Criterion High Distinction (HD) Distinction (DN) Credit (CR) Pass (PP) Fail (NN)
Identifies specialty area within health setting. 


(Relates to Criterion 1)

Specialty area has been identified

Specialty area has not been identified
Relevant research of a high level is used to identify an educational gap in the identified specialty area


(Relates to Criterion 1)

Education gap has been identified in a clear and succinct manner. Relevance to specialty area is very clear and well supported by evidence.

Demonstrates an advanced understanding of evidence-based research. 

High quality current primary research journal articles used. 

Education gap has been clearly identified and there are strong links shown to specialty area. 

Use of evidence-based research from journal articles and texts has been cited and supports arguments and claims well.

All resources used are current and relevant to the topic. 

Education gap has been identified and there are general links shown to the specialty area.

The majority of the evidence cited comes from journal articles although some articles may show only minor relevance to the topic. 

Education gap has been identified in a very general manner.

The resources used are mainly texts and there is limited use of journal articles that are evidence-based. 

The evidence used to support arguments and claims is not of a high level and lacks relevance to the chosen topic.

No clear discussion of the education gap has been demonstrated

The resources that have been chosen are inappropriate and failed to demonstrate an understanding of evidence-based research.

Literature is limited to non-academic material.

Analysis of the impact and implications of the educational gap 


(Relates to Criterion 2)

Analysis of the impact of the educational gap clearly explained. Existing and theoretical implications and ramifications have been discussed. High level evidence has been used to support arguments in a clear and relevant way There is discussion of the implications to health and outcomes using evidence to support arguments.  There is general discussion of the implications to health and outcomes. 

While evidence has been used to identify the education gap it has not been used in a specific way to support arguments regarding impacts and implications

There is little discussion of the implications to health and outcomes. The discussion of the implications is superficial and contains little detail or explanation. There is little use of evidence to support claims. Implications of the education gap have not been addressed.
Target audience clearly identified


(Relates to Criterion 3)

Target audience has been very clearly identified. A comprehensive list of specific criteria and identifiers have been used to describe the prospective audience Target audience has been clearly identified. There is use of specific criteria and identifiers used. Target audience has been identified with the use of general criteria and/or identifiers.  The target audience has been identified but there may be a lack of clarity regarding specifics of this group. Few criteria and/or identifiers have been given Target audience for the intervention has not been identified
Proposed education tool


(Relates to Criterion 3)

Education tool has been described and explained in a very clear and specific manner. Media type, presentation and specific message of the tool have been described in a clear and succinct fashion Education tool has been described and explained in a clear manner. 

Minor elements of the tool or the message may lack clarity

Education tool has been described and explained. Some elements may lack specific detail and/or message may not be described in a clear fashion Education tool has been described in a general way. There is little detail given. There may be a lack of clarity in the description of the proposed tool or in the explanation of the educational message the tool contains There is no clear explanation of the proposed education tool 
Academic writing


(Relates to Criterion 4)

The work is very clearly written and easy to read. The work has been correctly formatted and information is presented in a logical, easy to follow fashion. Difficult concepts have been presented in a concise, logical and understandable fashion. Only minor grammatical errors The student’s written response is clear and concise. Information is logically laid out and clearly expressed. There are few grammatical errors   It is clear and well written, however would benefit from further refinement. There may be minor instances where the work contains grammatical errors or is unclear. Sections of the work may lack a logical format Ability to communicate findings and knowledge at an acceptable standard. The work may contain instances of poor sentence structure, grammatical errors, lack of clarity or incorrect word usage. Ability to communicate findings and knowledge below an acceptable level. Sentence structure is poor, the work shows little organisation or logical layout; there are major grammatical errors.


Place Order

Don't hesitate - Save time and Excel

Assignmentsden brings you the best in custom paper writing! To get started, simply place an order and provide the details!

Place Order