This week, you will begin to develop your Systematic Plan of Evaluation. Create

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?

We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.

You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

This week, you will begin to develop your Systematic Plan of Evaluation. Create a table that could be used to measure an academic nursing program’s curriculum and institutional support.
Your table should include:
Rows for each applicable standard from your chosen agency
Columns to address the evidence/data needed, methods to gather the needed evidence or data, benchmarks for success, and the “feedback loop” of reporting, communication, and continuous improvement.
In addition to your table, submit 2–3 paragraphs explaining your table and how it will be used.
This has to be in APA format, also it has to be as a correlation to the first assignment, see first attachment. The Second attachment is an example of how the table must be completed. References must be within less than 5 years.
Rubric:
CriteriaRatingsPts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeRows
20 to >16.0 ptsProficient
Identifies and includes all accrediting agency standards related to curriculum and institutional support.
16 to >12.0 ptsAcceptable
Identifies and includes most accrediting agency standards related curriculum and institutional support.
12 to >8.0 ptsDeveloping
Identifies and includes some accrediting agency standards related curriculum and institutional support.
8 to >0 ptsUnsatisfactory
Identifies and includes few accrediting agency standards related curriculum and institutional support.
20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeColumns
20 to >16.0 ptsProficient
Identifies highly relevant and useful evidence needed and plans for benchmarks and the “feedback loop” of reporting, communication, and continuous improvement.
16 to >12.0 ptsAcceptable
Identifies relevant and useful evidence needed and plans for benchmarks and the “feedback loop” of reporting, communication, and continuous improvement.
12 to >8.0 ptsDeveloping
Identifies some evidence needed. May be missing plans for benchmarks and the “feedback loop” of reporting, communication, and continuous improvement.
8 to >0 ptsUnsatisfactory
Fails to identify evidence needed. Missing plans for benchmarks and the “feedback loop” of reporting, communication, and continuous improvement.
20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDiscussion
30 to >24.0 ptsProficient
Fully explains how table will be used to evaluate a nursing program. Demonstrates a sophisticated ability to critically think about the chosen accreditation agency’s standards, necessary evidence, benchmarks, and the “feedback loop” of reporting, communication, and continuous improvement.
24 to >18.0 ptsAcceptable
Explains how table will be used to evaluate a nursing program. Demonstrates ability to critically think about the chosen accreditation agency’s standards, necessary evidence, benchmarks, and the “feedback loop” of reporting, communication, and continuous improvement.
18 to >12.0 ptsDeveloping
Partially explains how table will be used to evaluate a nursing program. May fail to demonstrate ability to critically think about the chosen accreditation agency’s standards, necessary evidence, benchmarks, and the “feedback loop” of reporting, communication, and continuous improvement.
12 to >0 ptsUnsatisfactory
Fails to explain how table will be used to evaluate a nursing program. Fails to demonstrate ability to critically think about the chosen accreditation agency’s standards, necessary evidence, benchmarks, and the “feedback loop” of reporting, communication, and continuous improvement.
30 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeGeneral Writing Mechanics
5 to >4.0 ptsProficient
The writing demonstrates sophisticated clarity and conciseness and is extremely well organized. Punctuation, spelling, and capitalization are all correct with minimal to no errors.
4 to >3.0 ptsAcceptable
The writing is clear, concise, and well organized. May contain a few punctuation, spelling, or capitalization errors.
3 to >2.0 ptsDeveloping
The writing lacks clarity, conciseness, or organization. Several errors in punctuation, spelling, and capitalization detract from the readability of the paper.
2 to >0 ptsUnsatisfactory
The writing is unfocused and poorly organized. Many errors in punctuation, spelling, and capitalization detract from the readability of the paper.
5 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAPA Style
5 to >4.0 ptsProficient
The assignment accurately and consistently follows APA Style. Meets length and formatting requirements of the assignment.
4 to >3.0 ptsAcceptable
The assignment consistently follows current APA Style with only isolated and inconsistent mistakes. Mostly meets length and formatting requirements of the assignment.
3 to >2.0 ptsDeveloping
The assignment has numerous errors in APA Style. Reflects incomplete knowledge of APA Style. May not meet length and formatting requirements of the assignment.
2 to >0 ptsUnsatisfactory
The assignment has significant errors in APA Style. Does not meet length and formatting requirements of the assignment.
5 pts

Click Here To Order Now!