# benchmark assignment 6

Last Updated on 08/11/2021 by Sophia

Benchmark Assignment: Applying Theory to a Practice Problem: Part 3: Application of Borrowed Theory to Problem and Conclusion

PURPOSE:

It is important to understand how borrowed theory can help you in your everyday environment as a nurse. In the previous assignment, you identified a practical problem that emerged from the evidence in the extant literature or professional practice, and you explored how middle-range theory could be applied to solve the problem. In this assignment, you will explore and apply borrowed theory to solve the specific problem that you identified previously, and you will synthesize the applications of the middle-range theory and the borrowed theory into the most appropriate solution to the problem.

DIRECTIONS:

Consider the problem that you described in the previous assignments and the instructor feedback about those assignments.

Write a paper (1,750 to 2,000 words) that describes how borrowed theory can be applied to the identified problem. The paper should include the following:

1. A brief summary of the problem including the potential middle-range theory that could be applied.
2. A description of a borrowed theory that could be applied to the problem. Is this borrowed theory appropriate to your identified problem?
3. A brief history of the borrowed theory’s origins.
4. A discussion of how the borrowed theory has been previously applied.
5. A discussion of the application of the borrowed theory to the identified problem. How would your practice change by incorporating this theory?
6. A discussion of how application of both the borrowed theory and the middle-range theory can be integrated to create the most appropriate solution to the identified problem.

RUBRIC ATTACHED BELOW—-PLEASE LOOK AT PREVIOUS ASSIGNMENTS WE WORKED ON

Benchmark Assignment: Applying Theory to a Practice Problem: Part 3: Application of Borrowed Theory to Problem and Conclusion

1
Unsatisfactory
0.00%

2
Less Than Satisfactory
80.00%

3
Satisfactory
88.00%

4
Good
92.00%

5
Excellent
100.00%

70.0 %Content

5.0 %Summary of the problem including the potential middle-range theory that could be applied

A summary of the problem including the potential middle-range theory that could be applied is either missing or not evident to the reader.

A summary of the problem including the potential middle-range theory that could be applied is present, but incomplete or inaccurate.

A summary of the problem including the potential middle-range theory that could be applied is presented but is disjointed. The research cited is outdated.

A summary of the problem including the potential middle-range theory that could be applied is thoroughly presented and includes all necessary elements. Some research cited in is outdated.

A summary of the problem including the potential middle-range theory that could be applied is thoroughly presented with rich detail and includes all necessary elements.

5.0 %Description of a borrowed theory that could be applied to the problem

A description of a borrowed theory that could be applied to the problem is either missing or not evident to the reader.

A description of a borrowed theory that could be applied to the problem is present, but incomplete or inaccurate.

A description of a borrowed theory that could be applied to the problem is presented, but is cursory and lacking in depth. The research cited in the definition is outdated.

A description of a borrowed theory that could be applied to the problem is thoroughly presented and includes all necessary elements. Some research cited in the definition is outdated.

A description of a borrowed theory that could be applied to the problem is thoroughly presented with rich detail and includes all necessary elements.

15.0 %A history of the borrowed theory’s origins

A history of the borrowed theory’s origins is either missing or not evident to the reader.

A history of the borrowed theory’s origins is present, but incomplete or inaccurate.

A history of the borrowed theory’s origins is present, but cursory. The research used for support is outdated.

A history of the borrowed theory’s origins is present and thorough. The description is moderately well supported though some sources of support are outdated.

A history of the borrowed theory’s origins is present, thorough, and well-detailed. The description is well supported with current and/or seminal research.

15.0 %Discussion of how the borrowed theory has been previously applied

A discussion of how the borrowed theory has been previously applied is either missing or not evident to the reader.

A discussion of how the borrowed theory has been previously applied is present, but incomplete or inaccurate.

A discussion of how the borrowed theory has been previously applied is present, but cursory. The research used for support is outdated.

A discussion of how the borrowed theory has been previously applied is present and thorough. The description is moderately well supported though some sources of support are outdated.

A discussion of how the borrowed theory has been previously applied is present, thorough, and well-detailed. The description is well supported with current and/or seminal research.

15.0 %Discussion of the application of the borrowed theory to the identified problem

A discussion of the application of the borrowed theory to the identified problem is either missing or not evident to the reader.

A discussion of the application of the borrowed theory to the identified problem is present, but incomplete or illogical.

A discussion of the application of the borrowed theory to the identified problem is present, but cursory. The research used for support is outdated.

A discussion of the application of the borrowed theory to the identified problem is present and thorough. The description is moderately well supported though some sources of support are outdated.

A discussion of the application of the borrowed theory to the identified problem is present, thorough, and well-detailed. The description is well supported with current and/or seminal research.

15.0 %Discussion of the integration of the borrowed theory and the middle-range theory

A discussion of the integration of the borrowed theory and the middle-range theory is either missing or not evident to the reader.

A discussion of the integration of the borrowed theory and the middle-range theory is present, but incomplete or illogical.

A discussion of the integration of the borrowed theory and the middle-range theory is present, but cursory. The research used for support is outdated.

A discussion of the integration of the borrowed theory and the middle-range theory is moderately well supported though some sources of support are outdated.

A discussion of the integration of the borrowed theory and the middle-range theory is present, thorough, and well-detailed. The description is well supported with current and/or seminal research.

20.0 %Organization and Effectiveness

7.0 %Thesis Development and Purpose

Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.

Thesis and/or main claim are insufficiently developed and/or vague; purpose is not clear.

Thesis and/or main claim are apparent and appropriate to purpose.

Thesis and/or main claim are clear and forecast the development of the paper. It is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.

Thesis and/or main claim are comprehensive. The essence of the paper is contained within the thesis. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.

8.0 %Argument Logic and Construction

Statement 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 progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.

Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.

5.0 %Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are used.

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) and/or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.

Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.

Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.

Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.

10.0 %Format

5.0 %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 %Research Citations (in-text citations for paraphrasing and direct quotes, and reference page listing and formatting, as appropriate to assignment and style)

No reference page is included. No citations are used.

Reference page is present. Citations are inconsistently used.

Reference page is included and lists sources used in the paper. Sources are appropriately documented, although some errors may be present.

Reference page is present and fully inclusive of all cited sources. Documentation is appropriate and citation style is usually correct.

In-text citations and a reference page are complete and correct. The documentation of cited sources is free of error.

100 %Total Weightage