I’m studying for my Powerpoint class and need an explanation.
Case Scenario
Marion Pham is a nurse of Vietnamese ancestry. The staff of the ward in which she has worked for many years at the Astral Hospital Center is very culturally diverse. Although no one has ever demonstrated overt hostility toward her because of her race or color, she has noticed that over the years, it is usually the Asian employees who are made the brunt of practical jokes or ridiculed. At one time or another, she has observed just about every employee on the ward, including other Asian staff members, as well as the head nurse, engage in such behavior. Each time this happens, Marion experiences a strong sense of hurt and ostracism. Otherwise, everyone on the ward is helpful and courteous to her and she is frequently asked to participate in off-work social activities with coworkers.
Your team is to analyze the case presented much like the cases submitted via Turnitin. Instead of developing a written paper, your team is to develop a presentation covering all of the elements that would have been covered in a research paper. Sources must be properly cited, and at least two sources other than the textbook must be used to include outside court cases. The final slide of your presentation should list your references in APA format. Each team member must narrate the slides he/she contributed to the presentation. The team will receive one grade for the assignment. There are 5 sections that will be listed in the powerpoint: Assumptions, Analysis, Plaintiff Case, Defendant Case and Management Tips.
Team Assignment Rubric
Team Assignment Rubric
| Criteria |
Ratings |
Pts |
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAnalysisA thorough analysis was discussed to include applying the legal principles and incorporating research.
|
| 40.0 pts
Excellent
The analysis used the correct legal principles and applied them correctly. Appropriate assumptions were stated to provide context to the argument made. Outside research was used to support the argument.
|
30.0 pts
Good
The analysis used the correct legal principles for the most part and applied them correctly. Appropriate assumptions were stated to provide context to the arguments made. Outside research was used to support the argument.
|
20.0 pts
Fair
The analysis did not thoroughly demonstrate the use of legal principles and/or did not consistently apply them correctly. Outside research did not thoroughly support the argument.
|
10.0 pts
Poor
The correct legal principle was not used or was poorly applied. Assumptions were not clearly stated or accurately applied. Outside research was not used to support the argument.
|
0.0 pts
Not attempted
|
|
40.0 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeManagement TipsA thorough set of management tips were provided to include dealing with the current situation and preventing similar issues in the future.
|
| 30.0 pts
Excellent
Management tips addressed the situation and provided recommendations for preventing similar situations in the future.
|
23.0 pts
Good
Management tips addressed the situation and provided recommendations for preventing similar situations in the future for the most part.
|
15.0 pts
Fair
Management tips did not address the situation or did not provide recommendations for preventing similar situations in the future.
|
8.0 pts
Poor
Management tips did not thoroughly address the situation or provide recommendations for preventing similar situations in the future.
|
0.0 pts
Not attempted
|
|
30.0 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFormattingFollows the requirements related to format and APA.
|
| 10.0 pts
Excellent
Clearly follows the requirements related to format and APA.
|
8.0 pts
Good
Follows, for the most part, the requirements related to format and APA.
|
5.0 pts
Fair
Does not consistently follow the requirements related to format and APA.
|
3.0 pts
Poor
Poorly follows the requirements related to format and APA.
|
0.0 pts
Not attempted
|
|
10.0 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeReferencesScholarly level of references, how effective references are used, soundness of references.
|
| 10.0 pts
Excellent
All references used are of good/scholarly quality. There is a minimum of two scholarly references to include outside court cases, and they are used effectively.
|
8.0 pts
Good
Most references used are of good/scholarly quality. There is a minimum of two scholarly references to include outside court cases, and they are used effectively.
|
5.0 pts
Fair
Some references used are of good/scholarly quality. There is a not minimum of two scholarly references to include outside court cases, and/or they are not used effectively.
|
3.0 pts
Poor
Most references used are not of good/scholarly quality. There is not a minimum of two scholarly references to include outside court cases, and they are not used effectively.
|
0.0 pts
Not attempted
|
|
10.0 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePresentation QualityA thorough presentation was delivered in a logical manner presenting main points without reading the full text from slides.
|
| 10.0 pts
Excellent
The presentation was delivered in a logical manner presenting main points without reading the full text from slides.
|
8.0 pts
Good
The presentation was mostly delivered in a logical manner presenting main points usually without reading the full text from slides.
|
5.0 pts
Fair
The presentation was not fully delivered in a logical manner presenting main points. Some slides were presented by reading the slide text to the viewer.
|
3.0 pts
Poor
The presentation was not delivered in a logical manner, and/or slides were often presented by reading the slide text to the viewer.
|
0.0 pts
Not attempted
|
|
10.0 pts
|
|
Total Points: 100.0
|
