Description
SCORING RUBRIC FOR ASSESSMENT OF SYNTHESIS PAPER
AY 2024-2025 1st SEMESTER
DESCRIPTON:
The Review of Related Literature/ Synthesis Paper will require the students to synthesize and present research review articles summarizing the evidence
that supports best practices related to the topic of choice. Sources must include 20 current peer-reviewed research articles and discussions (within the past five
years, and to be widely cited) as well as 7 to 10 (old references). It is to the student’s advantage to read widely to ground understanding before selecting pieces
to integrate into the review. The review should be approximately 2500 to 3000 words, using APA Format 7th Edition and must follow academic writing skills and
avoid plagiarism.
This systemic review should comprehensive and incorporate three sections. First, there should be an introduction to the topic with an accompanying statement
of why this topic is timely and merits review. Second, there will be a review of selected research literature. The synthesis paper should contain both theoretical
pieces as well as reports of empirical studies. The process requires the combination of separate articles into a coherent whole. Articles should not be stacked on top
of each other, but a logical framework should be woven so that the reader can better understand the current knowledge of the topic. The coherent integration, with
the accompanying transitions, will be the most challenging aspect of this assignment. There should be at least 25 to 30 referencess, seven of which must be reports
of research from research journals.
The final section of this paper should include summary statement what is found in literatures .However, this is being included in this paper so that the student
has an opportunity to reflect on what has been learned about the topic and the process.
FORMAT FOR SYNTHESIS PAPER
Title and Cover Page
Section I. Introduction This section should identify key or pressing Issus. The students should include clear and thorough: a. Research Topic, b. Statement of
the problem or the significance, to be supported by evidence (other than purely personal experience) justifying the synthesis, and c. Statement of the audience and
what can be gained from the synthesis
Section II. Review of the Literature and Methodology: This section should include clear and thorough: a. Sub-headings that can logically lead the reader
through the literature and each section of the review, b. Synthesis of studies that indicates student’s ability to summarize purpose, content, & conclusions of
literature coherently and accurately, Synthesis of the studies that indicates student’s ability to draw coherent conclusions or pose coherent questions (e.g. What
gaps in the literature exist?) clearly and accurately, and d. Relevant and accurate sources from recent periodical primary and secondary – text – sources, and 1
may be internet sources – excluding online periodical literature). Most sources should have recent publication date and not more than five years ago.
Section III. Summary and conclusion / What You Learned: This includes short discussion and summary about synthesizing and conducting research. You can
address the m summary and conclusion after completing analysis from the collected references “
IV. Future Research Options (not graded)
You can address what you might hope to research in relation with your MSN degree.
.
pg. 1- SCORING RUBRIC FOR SYNTHESIS PAPER – MSN 704_Organizational and Systems Leadership in Healthcare, AY 2024-2025, 1st Semester
MSN 704: ORGANIZATIONAL AND SYSTEMS LEADERSHIP IN HEALTH CARE
SCORING RUBRIC FOR SYNTHESIS PAPER, AY 2023-2024,1ST SEM.
TOPIC/ TITLE: ________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
CATEGORIES
Criteria
1
Unacceptable
Title and Cover
Page
– Title is clear, novel,
understandable, well
written no grammatical
error and abbreviations
spelled out.
– Cover page reflects all
student’s information and
well organized.
– Some required
information is missing.
– Extraneous information
is included.
– All required
information is
included.
– Some extraneous
information is
included
Introduction and
Significance or
Magnitude
– This includes the following:
a. Research Topic,
b. Statement of the
Problem supported by
evidence (other than
purely personal
experience) justifying the
synthesis
c. Statement of the
audience and what can be
gained from the synthesis
– All of them must be clear
and thorough
– Introduction covers
relevant and current
scholarly articles in detail.
– Able to distinguish what
have been done in the
field from what needs to
be done.
– Placed the topic or
problem in the broader
scholarly literature
– Some required
information is missing.
– Extraneous information
is included.
– Did not distinguish what
have been done and
those that have not
been done
– Topic not placed in
broader scholarly
literature
Review of Related
Literature/
Synthesis
2
Marginal
3
Good
4
Excellent
EARNED
SCORE
– All required
information is
included.
– No extraneous
information is
included.
– All required
information is
included.
– Written as per criteria
X 5 = _____
– All required
information is
included.
– Some extraneous
information is
included
– All required
information is
included.
– No extraneous
information is
included.
– All required
information is
included.
– Written as per criteria
X 10 =
______
– Discussed what have
been done and those
that have not been
done.
– Some discussion of
broader scholarly
literature.
– Critically examined
the state of the field
– Topic clearly situated
in broader scholarly
literature
– Critically examined
history of topic
– Introduced new
methods to address
problems with
predominant
methods.
– Literature reviewed
relates to the main
pg. 2- SCORING RUBRIC FOR SYNTHESIS PAPER – MSN 704_Organizational and Systems Leadership in Healthcare, AY 2024-2025, 1st Semester
X 20 =
______
Methodology
Data extraction
Analysis
for the evidences
and
Interpretation of
results
Reference Style and writing skills
– Placed the research in the
historical context of the
field.
– Acquired and enhanced
the subject vocabulary.
– Articulated important
variables and phenomena
relevant to the topic.
– Synthesized and gained a
new perspective on the
literature
– History of topic not
discussed
– Vocabulary not
discussed,
– Key variables and
phenomena not
discussed
– Some mention of
history of topic
– Key vocabulary
defined
– Reviewed
relationships among
key variables and
phenomena
– Some critique of
literature
– Discussed and
resolved ambiguities
in definitions
– Noted ambiguities in
literature and
proposed new
relationships
– Offered new
viewpoint/s
topic and sets up the
rationale for the study
aim/ purpose by
clearly identifying a
gap in the literature.
– Only relevant and
current and scholarly
articles were included
to build the argument
for the need for the
study.
– Identified the main
methodologies and
research techniques that
have been used in the
field, and their advantages
and disadvantages.
– Related ideas and
theories in the field to
research methodologies.
– Some required
information is missing.
– Extraneous information
is included.
– All required
information is
included.
– Some extraneous
information is
included
– All required
information is
included.
– No extraneous
information is
included.
– All required
information is
included.
– Written as per criteria
Excellent quality
assessment with risk of
bias specific for a study
Design. All relevant data
Extracted. Identifies and
Deals with missing data.
Very good quality
assessment with risk of
bias specific for a study
design. All relevant data
extracted. Some insight
into dealing with missing
data.
Appropriate method of
analysis with clear
justification. Good data
synthesis and correct
interpretation of results.
Good understanding of
the quality assessment,
critical evaluation and
the risk of bias.
Understands the
relevant components of
data extraction.
Good data synthesis
using appropriate
method of analysis.
Correct interpretation of
results.
Has identified a
validated quality
assessment tool and its
Indicators. Stated the
development and
piloting of a data
extraction form.
Identified appropriate
data analysis method
and correct analysis
conducted. Minor
interpretation errors.
Has stated the data
extraction and quality
assessment but no
further details or critical
evaluation provided.
Some understanding of
data analysis but
incorrect analysis and
wrong interpretation.
20
– Contains many spelling
or grammatical errors,
does not follow APA 7th
–
Contains an
occasional spelling or
grammatical error,
scholarly tones used,
– Contains no spelling
or grammatical errors,
scholarly tones used,
full citations for all
– An appropriate
number of references
(more than 10) are
included all old and
X 10 = ____
Appropriate method of
analysis with clear
justification. Excellent
data synthesis, including
sub-group analysis
where appropriate and
interpretation of results
including clinical
Significance.
An appropriate number of
(10) references, including
both old and current/ up to
date (3 old -7 recent) and
pg. 3- SCORING RUBRIC FOR SYNTHESIS PAPER – MSN 704_Organizational and Systems Leadership in Healthcare, AY 2024-2025, 1st Semester
X 20 =
______
15
–
include critical citations.
Followed APA 7th edition
style.
The discussion must
coverage of related work.
Excellent
ability
to
synthesize and argue
points. Clear evidence of
superior critical thought.
Excellent awareness of
study limitations.
Edition style, lack of
transitions.
– Very good discussion. Covers related work
very well. Good ability
to synthesize and
argue
points.
Clear
evidence of
Critical thought. Clear
awareness of study
limitations
–
Missing one citation
for all sources.
Good discussion.
Covers related work
well. Some ability to
synthesise and argue
points. Some
evidence of critical
thought. Some
awareness of study
limitations.
sources mentioned,
all listed references
used in the review,
references, title page,
and main body
follows APA 7th style,
smooth transition.
– Satisfactory
discussion. Some
awareness of related
work. Limited ability to
synthesise and argue
points. Limited
evidence of critical
thought. Limited
awareness of study
limitations
current/ up-to-date
and include critical
citations.
– Weak discussion.
Limited awareness of
related work. Weak
synthesis. Unable to
argue points clearly.
Little evidence of
critical thought. Little
awareness of study
limitations.
Total Marks
Eligible for two bones marks: Yes – No
STUDENT NAME
STUDENT ID
SECTION
DATE OF SUBMISSION
1
2
3
Instructor’s\Evaluator’s Name & Signature/ Date: ………………………………………………………………………………
pg. 4- SCORING RUBRIC FOR SYNTHESIS PAPER – MSN 704_Organizational and Systems Leadership in Healthcare, AY 2024-2025, 1st Semester
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
