Evaluation of Frequently Encountered Issues Assignment solution
Order ID 53563633773 Type Essay Writer Level Masters Style APA Sources/References 4 Perfect Number of Pages to Order 5-10 Pages
Evaluation of Frequently Encountered Issues Assignment
Frequently Encountered Issues
Midterm paper: Frequently Encountered Issues
I have been able to review a few papers that some of you sent to me for feedback and have come up with a list of frequently encountered issues. If you found out you ran into one or more of these issues in the evaluation part, don’t worry because you’re probably not the only one who made a mistake (s). So, with multiple people running into the same issues, I’m writing this list to clarify and hopefully help you out before your final submission.
First, table 1 is created to help you organize your paper. It has the factor to be evaluated, evaluations and benchmarks columns. This table can be in the result section and you can organize your paper according to it. It is optional, so do not panic!
Table 1: EHR evaluation table
FACTORS TO EVALUATE EVALUATIONS & BENCHMARKS Description Reference Phase I Evaluation Phase I Benchmark Phase II Evaluation Phase II Benchmark Factor The game should be physically safe to play. Yeweifale, 2021 Systematically find every possible controller that could be used to input data into the game and test it with the game and with respect to in-game tips. No (0) incompatible third party controller is found, or tips or software are modified to make third party controllers compatible. Post-consumer reports of mishandled third party controllers must be systematically evaluated Post-consumer reports of mishandled third party controllers should be at or below a rate of 0.1% of the number of game copies sold Factor Factor Factor
Issues 1: Factors listed in Evaluation part/ Listed factors are not detailed enough
I encouraged all of you to put the factors in a table, so you can make sure that you specify them properly. Multiple factors I reviewed had factors accidentally listed in the (especially Phase I). These all also had the problem that a factor wasn’t detailed. A factor should be what you want to analyze, and the evaluation is how you want to analyze it. Basically, the how and the what should be specified and detailed enough.
Examples (these aren’t from your options because I can’t give away answers):
Let assume that you include a table with all the requirements that you are going to discuss in this assignment:
Table 2: Issue related to the factors listed in the evaluation part/ listed factors are not detailed enough
Factor (What) … Phase I Evaluation (How) Phase I Benchmark Phase II Evaluation (How) Phase II Benchmark Correct Patient portal systems need to be usable … An accepted systems usability scale is used to test the portal system with 5 patients The average usability score is 75% (Same as Phase I) The average usability score is 90% INCORRECT Usability … Patient portal systems need to be usable An accepted systems usability scale is used to test the portal system with 5 patients, average usability score is 75% Patient portal systems need to be usable An accepted systems usability scale is used to test the portal system with 5 patients, average usability score is 90%
Issue 2: Phase I benchmarks are counterproductive
I also found that some misunderstood what the Phase I benchmarks should be like. If a Phase I benchmark has a Phase II benchmark for the same evaluation, Phase I should be less strict. Some misinterpreted this as that the Phase I benchmark being lenient to the point that something bad was being expected.
Table 3: Issue related to the phase I benchmarks are counterproductive
Factor … Phase I Evaluation Phase I Benchmark Phase II Evaluation Phase II Benchmark Correct Physician critical care dashboards need to be legible … Physicians are tested for % accuracy in reading all items on the dashboard On average, the % accuracy must be at least 90% (Same as Phase I) On average, the % accuracy must be at least 98% INCORRECT Physician critical care dashboards need to be legible … Physicians are tested for % accuracy in reading all the items on the dashboard On average, the % accuracy must be less than 98% (Same as Phase I) On average, the % accuracy must be at least 98%
Issue 3: Evaluations not related to benchmarks
This issue often stemmed from factors being placed in the what to evaluate. However, it also came when the evaluation was placed and written correctly. All benchmarks are results of evaluations.
This example has a good evaluation, but the benchmark doesn’t directly relate to it. While record switching can cause patient mortality, finding the number of critical incidents due to switched records won’t give us a mortality figure to compare to a benchmark.
