Designing Electronic Forms – Rubric
Electronic Form
30 points
Criteria Description
Electronic Form
5. Target
30 points
An Excel spreadsheet or Word document that designs a custom form for merging the paper documents and converts them to an electronic form is extremely thorough,
4. Acceptable
26.1 points
An Excel spreadsheet or Word document that designs a custom form for merging the paper documents and converts them to an electronic form is complete.
3. Approaching
23.7 points
An Excel spreadsheet or Word document that designs a custom form for merging the paper documents and converts them to an electronic form is included but lacks supporting evidence.
2. Insufficient
22.2 points
An Excel spreadsheet or Word document that designs a custom form for merging the paper documents and converts them to an electronic form is incomplete or incorrect.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
An Excel spreadsheet or Word document that designs a custom form for merging the paper documents and converts them to an electronic form is not present.
Data Governance and Heuristic Principles
15 points
Criteria Description
Data Governance and Heuristic Principles
5. Target
15 points
An evaluation of the data governance and heuristic principles used to design the document is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
4. Acceptable
13.05 points
An evaluation of the data governance and heuristic principles used to design the document is complete and includes supporting details.
3. Approaching
11.85 points
An evaluation of the data governance and heuristic principles used to design the document is included but lacks supporting details.
2. Insufficient
11.1 points
An evaluation of the data governance and heuristic principles used to design the document is incomplete or incorrect.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
An evaluation of the data governance and heuristic principles used to design the document is not present.
Quality Patient Care and User Experience
15 points
Criteria Description
Quality Patient Care and User Experience
5. Target
15 points
An assessment of how the documentation aids the oncology RN navigator in providing quality patient care and improving the user experience is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
4. Acceptable
13.05 points
An assessment of how the documentation aids the oncology RN navigator in providing quality patient care and improving the user experience is complete and includes supporting details.
3. Approaching
11.85 points
An assessment of how the documentation aids the oncology RN navigator in providing quality patient care and improving the user experience is included but lacks supporting details.
2. Insufficient
11.1 points
An assessment of how the documentation aids the oncology RN navigator in providing quality patient care and improving the user experience is incomplete or incorrect.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
An assessment of how the documentation aids the oncology RN navigator in providing quality patient care and improving the user experience is not present.
Design Rationale
10 points
Criteria Description
Design Rationale
5. Target
10 points
A substantial rationale of the design is provided.
4. Acceptable
8.7 points
A clear rationale of the design is provided.
3. Approaching
7.9 points
The rationale of the design is underdeveloped.
2. Insufficient
7.4 points
A weak rationale of the design is provided.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
A rationale of the design is not provided.
Visual Appeal
10 points
Criteria Description
Visual Appeal
5. Target
10 points
Appropriate and thematic graphic elements are used to make visual connections that contribute to the understanding of concepts, ideas, and relationships. Differences in type size or color are used well and consistently.
4. Acceptable
8.7 points
Thematic graphic elements are used but not always in context. Visual connections mostly contribute to the understanding of concepts, ideas, and relationships. Differences in type size or color are used well and consistently.
3. Approaching
7.9 points
Minimal use of graphic elements is evident. Elements do not consistently contribute to the understanding of concepts, ideas, and relationships. There is some variation in type size, color, and layout.
2. Insufficient
7.4 points
Color is garish and/or typographic variations are overused and legibility suffers. Background interferes with readability. Understanding of concepts, ideas, and relationships is limited.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
There are few or no graphic elements. No variation in layout or typography is evident.
Technical Skill
10 points
Criteria Description
Technical Skill
5. Target
10 points
Execution is flawless. Demonstrates an in-depth, high-level of understanding.
4. Acceptable
8.7 points
Execution is of good quality.
3. Approaching
7.9 points
Execution needs improvement.
2. Insufficient
7.4 points
Execution is sloppy and unprofessional.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Execution does not meet the criteria outlined.
Originality
7 points
Criteria Description
Originality
5. Target
7 points
The product shows significant evidence of originality and inventiveness. The majority of the content and many of the ideas are fresh, original, inventive, and based upon logical conclusions and sound research.
4. Acceptable
6.09 points
The product shows evidence of originality and inventiveness. While based somewhat on the ideas, products, images, or inventions of other people, the work extends beyond that collection to offer new insights.
3. Approaching
5.53 points
The product shows evidence of originality. While based on the ideas, products, images, or inventions of other people, the work does offer some new insights.
2. Insufficient
5.18 points
The work is a minimal collection or rehash of the ideas, products, images, or inventions of other people. There is no evidence of new thought.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
The work is an extensive collection and rehash of the ideas, products, images, or inventions of other people. There is no evidence of new thought or inventiveness.
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, and language use)
3 points
Criteria Description
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, and language use)
5. Target
3 points
The writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
4. Acceptable
2.61 points
Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.
3. Approaching
2.37 points
Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.
2. Insufficient
2.22 points
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence