Assignment Prompt & Instructions
– a year ago
**files (2)**
– ## CLCPPTAssignment.docx
– ## EthicsintheChangingHealthCareEnvironmentPresentation.pdf
**## CLCPPTAssignment.docx**
Create a 6 -slide presentation with detailed speaker notes that addresses the following areas:
1. The chosen area of health care research which is
**HMIS.**
2. The potential ethical issues associated with this area of health care research (the health care research is
**HMIS. Health Management Information Systems**
· Include at least three references to support your positions.
**## EthicsintheChangingHealthCareEnvironmentPresentation.pdf**
5/8/25, 5:53 PM
Page 1 of 9about:srcdoc
CLC – Ethics in the Changing Health Care Environment Presentation –
Rubric
Chosen Area of Health Care Research 11 points
Criteria Description
Chosen Area of Health Care Research
5. Excellent 11 points
Presentation clearly and thoroughly identifies and explains a specific area of
health care research.
4. Good 9.35 points
Presentation thoroughly identifies and explains a specific area of health care
research.
3. Satisfactory 8.25 points
Presentation identifies and explains a specific area of health care research.
2. Less than Satisfactory 7.15 points
Presentation vaguely identifies and explains a specific area of health care
research.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Presentation does not adequately identify or explain a specific area of health
care research.
Collapse All
5/8/25, 5:53 PM
Page 2 of 9about:srcdoc
Potential Ethical Issues in the Chosen Area of Health Care Research 11 points
Criteria Description
Potential Ethical Issues in the Chosen Area of Health Care Research
5. Excellent 11 points
Presentation clearly and thoroughly examines potential ethical issues
associated with the chosen area of health care research.
4. Good 9.35 points
Presentation thoroughly examines potential ethical issues associated with the
chosen area of health care research.
3. Satisfactory 8.25 points
Presentation examines potential ethical issues associated with the chosen
area of health care research.
2. Less than Satisfactory 7.15 points
Presentation vaguely examines potential ethical issues associated with the
chosen area of health care research.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Presentation does not adequately examine potential ethical issues associated
with the chosen area of health care research.
5/8/25, 5:53 PM
Page 3 of 9about:srcdoc
Clinical Research and the IRB When Completing Research 11 points
Criteria Description
Clinical Research and the IRB When Completing Research
5. Excellent 11 points
Presentation clearly and thoroughly discusses the importance of clinical
research and the Institutional Review Board (IRB) when completing research.
4. Good 9.35 points
Presentation thoroughly discusses the importance of clinical research and the
Institutional Review Board (IRB) when completing research.
3. Satisfactory 8.25 points
Presentation discusses the importance of clinical research and the
Institutional Review Board (IRB) when completing research.
2. Less than Satisfactory 7.15 points
Presentation vaguely discusses the importance of clinical research and the
Institutional Review Board (IRB) when completing research.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Presentation does not adequately discuss the importance of clinical research
and the Institutional Review Board (IRB) when completing research.
5/8/25, 5:53 PM
Page 4 of 9about:srcdoc
Ethical Issues of Current and Developing Technology in Health Care
Research
11 points
Criteria Description
Ethical Issues of Current and Developing Technology in Health Care Research
5. Excellent 11 points
Presentation clearly and thoroughly explores potential ethical issues
surrounding the use of current and developing technology in health care
research.
4. Good 9.35 points
Presentation thoroughly explores potential ethical issues surrounding the use
of current and developing technology in health care research.
3. Satisfactory 8.25 points
Presentation explores potential ethical issues surrounding the use of current
and developing technology in health care research.
2. Less than Satisfactory 7.15 points
Presentation vaguely explores potential ethical issues surrounding the use of
current and developing technology in health care research.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Presentation does not adequately explore potential ethical issues surrounding
the use of current and developing technology in health care research.
5/8/25, 5:53 PM
Page 5 of 9about:srcdoc
Presentation of Content 33 points
Criteria Description
Presentation of Content
5. Excellent 33 points
The content is written clearly and concisely. Ideas universally progress and
relate to each other. The project includes motivating questions and advanced
organizers. The project gives the audience a clear sense of the main idea.
4. Good 28.05 points
The content is written with a logical progression of ideas and supporting
information exhibiting a unity, coherence, and cohesiveness. Includes
persuasive information from reliable sources.
3. Satisfactory 24.75 points
The presentation slides are generally competent, but ideas may show some
inconsistency in organization and/or in their relationships to each other.
