CATEGORY

4

3

2

1

NS/0

Readability

Concise, logical ordering of ideas throughout

Minor inconsistencies in logic; 1800-1900 words

Some inconsistencies in logic; Over 1900 words

Difficult to read; beyond 2000 words

Lack of order; beyond 2000 words

Documentation

Adequate and appropriate documentation and citation of relevant literature throughout

Minor errors in citations

Several missed citations; Several errors in citations

Inconsistent use of citations; Inconsistent formatting of citations

Lack of citations; Incorrect format for citations throughout

Writing

Correct grammar, spelling and sentence construction throughout

Occasional minor errors in grammar, spelling or sentence construction

Consistent errors in one aspect; Occasional errors in other aspects

Consistent errors in more than one aspect of writing

Incorrect grammar, spelling and sentence construction throughout

Format

Correct use of APA formatting throughout paper (5th edition)

Minor errors in formatting

Some aspects of formatting problematic; Use of incorrect edition of APA manual

Numerous aspects of formatting problematic; Use of incorrect edition of APA manual

APA format not used or used incorrectly throughout

Critical Thinking & Analysis

Evidence of critical thinking and analysis of literature on nursing concept or phenomenon throughout

Minor inconsistencies in critical thinking and / or analysis

Critical thinking / analysis inconsistently applied

Critical thinking / analysis minimal and inconsistent

No evidence of critical thinking, analysis or reflection on concept

Presentation of ideas

Complete discussion of concept or phenomenon, how it was addressed in the articles; Sound rationale for ideas presented

Good discussion of concept or phenomenon; Sound rationale for ideas presented

Discussion of concept or phenomenon inconsistent in depth; Some rationale for ideas unclear

Superficial discussion only; Rationale for ideas unclear and / or questionable

Lacking discussion; Lack of rationale for ideas presented

Content

Literature review uses 5 articles, 3 of which are research articles; strengths & limitations of authors' approaches included & fully described; situation or basis for choosing concept described fully

Fewer than 3 of the 5 articles are research articles; minor details missing in strengths & limitations of authors' approaches or in situation or basis for choosing concept

Fewer than 5 articles used; strengths & limitations of authors' approaches lack insight; situation or basis for choosing concept unclear

Fewer than 4 articles used; Strengths & limitations missing; situation or basis for choosing concept missing

Inappropriate articles used; less than 3 articles; large amount of content missing

Logical Conclusions

Includes relevance of the research and / or approaches of authors in relation to reason for choosing concept or phenomenon; Conclusions discussed with no new material added; questions needing further exploration included

Some details missing in relevance of research and / or approaches of authors in relation to concept choice; conclusions incomplete or new material added; further questions missing

Minimal attention to relevance of research and / or approaches in relation to concept choice; conclusions inappropriate in relation to content and / or new material added; missing further questions

Missing relevance of research and / or approaches in relation to concept; missing conclusions; missing questions

No mention of relevance of research; lack of conclusions; lack of questions