearance of document (font size or style, use of white space, use of headings), tone, word choice, or sentence structure.Meets assigned length criteria; few errors in spelling, punctuation, and grammar; appropriate in all of the following: appearance of document (font size or style, use of white space, use of headings), tone, word choice, or sentence structure.Meets assigned length criteria; no major errors in spelling, punctuation, and grammar; professional appearance of document (font size or style, use of white space, use of headings), professional tone, word choice, and sentence structure; Uses headings to organize paper.10.0 %Format5.0 %Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)Template is not used appropriately, or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent.Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style.All format elements are correct.5.0 %Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)Sources are not documented.Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.100 %Total Weightage Bottom of Form