2. Less than Satisfactory 21.45 points
The content is vague in conveying a point of view and does not create a strong
sense of purpose. Includes some persuasive information.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
The content lacks a clear point of view and logical sequence of information.
Includes little persuasive information. Sequencing of ideas is unclear.
5/8/25, 5:53 PM
Page 6 of 9about:srcdoc
Layout 11 points
Criteria Description
Layout
5. Excellent 11 points
The layout is visually pleasing and contributes to the overall message with
appropriate use of headings, subheadings, and white space. Text is
appropriate in length for the target audience and to the point. The
background and colors enhance the readability of the text.
4. Good 9.35 points
The layout background and text complement each other and enable the
content to be easily read. The fonts are easy to read and point size varies
appropriately for headings and text.
3. Satisfactory 8.25 points
The layout uses horizontal and vertical white space appropriately. Sometimes
the fonts are easy to read, but in a few places the use of fonts, italics, bold,
long paragraphs, color, or busy background detracts and does not enhance
readability.
2. Less than Satisfactory 7.15 points
The layout shows some structure, but appears cluttered and busy or
distracting with large gaps of white space or a distracting background. Overall
readability is difficult due to lengthy paragraphs, too many different fonts,
dark or busy background, overuse of bold, or lack of appropriate indentations
of text.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
The layout is cluttered, confusing, and does not use spacing, headings, and
subheadings to enhance the readability. The text is extremely difficult to read
with long blocks of text, small point size for fonts, and inappropriate
contrasting colors. Poor use of headings, subheadings, indentations, or bold
formatting is evident.
5/8/25, 5:53 PM
Page 7 of 9about:srcdoc
Language Use and Audience Awareness (includes sentence
construction, word choice, etc.)
11 points
Criteria Description
Language Use and Audience Awareness (includes sentence construction, word
choice, etc.)
5. Excellent 11 points
The writer uses a variety of sentence constructions, figures of speech, and
word choice in distinctive and creative ways that are appropriate to purpose,
discipline, and scope.
4. Good 9.35 points
The writer is clearly aware of audience, uses a variety of appropriate
vocabulary for the targeted audience, and uses figures of speech to
communicate clearly.
3. Satisfactory 8.25 points
Language is appropriate to the targeted audience for the most part.
2. Less than Satisfactory 7.15 points
Some distracting inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice
are present. The writer exhibits some lack of control in using figures of speech
appropriately.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Inappropriate word choice and lack of variety in language use are evident.
Writer appears to be unaware of audience. Use of primer prose indicates
writer either does not apply figures of speech or uses them inappropriately.
5/8/25, 5:53 PM
Page 8 of 9about:srcdoc
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar,
language use)
5.5 points
Criteria Description
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)
5. Excellent 5.5 points
Writer is clearly in control of standard, written, academic English.
4. Good 4.68 points
Slides are largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present.
3. Satisfactory 4.13 points
Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly
distracting to the reader.
2. Less than Satisfactory 3.58 points
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Slide errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of
meaning.
5/8/25, 5:53 PM
Page 9 of 9about:srcdoc
Documentation of Sources 5.5 points
Criteria Description
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as
appropriate to assignment and style)
5. Excellent 5.5 points
Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to
assignment and style, and format is free of error.
4. Good 4.68 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format
is mostly correct.
3. Satisfactory 4.13 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although
some formatting errors may be present.
2. Less than Satisfactory 3.58 points
Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to
assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Sources are not documented.
Total 110 points
© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
**## EthicsintheChangingHealthCareEnvironmentPresentation.pdf**
5/8/25, 5:53 PM
Page 1 of 9about:srcdoc
CLC – Ethics in the Changing Health Care Environment Presentation –
Rubric
Chosen Area of Health Care Research 11 points
Criteria Description
Chosen Area of Health Care Research
5. Excellent 11 points
Presentation clearly and thoroughly identifies and explains a specific area of
health care research.
4. Good 9.35 points
Presentation thoroughly identifies and explains a specific area of health care
research.
3. Satisfactory 8.25 points
Presentation identifies and explains a specific area of health care research.
2. Less than Satisfactory 7.15 points
Presentation vaguely identifies and explains a specific area of health care
research.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Presentation does not adequately identify or explain a specific area of health
care research.
Collapse All
5/8/25, 5:53 PM
Page 2 of 9about:srcdoc
Potential Ethical Issues in the Chosen Area of Health Care Research 11 points
Criteria Description
Potential Ethical Issues in the Chosen Area of Health Care Research
5. Excellent 11 points
Presentation clearly and thoroughly examines potential ethical issues
associated with the chosen area of health care research.
4. Good 9.35 points
Presentation thoroughly examines potential ethical issues associated with the
chosen area of health care research.
3. Satisfactory 8.25 points
Presentation examines potential ethical issues associated with the chosen
area of health care research.
2. Less than Satisfactory 7.15 points
Presentation vaguely examines potential ethical issues associated with the
chosen area of health care research.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Presentation does not adequately examine potential ethical issues associated
with the chosen area of health care research.
5/8/25, 5:53 PM
Page 3 of 9about:srcdoc
Clinical Research and the IRB When Completing Research 11 points
Criteria Description
Clinical Research and the IRB When Completing Research
5. Excellent 11 points
Presentation clearly and thoroughly discusses the importance of clinical
research and the Institutional Review Board (IRB) when completing research.
4. Good 9.35 points
Presentation thoroughly discusses the importance of clinical research and the
Institutional Review Board (IRB) when completing research.
3. Satisfactory 8.25 points
Presentation discusses the importance of clinical research and the
Institutional Review Board (IRB) when completing research.
2. Less than Satisfactory 7.15 points
Presentation vaguely discusses the importance of clinical research and the
Institutional Review Board (IRB) when completing research.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Presentation does not adequately discuss the importance of clinical research
and the Institutional Review Board (IRB) when completing research.
5/8/25, 5:53 PM
Page 4 of 9about:srcdoc
Ethical Issues of Current and Developing Technology in Health Care
Research
11 points
Criteria Description
Ethical Issues of Current and Developing Technology in Health Care Research
5. Excellent 11 points
Presentation clearly and thoroughly explores potential ethical issues
surrounding the use of current and developing technology in health care
research.
4. Good 9.35 points
Presentation thoroughly explores potential ethical issues surrounding the use
of current and developing technology in health care research.
3. Satisfactory 8.25 points
Presentation explores potential ethical issues surrounding the use of current
and developing technology in health care research.
2. Less than Satisfactory 7.15 points
Presentation vaguely explores potential ethical issues surrounding the use of
current and developing technology in health care research.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Presentation does not adequately explore potential ethical issues surrounding
the use of current and developing technology in health care research.
5/8/25, 5:53 PM
Page 5 of 9about:srcdoc
Presentation of Content 33 points
Criteria Description
Presentation of Content
5. Excellent 33 points
The content is written clearly and concisely. Ideas universally progress and
relate to each other. The project includes motivating questions and advanced
organizers. The project gives the audience a clear sense of the main idea.
4. Good 28.05 points
The content is written with a logical progression of ideas and supporting
information exhibiting a unity, coherence, and cohesiveness. Includes
persuasive information from reliable sources.
3. Satisfactory 24.75 points
The presentation slides are generally competent, but ideas may show some
inconsistency in organization and/or in their relationships to each other.
2. Less than Satisfactory 21.45 points
The content is vague in conveying a point of view and does not create a strong
sense of purpose. Includes some persuasive information.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
The content lacks a clear point of view and logical sequence of information.
Includes little persuasive information. Sequencing of ideas is unclear.
5/8/25, 5:53 PM
Page 6 of 9about:srcdoc
Layout 11 points
Criteria Description
Layout
5. Excellent 11 points
The layout is visually pleasing and contributes to the overall message with
appropriate use of headings, subheadings, and white space. Text is
appropriate in length for the target audience and to the point. The
background and colors enhance the readability of the text.
4. Good 9.35 points
The layout background and text complement each other and enable the
content to be easily read. The fonts are easy to read and point size varies
appropriately for headings and text.
3. Satisfactory 8.25 points
The layout uses horizontal and vertical white space appropriately. Sometimes
the fonts are easy to read, but in a few places the use of fonts, italics, bold,
long paragraphs, color, or busy background detracts and does not enhance
readability.
2. Less than Satisfactory 7.15 points
The layout shows some structure, but appears cluttered and busy or
distracting with large gaps of white space or a distracting background. Overall
readability is difficult due to lengthy paragraphs, too many different fonts,
dark or busy background, overuse of bold, or lack of appropriate indentations
of text.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
The layout is cluttered, confusing, and does not use spacing, headings, and
subheadings to enhance the readability. The text is extremely difficult to read
with long blocks of text, small point size for fonts, and inappropriate
contrasting colors. Poor use of headings, subheadings, indentations, or bold
formatting is evident.
5/8/25, 5:53 PM
Page 7 of 9about:srcdoc
Language Use and Audience Awareness (includes sentence
construction, word choice, etc.)
11 points
Criteria Description
Language Use and Audience Awareness (includes sentence construction, word
choice, etc.)
5. Excellent 11 points
The writer uses a variety of sentence constructions, figures of speech, and
word choice in distinctive and creative ways that are appropriate to purpose,
discipline, and scope.
4. Good 9.35 points
The writer is clearly aware of audience, uses a variety of appropriate
vocabulary for the targeted audience, and uses figures of speech to
communicate clearly.
3. Satisfactory 8.25 points
Language is appropriate to the targeted audience for the most part.
2. Less than Satisfactory 7.15 points
Some distracting inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice
are present. The writer exhibits some lack of control in using figures of speech
appropriately.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Inappropriate word choice and lack of variety in language use are evident.
Writer appears to be unaware of audience. Use of primer prose indicates
writer either does not apply figures of speech or uses them inappropriately.
5/8/25, 5:53 PM
Page 8 of 9about:srcdoc
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar,
language use)
5.5 points
Criteria Description
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)
5. Excellent 5.5 points
Writer is clearly in control of standard, written, academic English.
4. Good 4.68 points
Slides are largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present.
3. Satisfactory 4.13 points
Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly
distracting to the reader.
2. Less than Satisfactory 3.58 points
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Slide errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of
meaning.
5/8/25, 5:53 PM
Page 9 of 9about:srcdoc
Documentation of Sources 5.5 points
Criteria Description
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as
appropriate to assignment and style)
5. Excellent 5.5 points
Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to
assignment and style, and format is free of error.
4. Good 4.68 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format
is mostly correct.
3. Satisfactory 4.13 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although
some formatting errors may be present.
2. Less than Satisfactory 3.58 points
Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to
assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Sources are not documented.
Total 110 points
© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
**## CLCPPTAssignment.docx**
Create a 6 -slide presentation with detailed speaker notes that addresses the following areas:
1. The chosen area of health care research which is
**HMIS.**
2. The potential ethical issues associated with this area of health care research (the health care research is
**HMIS. Health Management Information Systems**
· Include at least three references to support your positions.
**## EthicsintheChangingHealthCareEnvironmentPresentation.pdf**
5/8/25, 5:53 PM
Page 1 of 9about:srcdoc
CLC – Ethics in the Changing Health Care Environment Presentation –
Rubric
Chosen Area of Health Care Research 11 points
Criteria Description
Chosen Area of Health Care Research
5. Excellent 11 points
Presentation clearly and thoroughly identifies and explains a specific area of
health care research.
4. Good 9.35 points
Presentation thoroughly identifies and explains a specific area of health care
research.
3. Satisfactory 8.25 points
Presentation identifies and explains a specific area of health care research.
2. Less than Satisfactory 7.15 points
Presentation vaguely identifies and explains a specific area of health care
research.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Presentation does not adequately identify or explain a specific area of health
care research.
Collapse All
5/8/25, 5:53 PM
Page 2 of 9about:srcdoc
Potential Ethical Issues in the Chosen Area of Health Care Research 11 points
Criteria Description
Potential Ethical Issues in the Chosen Area of Health Care Research
5. Excellent 11 points
Presentation clearly and thoroughly examines potential ethical issues
associated with the chosen area of health care research.
4. Good 9.35 points
Presentation thoroughly examines potential ethical issues associated with the
chosen area of health care research.
3. Satisfactory 8.25 points
Presentation examines potential ethical issues associated with the chosen
area of health care research.
2. Less than Satisfactory 7.15 points
Presentation vaguely examines potential ethical issues associated with the
chosen area of health care research.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Presentation does not adequately examine potential ethical issues associated
with the chosen area of health care research.
5/8/25, 5:53 PM
Page 3 of 9about:srcdoc
Clinical Research and the IRB When Completing Research 11 points
Criteria Description
Clinical Research and the IRB When Completing Research
5. Excellent 11 points
Presentation clearly and thoroughly discusses the importance of clinical
research and the Institutional Review Board (IRB) when completing research.
4. Good 9.35 points
Presentation thoroughly discusses the importance of clinical research and the
Institutional Review Board (IRB) when completing research.
3. Satisfactory 8.25 points
Presentation discusses the importance of clinical research and the
Institutional Review Board (IRB) when completing research.
2. Less than Satisfactory 7.15 points
Presentation vaguely discusses the importance of clinical research and the
Institutional Review Board (IRB) when completing research.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Presentation does not adequately discuss the importance of clinical research
and the Institutional Review Board (IRB) when completing research.
5/8/25, 5:53 PM
Page 4 of 9about:srcdoc
Ethical Issues of Current and Developing Technology in Health Care
Research
11 points
Criteria Description
Ethical Issues of Current and Developing Technology in Health Care Research
5. Excellent 11 points
Presentation clearly and thoroughly explores potential ethical issues
surrounding the use of current and developing technology in health care
research.
4. Good 9.35 points
Presentation thoroughly explores potential ethical issues surrounding the use
of current and developing technology in health care research.
3. Satisfactory 8.25 points
Presentation explores potential ethical issues surrounding the use of current
and developing technology in health care research.
2. Less than Satisfactory 7.15 points
Presentation vaguely explores potential ethical issues surrounding the use of
current and developing technology in health care research.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Presentation does not adequately explore potential ethical issues surrounding
the use of current and developing technology in health care research.
5/8/25, 5:53 PM
Page 5 of 9about:srcdoc
Presentation of Content 33 points
Criteria Description
Presentation of Content
5. Excellent 33 points
The content is written clearly and concisely. Ideas universally progress and
relate to each other. The project includes motivating questions and advanced
organizers. The project gives the audience a clear sense of the main idea.
4. Good 28.05 points
The content is written with a logical progression of ideas and supporting
information exhibiting a unity, coherence, and cohesiveness. Includes
persuasive information from reliable sources.
3. Satisfactory 24.75 points
The presentation slides are generally competent, but ideas may show some
inconsistency in organization and/or in their relationships to each other.
2. Less than Satisfactory 21.45 points
The content is vague in conveying a point of view and does not create a strong
sense of purpose. Includes some persuasive information.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
The content lacks a clear point of view and logical sequence of information.
Includes little persuasive information. Sequencing of ideas is unclear.
5/8/25, 5:53 PM
Page 6 of 9about:srcdoc
Layout 11 points
Criteria Description
Layout
5. Excellent 11 points
The layout is visually pleasing and contributes to the overall message with
appropriate use of headings, subheadings, and white space. Text is
appropriate in length for the target audience and to the point. The
background and colors enhance the readability of the text.
4. Good 9.35 points
The layout background and text complement each other and enable the
content to be easily read. The fonts are easy to read and point size varies
appropriately for headings and text.
3. Satisfactory 8.25 points
The layout uses horizontal and vertical white space appropriately. Sometimes
the fonts are easy to read, but in a few places the use of fonts, italics, bold,
long paragraphs, color, or busy background detracts and does not enhance
readability.
2. Less than Satisfactory 7.15 points
The layout shows some structure, but appears cluttered and busy or
distracting with large gaps of white space or a distracting background. Overall
readability is difficult due to lengthy paragraphs, too many different fonts,
dark or busy background, overuse of bold, or lack of appropriate indentations
of text.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
The layout is cluttered, confusing, and does not use spacing, headings, and
subheadings to enhance the readability. The text is extremely difficult to read
with long blocks of text, small point size for fonts, and inappropriate
contrasting colors. Poor use of headings, subheadings, indentations, or bold
formatting is evident.
5/8/25, 5:53 PM
Page 7 of 9about:srcdoc
Language Use and Audience Awareness (includes sentence
construction, word choice, etc.)
11 points
Criteria Description
Language Use and Audience Awareness (includes sentence construction, word
choice, etc.)
5. Excellent 11 points
The writer uses a variety of sentence constructions, figures of speech, and
word choice in distinctive and creative ways that are appropriate to purpose,
discipline, and scope.
4. Good 9.35 points
The writer is clearly aware of audience, uses a variety of appropriate
vocabulary for the targeted audience, and uses figures of speech to
communicate clearly.
3. Satisfactory 8.25 points
Language is appropriate to the targeted audience for the most part.
2. Less than Satisfactory 7.15 points
Some distracting inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice
are present. The writer exhibits some lack of control in using figures of speech
appropriately.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Inappropriate word choice and lack of variety in language use are evident.
Writer appears to be unaware of audience. Use of primer prose indicates
writer either does not apply figures of speech or uses them inappropriately.
5/8/25, 5:53 PM
Page 8 of 9about:srcdoc
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar,
language use)
5.5 points
Criteria Description
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)
5. Excellent 5.5 points
Writer is clearly in control of standard, written, academic English.
4. Good 4.68 points
Slides are largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present.
3. Satisfactory 4.13 points
Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly
distracting to the reader.
2. Less than Satisfactory 3.58 points
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Slide errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of
meaning.
5/8/25, 5:53 PM
Page 9 of 9about:srcdoc
Documentation of Sources 5.5 points
Criteria Description
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as
appropriate to assignment and style)
5. Excellent 5.5 points
Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to
assignment and style, and format is free of error.
4. Good 4.68 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format
is mostly correct.
3. Satisfactory 4.13 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although
some formatting errors may be present.
2. Less than Satisfactory 3.58 points
Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to
assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Sources are not documented.
Total 110 points
© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
**## CLCPPTAssignment.docx**
Create a 6 -slide presentation with detailed speaker notes that addresses the following areas:
1. The chosen area of health care research which is
**HMIS.**
2. The potential ethical issues associated with this area of health care research (the health care research is
**HMIS. Health Management Information Systems**
· Include at least three references to support your positions.
**## EthicsintheChangingHealthCareEnvironmentPresentation.pdf**
5/8/25, 5:53 PM
Page 1 of 9about:srcdoc
CLC – Ethics in the Changing Health Care Environment Presentation –
Rubric
Chosen Area of Health Care Research 11 points
Criteria Description
Chosen Area of Health Care Research
5. Excellent 11 points
Presentation clearly and thoroughly identifies and explains a specific area of
health care research.
4. Good 9.35 points
Presentation thoroughly identifies and explains a specific area of health care
research.
3. Satisfactory 8.25 points
Presentation identifies and explains a specific area of health care research.
2. Less than Satisfactory 7.15 points
Presentation vaguely identifies and explains a specific area of health care
research.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Presentation does not adequately identify or explain a specific area of health
care research.
Collapse All
5/8/25, 5:53 PM
Page 2 of 9about:srcdoc
Potential Ethical Issues in the Chosen Area of Health Care Research 11 points
Criteria Description
Potential Ethical Issues in the Chosen Area of Health Care Research
5. Excellent 11 points
Presentation clearly and thoroughly examines potential ethical issues
associated with the chosen area of health care research.
4. Good 9.35 points
Presentation thoroughly examines potential ethical issues associated with the
chosen area of health care research.
3. Satisfactory 8.25 points
Presentation examines potential ethical issues associated with the chosen
area of health care research.
2. Less than Satisfactory 7.15 points
Presentation vaguely examines potential ethical issues associated with the
chosen area of health care research.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Presentation does not adequately examine potential ethical issues associated
with the chosen area of health care research.
5/8/25, 5:53 PM
Page 3 of 9about:srcdoc
Clinical Research and the IRB When Completing Research 11 points
Criteria Description
Clinical Research and the IRB When Completing Research
5. Excellent 11 points
Presentation clearly and thoroughly discusses the importance of clinical
research and the Institutional Review Board (IRB) when completing research.
4. Good 9.35 points
Presentation thoroughly discusses the importance of clinical research and the
Institutional Review Board (IRB) when completing research.
3. Satisfactory 8.25 points
Presentation discusses the importance of clinical research and the
Institutional Review Board (IRB) when completing research.
2. Less than Satisfactory 7.15 points
Presentation vaguely discusses the importance of clinical research and the
Institutional Review Board (IRB) when completing research.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Presentation does not adequately discuss the importance of clinical research
and the Institutional Review Board (IRB) when completing research.
5/8/25, 5:53 PM
Page 4 of 9about:srcdoc
Ethical Issues of Current and Developing Technology in Health Care
Research
11 points
Criteria Description
Ethical Issues of Current and Developing Technology in Health Care Research
5. Excellent 11 points
Presentation clearly and thoroughly explores potential ethical issues
surrounding the use of current and developing technology in health care
research.
4. Good 9.35 points
Presentation thoroughly explores potential ethical issues surrounding the use
of current and developing technology in health care research.
3. Satisfactory 8.25 points
Presentation explores potential ethical issues surrounding the use of current
and developing technology in health care research.
2. Less than Satisfactory 7.15 points
Presentation vaguely explores potential ethical issues surrounding the use of
current and developing technology in health care research.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Presentation does not adequately explore potential ethical issues surrounding
the use of current and developing technology in health care research.
5/8/25, 5:53 PM
Page 5 of 9about:srcdoc
Presentation of Content 33 points
Criteria Description
Presentation of Content
5. Excellent 33 points
The content is written clearly and concisely. Ideas universally progress and
relate to each other. The project includes motivating questions and advanced
organizers. The project gives the audience a clear sense of the main idea.
4. Good 28.05 points
The content is written with a logical progression of ideas and supporting
information exhibiting a unity, coherence, and cohesiveness. Includes
persuasive information from reliable sources.
3. Satisfactory 24.75 points
The presentation slides are generally competent, but ideas may show some
inconsistency in organization and/or in their relationships to each other.
2. Less than Satisfactory 21.45 points
The content is vague in conveying a point of view and does not create a strong
sense of purpose. Includes some persuasive information.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
The content lacks a clear point of view and logical sequence of information.
Includes little persuasive information. Sequencing of ideas is unclear.
5/8/25, 5:53 PM
Page 6 of 9about:srcdoc
Layout 11 points
Criteria Description
Layout
5. Excellent 11 points
The layout is visually pleasing and contributes to the overall message with
appropriate use of headings, subheadings, and white space. Text is
appropriate in length for the target audience and to the point. The
background and colors enhance the readability of the text.
4. Good 9.35 points
The layout background and text complement each other and enable the
content to be easily read. The fonts are easy to read and point size varies
appropriately for headings and text.
3. Satisfactory 8.25 points
The layout uses horizontal and vertical white space appropriately. Sometimes
the fonts are easy to read, but in a few places the use of fonts, italics, bold,
long paragraphs, color, or busy background detracts and does not enhance
readability.
2. Less than Satisfactory 7.15 points
The layout shows some structure, but appears cluttered and busy or
distracting with large gaps of white space or a distracting background. Overall
readability is difficult due to lengthy paragraphs, too many different fonts,
dark or busy background, overuse of bold, or lack of appropriate indentations
of text.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
The layout is cluttered, confusing, and does not use spacing, headings, and
subheadings to enhance the readability. The text is extremely difficult to read
with long blocks of text, small point size for fonts, and inappropriate
contrasting colors. Poor use of headings, subheadings, indentations, or bold
formatting is evident.
5/8/25, 5:53 PM
Page 7 of 9about:srcdoc
Language Use and Audience Awareness (includes sentence
construction, word choice, etc.)
11 points
Criteria Description
Language Use and Audience Awareness (includes sentence construction, word
choice, etc.)
5. Excellent 11 points
The writer uses a variety of sentence constructions, figures of speech, and
word choice in distinctive and creative ways that are appropriate to purpose,
discipline, and scope.
4. Good 9.35 points
The writer is clearly aware of audience, uses a variety of appropriate
vocabulary for the targeted audience, and uses figures of speech to
communicate clearly.
3. Satisfactory 8.25 points
Language is appropriate to the targeted audience for the most part.
2. Less than Satisfactory 7.15 points
Some distracting inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice
are present. The writer exhibits some lack of control in using figures of speech
appropriately.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Inappropriate word choice and lack of variety in language use are evident.
Writer appears to be unaware of audience. Use of primer prose indicates
writer either does not apply figures of speech or uses them inappropriately.
5/8/25, 5:53 PM
Page 8 of 9about:srcdoc
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar,
language use)
5.5 points
Criteria Description
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)
5. Excellent 5.5 points
Writer is clearly in control of standard, written, academic English.
4. Good 4.68 points
Slides are largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present.
3. Satisfactory 4.13 points
Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly
distracting to the reader.
2. Less than Satisfactory 3.58 points
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Slide errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of
meaning.
5/8/25, 5:53 PM
Page 9 of 9about:srcdoc
Documentation of Sources 5.5 points
Criteria Description
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as
appropriate to assignment and style)
5. Excellent 5.5 points
Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to
assignment and style, and format is free of error.
4. Good 4.68 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format
is mostly correct.
3. Satisfactory 4.13 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although
some formatting errors may be present.
2. Less than Satisfactory 3.58 points
Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to
assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Sources are not documented.
Total 110 points
© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)