Health Policy Analysis Paper
Instructions from our professor:
Topic: Health Policy Analysis Paper
1. Select a Health Policy on a Local, State, or Federal policy that you have explored along with recommendations based upon the analysis.
2. Analyze the Health Policy selected.
3. Evaluate the Health Policy selected.
4. Identify application of health policy into clinical practice.
Ø Your paper must have an Introduction and a Conclusion
Ø Maximum of 6 pages (not including Title and Reference page).
Ø APA format
Ø At least 5 references within 5 years.
Note:
I need the paper to follow all of the professor’s instructions, my professor is very strict with this.
Plagiarism is not tolerated, and they use turn it in.
The paper has to cover all of first four points:
1. Select a Health Policy on a Local, State, or Federal policy that you have explored along with recommendations based upon the analysis.
2.Analyze the Health Policy selected.
3. Evaluate the Health Policy selected.
4. Identify application of health policy into clinical practice.
And also, these:
Ø Your paper must have an Introduction and a Conclusion
Ø Maximum of 6 pages (not including Title and Reference page).
Ø APA format (APA 7 is the one the school is using)
Ø At least 5 references within 5 years.
I attached the grading rubric for this homework (for your guide)
Research-Based Paper Grading Rubric
Miami Regional University
|
Dimension |
Competent |
Needs Improvement |
Unacceptable |
|
Problem Statement (PS) / Abstract (Abs)
10% |
PS/Abs is proper length (150-250 words). Highly informative, complete and easy to understand (includes all key aspects of the paper). Appropriate vocabulary is used. PS/Abs makes you want to read the paper. 10% |
PS/Abs is proper length (150-250 words). Somewhat informative and understandable (includes just some of the aspects of the paper). 5% |
PS/Abs is not the proper length (less than 150 words). Not very informative or understandable (provides little of no reference to the key aspect of the paper). 0% |
|
Introduction 20% |
Thesis provides a clear and concise response to the assigned/selected topic. Organization of the topic is completely and clearly outlined and implemented. Does not contain superfluous information. 20% |
Thesis is too broad or too narrow for the assigned/selected topic. Organization of the topic is difficult to follow, and superficially implemented. Provides too much unnecessary information. 10% |
Fails to present a thesis. OR Thesis fails to respond to the assigned/selected topic. Organization of topic is missing, vague, or not consistently maintained. 0% |
|
Body Paragraphs 30% |
All main points are well-developed; directly related to the thesis. Supporting examples are concrete and detailed. There is a logical flow to the topics/arguments. 30% |
Most main points are present, but not consistently pertinent to the thesis. Supporting examples are unclear or missing. 15% |
Main points are poorly developed or not pertinent to the thesis. Missing supporting examples. 0% |
|
Research (literature review) 10% |
Research selected is highly relevant to the topic, and is properly incorporated into the body paragraphs. The method, results, and implications are presented accurately and completely. Relationship between research and theory is clearly articulated and accurate. The evidence comes from a wide variety of valid sources; minimum “required” sources published within the last 5 years. 10% |
Research is relevant to the topic, yet incomplete, vague and/or is poorly incorporated into the body paragraphs. Unclear components. Connection between theory and research is unclear/inaccurate. Some evidence does not come from valid sources: minimum “required” sources published within the last 5 years. 5% |
Research selected is not relevant to the topic, and is not properly incorporated into the body paragraphs. Components are missing, inaccurate or unclear. Relationship between theory and research is unclear/inaccurate, major errors in the logic are present. The evidence seldom comes from valid sources: minimum “required” sources published within the last 5 years. 0% |
|
Conclusion 10% |
Conclusion is clearly stated, and connections to the research and position are clear and relevant. The underlying logic is explicit. 10% |
Conclusion is unclear. Partially connected to research. Significant errors in logic. 5% |
Conclusion is unclear.
Connections to research are incorrect/unclear, or just a repetition of the findings without explanation. Underlying logic has major flaws. 0% |
|
Writing/ Mechanics 10% |
Paper is coherently organized. Writing is clear and concise. Writing is fluid and free from spelling and grammatical errors. Terminology is clearly defined. Writing uses appropriate voice (active/passive). APA formatting appropriate. 10% |
Paper is poorly organized. Writing often contains spelling and grammatical errors. Writing inconsistently switches voices (active/passive). APA formatting appropriate. 5% |
Paper is poorly organized and difficult to read – does not flow logically from one part to another. There are consistent spelling and/or grammatical errors; technical terms may not be defined or are poorly defined. Writing does not use appropriate voice (active/passive). APA formatting inappropriate. 0% |
|
References 10% |
References are precisely listed in APA format. In-text citations are used correctly for all quotations and paraphrasing. 10% |
References are listed in APA format with frequent errors. In-text citations are missing, or contain frequent errors. 5% |
References are not listed in the correct APA format. In-text citations are missing. PLAGIARISM will be addressed as per MRU’s policy. 0% |