Order ID:89JHGSJE83839 | Style:APA/MLA/Harvard/Chicago | Pages:5-10 |
Instructions:
HCM901 Advanced Technical Centers Evaluations Discussion Term Paper
Include citations within the paragraphs of your posting and the reference(s) in APA format at the end of your posting.
(Course Objectives # 1, 2, and 3)
The Discussion Questions focus on key topics in Chapter 10.
HCM901 Process Evaluation results of a cluster randomised controlled childhood obesity.pdf The pdf is attached below
What was the purpose of the process evaluation?
How was the process evaluation conducted?
What are the components of a process evaluation that was discussed in the textbook and mentioned in the article
What barriers were encountered while implementing the evaluation?
REFERENCE:
Griffin, T. L., Clarke, J. L., Lancashire, E. R., Pallan, M. J., & Adab, P. (2017). Process evaluation results of a cluster randomised controlled childhood obesity prevention trial: the WAVES study. BMC Public Health, 17, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-017-4690-0
HCM901 Advanced Technical Centers Evaluations Discussion Term Paper
RUBRIC |
||||||
Excellent Quality
95-100%
|
Introduction
45-41 points The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned. |
Literature Support
91-84 points The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned. |
Methodology
58-53 points Content is well-organized with headings for each slide and bulleted lists to group related material as needed. Use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. to enhance readability and presentation content is excellent. Length requirements of 10 slides/pages or less is met. |
|||
Average Score
50-85% |
40-38 points
More depth/detail for the background and significance is needed, or the research detail is not clear. No search history information is provided. |
83-76 points
Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is little integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are included. Summary of information presented is included. Conclusion may not contain a biblical integration. |
52-49 points
Content is somewhat organized, but no structure is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. is occasionally detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met. |
|||
Poor Quality
0-45% |
37-1 points
The background and/or significance are missing. No search history information is provided. |
75-1 points
Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is no integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are not included in the summary of information presented. Conclusion does not contain a biblical integration. |
48-1 points
There is no clear or logical organizational structure. No logical sequence is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects etc. is often detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met |
|||
You Can Also Place the Order at www.collegepaper.us/orders/ordernow or www.crucialessay.com/orders/ordernow
|
HCM901 Advanced Technical Centers Evaluations Discussion Term Paper