RUBRICFORETHICALDECISIONMAKINGPAPERWRITTENASSIGNMENT.

Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

Ministry of Education

University of Hail

College of Nursing

المملكة العربية السعودية

وزارة التعليم

جامـعـة حـائل

كلية التمريض

 
INTERDISCIPLINARY PROFESSIONAL ETHICS (NURS 523)

Rubric for Ethical Decision-making Paper – Written Assignment

 

Assessment Task Assessment Score
Rubric for Ethical Decision-making Paper – Written Assignment 10%

 

 

Student Name:  
Student ID:  
Date:  
Overall Grade:  

 

 

Assessment Rubric:

ITEM POOR

(0)

ACCEPTABLE

(0.5)

IDEAL

(1)

CLO STUDENT’S GRADE
1) Distinguishing the position of the protagonist (main character) in the scenario. Did not distinguish the position of the protagonist (main character in the scenario). Partially distinguished the position of the protagonist (main character in the scenario). Comprehensively distinguished the position of the protagonist (main character in the scenario). 1.1  
2) Identification of the ethical dimensions of the presenting case with respect to the protagonist (main character) in the scenario. Failed to identify any of the ethical dimensions of the presenting case with respect to the protagonist (main character) in the scenario Identified some of the ethical dimensions of the presenting case with respect to the protagonist (main character) in the scenario. Completely identified all of the ethical dimensions of the presenting case with respect to the protagonist (main character) in the scenario. 1.1  
3) Identification of the competing professional principles and values with respect to the protagonist (main character) in the scenario. Did not identify the competing professional principles and values with respect to the protagonist (main character) in the scenario. Partially identified some of the competing professional principles and values with respect to the protagonist (main character) in the scenario. Thoroughly identified all of the competing professional principles and values with respect to the protagonist (main character) in the scenario. 1.2, 1.3  
4) Distinguishing the position of at least one other professional in the scenario. Failed to distinguish the position of at least one other professional in the scenario. Partially distinguished the position of at least one other professional in the scenario. Comprehensively distinguished the position of the at least one other professional in the scenario. 1.1  
5) Analysis of the similarities and/or differences in the ethical principles which the other professional in the scenario would consider compared with the protagonist (main character). Provided no analysis of the similarities and/or differences in the ethical principles which the other professional in the scenario would consider compared with the protagonist (main character). Provided an analysis of either just the similarities or just the differences in the ethical principles which the other professional in the scenario would consider compared with the protagonist (main character). Provided an analysis of both the similarities and differences in the ethical principles which the other professional in the scenario would consider compared with the protagonist (main character). 2.1  
6) Utilization of a clearly identified ethical decision-making model to systematically explore the presenting situation. Did not utilize a clearly identified ethical decision-making model to systematically explore the presenting situation. Partially utilized a clearly identified ethical decision-making model to systematically explore the presenting situation. Completely utilized a clearly identified ethical decision-making model to systematically explore the presenting situation. 2.3  
7) Highlighting relevant steps of the process involved in the identified ethical decision-making model utilized to systematically explore the presenting situation. Failed to highlight the relevant steps of the process involved in the identified ethical decision-making model utilized to systematically explore the presenting situation. Highlighted some of the relevant steps of the process involved in the identified ethical decision making model utilized to systematically explore the presenting situation. Highlighted all of the relevant steps of the process involved in the identified ethical decision-making model utilized to systematically explore the presenting situation. 2.3  
8) Formulation of a justified final position consistent with professional practice Did not formulate a justified final position consistent with professional practice. Formulated a partially justified final position consistent with professional practice. Formulated a comprehensively justified final position consistent with professional practice. 2.3  
9) Composition of a well-structured, and grammatically correct ethical decision-making paper. Composed a poorly structured ethical decision-making paper with numerous grammatical errors. Composed a fairly-structured ethical decision-making paper with some grammatical errors. Composed a well-structured ethical decision-making paper free of grammatical errors. Not applicable  
10) Reference List Provided an insufficient number of references for the ethical decision-making paper assignment. Provided a reasonably sufficient number of references for the ethical decision-making paper assignment. Provided an extensive number of references for the ethical decision-making paper assignment. Not applicable  
TOTAL GRADE FROM A PERFECT SCORE OF 10  

 

Evaluator’s Name: ________________________________

Evaluator’s Signature: _______________________________

Page 2 of 4

  Accredited University by the ASIC on March 27, 2017   Accredited BSN Program by AHPGS on February 15, 2018
bottom of post
Scroll to Top