Table 4: Issue related to the evaluations not related to benchmarks
Factor … Phase I Evaluation Phase I Benchmark … … Correct Patient record switching is a major safety issue … The number of critical incidents due to switched records is analyzed The number of critical incidents is below 1 per 10,000 patient-visits … … INCORRECT Patient record switching is a major safety issue … The number of critical incidents due to switched records is analyzed The patient mortality is less than 1 per 10,000 patient-visits … …
Issue 4: Factor and evaluations not related
This type of problem is similar to the last one. One cause was, again, a factor sitting in the evaluation column. The other times, the evaluation made sense but for some reason didn’t match the factor.
Example (with a valid albeit irrelevant evaluation):
Table 5: Issue related to the factor and evaluations with no relation
Factor … Phase I Evaluation … … … Correct Systems need to schedule staff so that they have enough downtime between tasks … Staff are surveyed to determine the number of times they weren’t given enough time to go from one place to another … … … INCORRECT Systems need to schedule staff so that they have enough downtime between tasks … The system logs are checked daily to find out the rate of staff who are absent from work. … … …
Issue 5: Remedial measure stated where the evaluation (or benchmark) should be
In a few places, as an evaluation or benchmark, a remedial measure (how to fix the problem) was stated instead.
Example: Evaluation is a remedial measure
Table 6: Issue related to the remedial measure stated where the evaluation (or benchmark) should be
Factor … Phase I Evaluation Phase I Benchmark Phase II Evaluation Phase II Benchmark Correct Physician critical care dashboards need to be legible … Physicians are tested for % accuracy in reading all items on the dashboard On average, the % accuracy must be at least 90% Physicians are tested for % accuracy in reading all items on the dashboard On average, the % accuracy must be at least 98% INCORRECT Physician critical care dashboards need to be legible … Physicians are tested for % accuracy in reading all the items on the dashboard On average, the % accuracy must be at least 90% Physicians are given additional training in dashboard literacy On average, the % accuracy must be at least 98%
Important Note: You are welcome to add remedial measures, and they will help prove you went above and beyond the call for the assignment. However, do not place these under evaluations or benchmarks on your table and don’t refer to them as evaluations or benchmarks in your paper. Instead, if you wish, make an additional evaluation table column to the right of each benchmark and enter the remedial measure/ or intervention measure, and in your paper, discuss them after the respective benchmarks.
QUALITY OF RESPONSE NO RESPONSE POOR / UNSATISFACTORY SATISFACTORY GOOD EXCELLENT Content (worth a maximum of 50% of the total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 20 points out of 50: The essay illustrates poor understanding of the relevant material by failing to address or incorrectly addressing the relevant content; failing to identify or inaccurately explaining/defining key concepts/ideas; ignoring or incorrectly explaining key points/claims and the reasoning behind them; and/or incorrectly or inappropriately using terminology; and elements of the response are lacking. 30 points out of 50: The essay illustrates a rudimentary understanding of the relevant material by mentioning but not full explaining the relevant content; identifying some of the key concepts/ideas though failing to fully or accurately explain many of them; using terminology, though sometimes inaccurately or inappropriately; and/or incorporating some key claims/points but failing to explain the reasoning behind them or doing so inaccurately. Elements of the required response may also be lacking. 40 points out of 50: The essay illustrates solid understanding of the relevant material by correctly addressing most of the relevant content; identifying and explaining most of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology; explaining the reasoning behind most of the key points/claims; and/or where necessary or useful, substantiating some points with accurate examples. The answer is complete. 50 points: The essay illustrates exemplary understanding of the relevant material by thoroughly and correctly addressing the relevant content; identifying and explaining all of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology explaining the reasoning behind key points/claims and substantiating, as necessary/useful, points with several accurate and illuminating examples. No aspects of the required answer are missing. Use of Sources (worth a maximum of 20% of the total points). Zero points: Student failed to include citations and/or references. Or the student failed to submit a final paper. 