Advance Nurse Practioner Peer Review
Advance Nurse Practioner Peer Review
Advance Nurse Practioner Peer Review
NURS 610 Rubric for Student Critique of a Fellow Student’s Nurse Practice Act PowerPoint Presentation
Name of student critiquing PowerPoint________________________
Name of student who developed PowerPoint __________________________
ORDER A PLAGIARISM- FREE PAPER NOW
Use the tool below to evaluate another student’s PowerPoint presentation by ranking each grading element on a 1 – 5 scale as noted below. While positive, courteous feedback is expect, it is very important to provide an in-depth and critical analysis of the student’s work. Advance Nurse Practioner Peer Review
To what extent were ALL of the assignment elements addressed as required in the instructions provided by faculty.
1- Poor 2-Fair 3-Adequate 4-Very Well 5-Extremely well
Comments:
To what extent was the content on the slides clear and understandable.
1- Poor 2-Fair 3-Adequate 4-Very Well 5-Extremely well
Comments:
To what extent did the “aesthetics” enhance delivery of content? The presentation should be ranked in terms of its visual appeal—but only if the graphics, colors, charts, etc. actually ENHANCED retention of the information. Advance Nurse Practioner Peer Review
1- Poor 2-Fair 3-Adequate 4-Very Well 5-Extremely well
Comments:
Given the limitations of conveying information via slides (e.g., bullet points are expected), to what extent did the presentation conform to APA format, standard grammar, punctuation, spelling, etc.
1- Poor 2-Fair 3-Adequate 4-Very Well 5-Extremely well
Comments:
General comments about presentation overall:
Advanced Nurse Practitioner Peer Review
To what extent were ALL of the assignment elements addressed as required in the instructions provided by faculty.
1- Poor 2-Fair 3-Adequate 4-Very Well 5-Extremely well
Comments: Advance Nurse Practioner Peer Review
All assignment components were addressed. The student covered the titles for APN in both states; licensure; education & certification requirements; APN oversight authority; APN regulatory agency in both states; APN Rx Authority; and Reimbursement in Nurse Practice Act for APNs in both states.
2. To what extent was the content on the slides clear and understandable.
1- Poor 2-Fair 3-Adequate 4-Very Well 5-Extremely well
Comments:
The content of the slides is very clear and comprehensible. The content is succinct, brief and at the same time conveys the target information. The font is appropriate and the same font has been used throughout the entire presentation.
3. To what extent did the “aesthetics” enhance delivery of content? The presentation should be ranked in terms of its visual appeal—but only if the graphics, colors, charts, etc. actually ENHANCED retention of the information.
1- Poor 2-Fair 3-Adequate 4-Very Well 5-Extremely well
Comments:
The color has been used to catch attention and hence increase interest; overall, this improves comprehension and retention of the content. However, a graphic would have been appropriate to further increase interest and thus improve content retention.
Given the limitations of conveying information via slides (e.g., bullet points are expected), to what extent did the presentation conform to APA format, standard grammar, punctuation, spelling, etc.
1- Poor 2-Fair 3-Adequate 4-Very Well 5-Extremely well
Comments: Advance Nurse Practioner Peer Review
ORDER NOW
The presentation satisfactorily confirms to the APA format
There are no grammatical errors. However, the 10th slide is relatively squeezed with too much content
General comments about presentation overall:
The presentation is excellent. All the required aspects have been covered. The color of the themes as well as the font color complement each other and this increases the attention and thus improves retention of the information, the font is readable; not too small or too big. The only weakness is that some slides had so much content and this may be a bit confusing to the audience. Advance Nurse Practioner Peer Review
