Assignment task: Module 2: Overview of EBP Process and Translation Instructions: As a DNP scholar, you are expected to perform an academic search of scholarly peer-review journal articles on a given topic. For this assignment, you will choose – EssayQuest

Module 2: Overview of EBP Process and Translation

Instructions:

As a DNP scholar, you are expected to perform an academic search of scholarly peer-review journal articles on a given topic. For this assignment, you will choose an article from a peer-review journal database, including but not limited to CINAHL, MEDLINE, Pub MED, NIH, Google Scholar, and AGM Virtual Library. Once you have your article, you will read and analyze the document and be able to answer the following questions:

1. What is the purpose of the study?

2. What type of methodology the researcher utilizes and why?

3. How do the results of the study contribute to the research question?

Use an Essay Format

· You must present your writing double-spaced, in a Times New Roman, Arial, or Courier New font, with a font size of 12.

· Pay attention to grammar rules (spelling and syntax).

· Your work must be original and not contain material copied from books or the internet.

· When citing the work of other authors, including citations and references, use APA style to respect their intellectual property and avoid plagiarism.

· Remember that your writing must have a header or a cover page that includes the name of the institution, the program, the course code, the title of the activity, your name and student number, and the assignment’s due date.

Contribute a minimum of 5 pages. It should include at least 2 academic sources, formatted and cited in APA.

Official Rubric for Case Study Rubric

– Official Rubric for Case Study Rubric
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCritical Thinking and Logical Reasoning Development of Ideas	40 to >36.0 ptsExcellentThe case study provided all basic and complex details are considered, and the situation, problem, or diagnosis is identified. Next, the thought process to present alternatives, solutions, or the required information is linked to the analysis. Finally, the student presents excellent evidence, arguments, or examples to support the alternatives, solutions, or the required information. 36 to >32.0 ptsGoodThe case study provided the most basic and complex details are considered, and the situation, problem, or diagnosis is identified. Next, the thought process to present alternatives, solutions, or the required information is linked to the analysis. Finally, the student presents good evidence, arguments, or examples to support the alternatives, solutions, or the required information. 32 to >28.0 ptsFairThe case study provided some basic and complex details, identifying the situation, problem, or diagnosis. Next, the thought process to present alternatives, solutions, or the required information is linked to the analysis. Finally, the student presents limited evidence, arguments, or examples to support the alternatives, solutions, or the required information. 28 to >24.0 ptsPoorThe case study provided only minimal details and lacked a clear identification of the situation, problem, or diagnosis. The thought process to present alternatives, solutions, or the required information is not linked to the analysis. Finally, the student presents weak or no evidence, arguments, or examples to support the alternatives, solutions, or the required information. 24 to >0 ptsUnacceptableThe assignment did not reflect the requested outcomes, was off-topic, and/or the assignment was not submitted.	40 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeContent Mastery	25 to >23.0 ptsExcellentThe response shows exemplary mastery of the theoretical concepts applicable to the situation, recognizing all basic and complex factors. Furthermore, based on the case study presented, the response exceeds the requested information. 23 to >20.0 ptsGoodThe response shows good mastery of the theoretical concepts applicable to the situation, recognizing the most basic and complex factors. Based on the situation presented, the response complies with the information requested. 20 to >18.0 ptsFairThe response shows fair mastery of the theoretical concepts applicable to the situation, recognizing the basic factors. However, based on the situation presented, the response minimally complies with the information requested. 18 to >15.0 ptsPoorThe response does not show mastery of the professional theoretical concepts applicable to the situation. Analysis misses many factors and details. The response does not comply with the information requested. 15 to >0 ptsUnacceptableThe assignment did not reflect the requested outcomes, was off-topic, and/or the assignment was not submitted.	25 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeInformation Literacy Quality of Resources	15 to >14.0 ptsExcellentSupporting information is pertinent to the topic, up to date (depending on what is acceptable in the field), from credible and trusted sources, and the number of sources meets the requested amount. 14 to >12.0 ptsGoodSupporting information is pertinent to the topic, however, 1 source is not a credible and trusted source; they may or may not be the most recent (depending on what is acceptable in the field). Additionally, the number of sources meets the requested amount. 12 to >11.0 ptsFairSupporting information is pertinent to the topic, however, 2 or more sources are not credible and trusted sources; they may or may not be the most recent (depending on what is acceptable in the field). Additionally, the number of sources meets the requested amount. 11 to >9.0 ptsPoorThe following criteria would apply, supporting information is not pertinent to the topic, none of the sources are from credible or trusted sources, or the number of sources requested was not met. 9 to >0 ptsUnacceptableResources did not reflect the requested outcomes, were off-topic, and/or the assignment was not submitted.	15 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWriting Mechanics, Grammar, and APA	10 to >9.0 ptsExcellentExcellence in grammar, spelling, and sentence structure. Sentences are not too long and are complete sentences. 9 to >8.0 ptsGoodMinimal (1 – 3) typos, spelling, grammatical, punctuation, or translation errors. 8 to >7.0 ptsFairMultiple (4 -7) typos, spelling, grammatical, punctuation, or translation errors. 7 to >6.0 ptsPoorSevere (8 – 10) typos, spelling, grammatical, punctuation, or translation errors. 6 to >0 ptsUnacceptableUnacceptable (11 or more) typos, spelling, grammatical, punctuation, or translation errors.	10 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFormat Organization and Presentation of Information	10 to >9.0 ptsExcellentThe document has a high level of professional appearance. Material is formatted exceptionally well, presented in a highly organized fashion, and aligned with assignment requirements. Includes sections and subtitles as required. 9 to >8.0 ptsGoodThe document has a good, professional appearance. Overall, the material is formatted and presented in an organized fashion, aligned with assignment requirements. Includes sections and subtitles as required. 8 to >7.0 ptsFairThe presentation of information does not appear professional or approaching proficiency. For example, the assignment missed required sections, subtitles, or other elements. 7 to >6.0 ptsPoorThe presentation of information lacks a clear demonstration of a professional appearance. The assignment is missing several required sections, subtitles, or other elements. 6 to >0 ptsUnacceptableThe assignment did not reflect the requested outcomes, was off-topic, and/or the assignment was not submitted.	10 pts

– Official Rubric for Case Study Rubric

Criteria

Ratings

Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCritical Thinking and Logical
Reasoning

Development of Ideas

40 to >36.0 ptsExcellentThe case study provided all basic
and complex details are considered, and the situation, problem, or diagnosis
is identified. Next, the thought process to present alternatives, solutions,
or the required information is linked to the analysis. Finally, the student
presents excellent evidence, arguments, or examples to support the
alternatives, solutions, or the required information.

36 to >32.0 ptsGoodThe case study provided the most
basic and complex details are considered, and the situation, problem, or
diagnosis is identified. Next, the thought process to present alternatives,
solutions, or the required information is linked to the analysis. Finally,
the student presents good evidence, arguments, or examples to support the
alternatives, solutions, or the required information.

32 to >28.0 ptsFairThe case study provided some basic
and complex details, identifying the situation, problem, or diagnosis. Next,
the thought process to present alternatives, solutions, or the required
information is linked to the analysis. Finally, the student presents limited
evidence, arguments, or examples to support the alternatives, solutions, or
the required information.

28 to >24.0 ptsPoorThe case study provided only minimal
details and lacked a clear identification of the situation, problem, or
diagnosis. The thought process to present alternatives, solutions, or the
required information is not linked to the analysis. Finally, the student
presents weak or no evidence, arguments, or examples to support the
alternatives, solutions, or the required information.

24 to >0 ptsUnacceptableThe assignment did not reflect the
requested outcomes, was off-topic, and/or the assignment was not submitted.

40 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeContent

Mastery

25 to >23.0 ptsExcellentThe response shows exemplary mastery
of the theoretical concepts applicable to the situation, recognizing all
basic and complex factors. Furthermore, based on the case study presented,
the response exceeds the requested information.

23 to >20.0 ptsGoodThe response shows good mastery of
the theoretical concepts applicable to the situation, recognizing the most
basic and complex factors. Based on the situation presented, the response
complies with the information requested.

20 to >18.0 ptsFairThe response shows fair mastery of
the theoretical concepts applicable to the situation, recognizing the basic
factors. However, based on the situation presented, the response minimally
complies with the information requested.

18 to >15.0 ptsPoorThe response does not show mastery
of the professional theoretical concepts applicable to the situation.
Analysis misses many factors and details. The response does not comply with
the information requested.

15 to >0 ptsUnacceptableThe assignment did not reflect the
requested outcomes, was off-topic, and/or the assignment was not submitted.

25 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeInformation Literacy

Quality of Resources

15 to >14.0 ptsExcellentSupporting information is pertinent
to the topic, up to date (depending on what is acceptable in the field), from
credible and trusted sources, and the number of sources meets the requested
amount.

14 to >12.0 ptsGoodSupporting information is pertinent
to the topic, however, 1 source is not a credible and trusted source; they may
or may not be the most recent (depending on what is acceptable in the field).
Additionally, the number of sources meets the requested amount.

12 to >11.0 ptsFairSupporting information is pertinent
to the topic, however, 2 or more sources are not credible and trusted
sources; they may or may not be the most recent (depending on what is
acceptable in the field). Additionally, the number of sources meets the
requested amount.

11 to >9.0 ptsPoorThe following criteria would apply,
supporting information is not pertinent to the topic, none of the sources are
from credible or trusted sources, or the number of sources requested was not
met.

9 to >0 ptsUnacceptableResources did not reflect the
requested outcomes, were off-topic, and/or the assignment was not submitted.

15 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWriting

Mechanics, Grammar, and APA

10 to >9.0 ptsExcellentExcellence in grammar, spelling, and
sentence structure. Sentences are not too long and are complete sentences.

9 to >8.0 ptsGoodMinimal (1 – 3) typos, spelling,
grammatical, punctuation, or translation errors.

8 to >7.0 ptsFairMultiple (4 -7) typos, spelling,
grammatical, punctuation, or translation errors.

7 to >6.0 ptsPoorSevere (8 – 10) typos, spelling,
grammatical, punctuation, or translation errors.

6 to >0 ptsUnacceptableUnacceptable (11 or more) typos,
spelling, grammatical, punctuation, or translation errors.

10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFormat

Organization and Presentation of Information

10 to >9.0 ptsExcellentThe document has a high level of
professional appearance. Material is formatted exceptionally well, presented
in a highly organized fashion, and aligned with assignment requirements.
Includes sections and subtitles as required.

9 to >8.0 ptsGoodThe document has a good,
professional appearance. Overall, the material is formatted and presented in
an organized fashion, aligned with assignment requirements. Includes sections
and subtitles as required.

8 to >7.0 ptsFairThe presentation of information does
not appear professional or approaching proficiency. For example, the
assignment missed required sections, subtitles, or other elements.

7 to >6.0 ptsPoorThe presentation of information
lacks a clear demonstration of a professional appearance. The assignment is
missing several required sections, subtitles, or other elements.

6 to >0 ptsUnacceptableThe assignment did not reflect the
requested outcomes, was off-topic, and/or the assignment was not submitted.

10 pts

Total Points: 100

📋 Table of Contents