2Less than Satisfactory65.00%
20.0 % Flow Chart Content
The information has minimally been addressed. Subject knowledge is not evident.
The information provided is mostly complete, but lacks specific information necessary to assist the audience in understanding the policies progression to law. Few supporting details are present. Little subject knowledge is evident.
The information provided is appropriate and provides a historical timeline from the introduction of the law to its implementation to assist the audience in understanding the policies progression to law. Includes some supporting details. Some subject knowledge is evident.
The information provided is complete and clear and provides a historical timeline from the introduction of the law to its implementation to assist the audience in understanding the policies progression to law. Details are provided. Subject knowledge appears to be good.
The information provided is comprehensive and provides a comprehensive historical timeline from the introduction of the law to its implementation, which assists the audience in understanding the policies progression to law. Content is in-depth with extensive details. Subject knowledge is excellent.
35.0 % Narrative
Outlines the expected effects of the health care policy on specific health outcomes. Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Narrative is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.
Outlines, using some detail, the expected effects of the health care policy on specific health outcomes. Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Narrative lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.
Provides a basic description of the expected effects of the health care policy on specific health outcomes. Narrative is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. Presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.
Provides an adequate description of the expected effects of the health care policy on specific health outcomes. Narrative shows logical progression. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.
Thoroughly describes the expected effects of the health care policy on specific health outcomes. Clear and convincing arguments present a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.
15.0 % Flow Chart Layout
The layout is cluttered, confusing, and does not use spacing, headings, and subheadings to enhance the readability. The text is extremely difficult to read with long blocks of text, small point size for fonts, and inappropriate contrasting colors. Poor use of headings, subheadings, indentations, or bold formatting is evident.
The layout shows some structure, but appears cluttered and busy or distracting with large gaps of white space or a distracting background. Overall readability is difficult due to lengthy paragraphs, too many different fonts, a dark or busy background, overuse of bold, or a lack of appropriate indentations of text.
The layout uses horizontal and vertical white space appropriately. Sometimes the fonts are easy to read, but in a few places the use of fonts, italics, bold, long paragraphs, color, or busy background detracts and does not enhance readability.
The layout background and text complement each other and enable the content to be easily read. The fonts are easy to read and point size varies appropriately for headings and text.
The layout is visually pleasing and demonstrates the content with appropriate use of headings, subheadings, and white space. Text is appropriate in length for the target audience and to the point.
30.0 %Organization & Effectiveness
10.0 % Language Use and Audience Awareness (Includes sentence construction, word choice, etc.)
Inappropriate word choice and lack of variety in language use are evident. Writer appears to be unaware of audience. Use of “primer prose” indicates writer either does not apply figures of speech or uses them inappropriately.
Some distracting inconsistencies in language choice (register) and/or word choice are present. The writer exhibits some lack of control in using figures of speech appropriately.
Language is appropriate to the targeted audience for the most part.
The writer is clearly aware of audience, uses a variety of appropriate vocabulary for the targeted audience, and uses figures of speech to communicate clearly.
The writer uses a variety of sentence constructions, figures of speech, and word choice in distinctive and creative ways that are appropriate to purpose, discipline, and scope.
10.0 % Mechanics of Writing (Includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, and 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), sentence structure, and/or word choice are present.
Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used.
Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used.
Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
10.0 % Sources
No outside academic sources were used to support major points.
Few relevant sources beyond assigned readings were used to support major points. Important relevant sources were neglected. Quoted material and paraphrasing were overused.
Sources were adequate, relevant, and extended beyond assigned readings. Quoted material and paraphrasing are included to support major points and writer’s idea development.
Sources are academic, current and/or relevant to support major points. Quoted material and paraphrasing is used effectively and consistently to support the major points and writer’s idea development.
Sources are academic, comprehensive, current and/or relevant. Quoted material and paraphrasing expertly support, extend, and inform ideas, but do not substitute for the writer’s own idea development. Sources are well synthesized to support major points.
100 % Total Weightage