5 out 20 points: Sources are seldom cited to support statements and/or format of citations are not recognizable as APA 6th Edition format. There are major errors in the formation of the references and citations. And/or there is a major reliance on highly questionable. The Student fails to provide an adequate synthesis of research collected for the paper. 10 out 20 points: References to scholarly sources are occasionally given; many statements seem unsubstantiated. Frequent errors in APA 6th Edition format, leaving the reader confused about the source of the information. There are significant errors of the formation in the references and citations. And/or there is a significant use of highly questionable sources. 15 out 20 points: Credible Scholarly sources are used effectively support claims and are, for the most part, clear and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition is used with only a few minor errors. There are minor errors in reference and/or citations. And/or there is some use of questionable sources. 20 points: Credible scholarly sources are used to give compelling evidence to support claims and are clearly and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition format is used accurately and consistently. The student uses above the maximum required references in the development of the assignment. Grammar (worth maximum of 20% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 5 points out of 20: The paper does not communicate ideas/points clearly due to inappropriate use of terminology and vague language; thoughts and sentences are disjointed or incomprehensible; organization lacking; and/or numerous grammatical, spelling/punctuation errors 10 points out 20: The paper is often unclear and difficult to follow due to some inappropriate terminology and/or vague language; ideas may be fragmented, wandering and/or repetitive; poor organization; and/or some grammatical, spelling, punctuation errors 15 points out of 20: The paper is mostly clear as a result of appropriate use of terminology and minimal vagueness; no tangents and no repetition; fairly good organization; almost perfect grammar, spelling, punctuation, and word usage. 20 points: The paper is clear, concise, and a pleasure to read as a result of appropriate and precise use of terminology; total coherence of thoughts and presentation and logical organization; and the essay is error free. Structure of the Paper (worth 10% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 3 points out of 10: Student needs to develop better formatting skills. The paper omits significant structural elements required for and APA 6th edition paper. Formatting of the paper has major flaws. The paper does not conform to APA 6th edition requirements whatsoever. 5 points out of 10: Appearance of final paper demonstrates the student’s limited ability to format the paper. There are significant errors in formatting and/or the total omission of major components of an APA 6th edition paper. They can include the omission of the cover page, abstract, and page numbers. Additionally the page has major formatting issues with spacing or paragraph formation. Font size might not conform to size requirements. The student also significantly writes too large or too short of and paper 7 points out of 10: Research paper presents an above-average use of formatting skills. The paper has slight errors within the paper. This can include small errors or omissions with the cover page, abstract, page number, and headers. There could be also slight formatting issues with the document spacing or the font Additionally the paper might slightly exceed or undershoot the specific number of required written pages for the assignment. 10 points: Student provides a high-caliber, formatted paper. This includes an APA 6th edition cover page, abstract, page number, headers and is double spaced in 12’ Times Roman Font. Additionally, the paper conforms to the specific number of required written pages and neither goes over or under the specified length of the paper.
GET THIS PROJECT NOW BY CLICKING ON THIS LINK TO PLACE THE ORDER
CLICK ON THE LINK HERE: https://essaysolver.com/orders/ordernow
You Can Also Place the Order In www.perfectacademic.com/orders/ordernow / www.essaysolver.com/orders/ordernow
Do You Have Any Other Essay/Assignment/Class Project/Homework Related to this? Click Here Now [CLICK ME] and Have It Done by Our PhD Qualified Writers!!
Tired of getting an average grade in all your school assignments, projects, essays, and homework? Try us today for all your academic schoolwork needs. We are among the most trusted and recognized professional writing services in the market.
We provide unique, original and plagiarism-free high quality academic, homework, assignments and essay submissions for all our clients. At our company, we capitalize on producing A+ Grades for all our clients and also ensure that you have smooth academic progress in all your school term and semesters.
High-quality academic submissions, A 100% plagiarism-free submission, Meet even the most urgent deadlines, Provide our services to you at the most competitive rates in the market, Give you free revisions until you meet your desired grades and Provide you with 24/7 customer support service via calls or live chats.