CON Faculty Practice Fund Scoring Rubric

From University of Nebraska Medical Center
Revision as of 14:29, May 30, 2017 by Jbarrier (talk | contribs)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.
Home   Appendices                    


UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA MEDICAL CENTER
COLLEGE OF NURSING
Faculty Practice Fund Scoring Rubric Subsection: Appendix Z4
Appendix - Appendices Originating Date: May 2017
Responsible Reviewing Agency:
Faculty Practice Committee
Executive Council
 
 


Faculty Practice Fund Scoring Rubric
Applies to:
Projects, Conferences or Continuing Education

Scoring Rubric:


  Not Applicable 1 2 3


Scoring Explanation:

Not applicable – This item is not relevant to this particular application.

Score of 1 – The application poses a weak explanation for the request. There is little explanation of what the funding request is for or how the outcomes might benefit faculty practice at the UNMC CON.

Score of 2 – The application poses a reasonable explanation for the request. The explanation of the funding request is clear and concise. The outcomes would benefit faculty practice at the UNMC CON.

Score of 3 – The application poses a strong explanation for the request. The explanation of the funding request is clear and concise. Additionally, it includes a strong explanation for significance, innovation, and approach. The outcomes directly benefit faculty practice at the UNMC CON and the individual’s personal trajectory towards promotion and tenure.