Code of Ethics is presented.
and Code of Ethics is presented. More evidence or rationale is needed.A discussion generally establishing the relationship of continuing education in nursing to competency, attitudes, knowledge, and the ANA Scope and Standards for Practice and Code of Ethics is presented. Some minor evidence or rationale is needed.A well-supported discussion clearly establishing the relationship of continuing education in nursing to competency, attitudes, knowledge, and the ANA Scope and Standards for Practice and Code of Ethics is presented. The discussion demonstrates insight into the importance of education to the nursing profession.Criteria 5Mandatory Continuing Education Nursing20.0A discussion of whether continuing nursing education should be mandatory is omitted.An incomplete summary of whether continuing nursing education should be mandatory is presented. The rationale and support for argument fail to support its claims.A summary of whether continuing nursing education should be mandatory is presented. The summary lacks some rationale or evidence-based support for the argument.A discussion of whether continuing nursing education should be mandatory is presented. Overall, rationale and evidence-based support for the argument is provided.A well-developed discussion of whether continuing nursing education should be mandatory is presented. Compelling rationale and evidence-based support for the argument is provided.Organization, Effectiveness, and Format20.0 Thesis Development and Purpose5.0Paper 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.Argument Logic and Construction5.0Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.Argument is orderly but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.Argument shows logical progression. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression
