Module 1a. Oncology. Word limit: 500 words. Weighting: 12.5%
Criterion High Distinction (HD) Distinction (DN) Credit (CR) Pass (PP) Fail (NN)
Criterion 1
Apply evidence-informed
care in order to promote
positive health outcomes Your case study analysis: Your case study analysis: Your case study analysis: Your case study analysis: Your case study analysis:
Criterion 1a.
Analyses cues to formulate
a correct nursing diagnosis
(2.5 marks) Correctly interprets cues
collected and forms a
complete and comprehensive
nursing diagnosis. Correctly interprets cues
collected and forms a
complete nursing diagnosis. Mostly interprets cues
collected and forms a
complete nursing diagnosis. Mostly interprets cues
collected but briefly applies
this to the patient
presentation to form a
correct nursing diagnosis. Has misinterpreted patient
cues collected and have
minimal/no application to
the patient presentation
and/or made no/incorrect
nursing diagnosis.
Criterion 1b.
Applies the ABCDE
framework to nursing
assessment
(2.5 marks) Presents an exceptional
application of the A-E
framework to nursing
assessment of the patient. Comprehensively applies the
A-E framework to nursing
assessment of the patient. Applies the A-E framework to
nursing assessment of the
patient. Briefly applies the A-E
framework to nursing
assessment of the patient. Incorrectly approached the
assessment of the patient.
Criterion 1c.
Applies appropriate
assessment tools and
clinical guidelines to
support patient care
(2.5 marks) Extensively applies
appropriate identified
assessment tools/clinical
guidelines to promote
positive patient health
outcomes. Comprehensively applies
appropriate identified
assessment tools/clinical
guidelines to promote
positive patient health
outcomes. Applies appropriate identified
assessment tools/clinical
guidelines to promote positive
patient health outcomes. Briefly identifies
assessment tools/clinical
guidelines. Does not consider and/or
incorrectly identified
assessment tools/clinical
guidelines to promote
positive patient outcomes.
Criterion 1d
Demonstrates knowledge of
the
oncological/haematological
patient care and education
needs
(2.5 marks) Demonstrates extensive
knowledge of medical,
pharmacological and
psychosocial management
and education of the patient. Demonstrates excellent
knowledge of medical,
pharmacological and
psychosocial management
and education of the patient. Demonstrates sound
knowledge of medical,
pharmacological and
psychosocial management and
education of the patient. Demonstrates some
knowledge of medical,
pharmacological and
psychosocial management
and education of the
patient. Superficially and/or not
discussed appropriate
medical, pharmacological
and psychosocial
management and education
of the patient.
Criterion 5
Write in a structured,
succinct and well-informed
manner, substantiating
work with scholarly sources
and accurate referencing
(2.5 marks) • A high level of academic
writing with strong
evidence of planning.
• The paper is
exceptionally logical,
insightful and balanced
and is consistently
expressed in a clear and
fluent manner.
• Accurately references all
sources using the
Harvard style. • Academic writing with
strong evidence of
planning.
• The paper is logical and
balanced and expressed
in a clear and fluent
manner.
• Accurately references
the majority sources
using the Harvard style. • Academic writing with
clear evidence of
planning with a logical
flow.
• Discussion is generally
expressed in a clear and
fluent manner.
• Accurately references the
majority sources using
the Harvard style. • Academic writing
using coherent and
partly cohesive
expression.
• Semi-structured using
some academic
literature to support
the paper.
• Accurately references
most sources using
the Harvard style. • Multiple punctuation,
sentence structure and
formatting errors which
impact on readability.
• Non-academic sources
are utilised.
• Inaccurate referencing
style or does not use
the Harvard style.
