HPR 415 Marrymount Interrelated Manner Essay Inquiry Problem #1 (assigned on 1.14.19) During an exercise (such as a GXT), the heart must compensate from re

HPR 415 Marrymount Interrelated Manner Essay Inquiry Problem #1 (assigned on 1.14.19) During an exercise (such as a GXT), the heart must compensate from rest to facilitate increased blood flow to the body/muscles. In doing so, the heart tissue itself must be supplied with enough blood, oxygen, and nutrients to meet such heightened metabolic demands related to cardiac performance. In a roughly 1000 word essay/response, your assignment is to describe in an interrelated manner key concepts in the above statement Marymount University
Department of Health and Human Performance
HPR 415: Grading Rubric for Short Inquiry Writing Assignments
Category (max
points)
Introduction and
Purpose (5)
Content (30)
Organization (10)
Tone (5)
Sentence and
Paragraph
Structure (10)
Outstanding (pts)
Clearly established introduction that
outlines major topics to be covered in
paper; well-established and relevant
purpose that addresses inquiry
statement/problem/question. (5 pts)
Paper provides an in-depth yet
succinct balance of information and
the reader gains important insights
based on the inquiry topic. Paper
presents and explores contemporary
viewpoints or information on the topic.
Limited direct quotes indicating strong
interpretation of material by student.
(27-30 pts)
Ideas are well organized and presented
in a logical manner following the
outline reviewed in the introduction.
Topics flow smoothly from one to the
next and are clearly linked. The reader
follows the line of reasoning. (9-10 pts)
The writing is compelling and the tone
is appropriate for a scientific writing
assignment. Outstanding for a senior
level student in the health sciences.
Would be appropriate tone for early
graduate/entry level work in the topic
area. (5 pts)
Sentences are well phrased and vary in
length and structure. Transitions are
smooth from one topic to the next.
Good/Above Average (pts)
Above average work, some
disconnect between
outline/purpose and actual
paper. (4 pts)
Not as comprehensive or indepth as outstanding
performance. Some
information may be irrelevant
or lacking in timeliness and
depth. Some overuse of direct
quotes and general lack of
interpretation of material by
student. (24-26 pts)
Paper does a good job of
developing logically from one
topic to the next. Minor
disconnect from the outline to
what is written in the paper. (8
pts)
Minor use of conversational
tone. Use of scientific
language could be improved
upon in certain areas.
Generally above a senior level
health sciences audience. (4
pts)
Very minor concerns with
phrasing of sentences and with
length and structure.
Acceptable/Average (pts)
Poor/Below Average (pts)
Average work, some greater
disconnect between
outline/purpose and actual
paper. May not fully address
inquiry assignment. (3 pts)
Average coverage of material or
not as in-depth as above
average performance. Some
information may be irrelevant or
lacking in timeliness. Some
overuse of direct quotes instead
of student interpretation of
material. May not fully address
inquiry assignment. (21-23 pts)
Some disorganization between
topics, or presented in a less
than ideally logical manner.
Certain topics listed are not
discussed or are omitted from
paper. (7 pts)
A blend of scientific and
conversational (bad) tone is
present. This is the
expected/typical level of
performance for a senior level
health sciences student. (3 pts)
No outline presented in
introduction and no/lacking
evidence of purpose for
paper. (2 or less pts)
Minor concerns with phrasing of
sentences and with length and
structure. Transitions are
Considerable lack of
content depth; is mostly
opinion or from nonevidence based/primary
sources. Reader gains little
about topic. Considerable
overuse of direct quotes.
(20 or less pts)
There is very little or no
sense of organization in the
paper. Paper is hard to
follow and does not match
the stated outline in the
introduction. (6 or less pts)
Considerable reference to
first person; conversational
in tone; reads like an
opinion or reaction type
paper. Is well below the
senior level audience. (2 or
less pts)
Poorly phrased, jumps from
one topic to another
without lead ins or
Paragraphs develop each topic fully
and in a logical manner. (9-10 pts)
Word choice (5)
Word choice is consistently accurate,
succinct, precise and of a high scientific
nature. (5 pts)
Grammar,
spelling, and
mechanics (15)
Sources (10)
The writing is free of errors (nearly
perfect). (14-15 pts)
APA formatting
(10)
There is compelling evidence from
professionally relevant and evidencebased sources to support written
claims. Limited use of quotes. The
reader can trust the resources used
(peer-reviewed or primary). Sources
are from very recent literature (within
10 yrs.). (9-10 pts)
Parenthetical citations are in evidence,
match the reference list, and
formatting meets the current APA style
manual (again, no cover page, running
head necessary). APA formatting is
flawless. (9-10 pts) see Owl Purdue
APA online:
Transitions are mostly smooth
from one topic to the next. (8
pts)
Very little use of less than
scientific vocabulary or minor
word use inaccuracies. (4 pts)
somewhat smooth but often
lacking from one topic to the
next. (7 pts)
Some use of less than scientific
vocabulary or minor word use
inaccuracies. (3 pts)
Very minor grammatical,
spelling or mechanical errors in
paper. (12-13 pts)
Very little but some use of
secondary sources, but
generally sources are primary
and evidence-based. Some
overuse of direct quotes.
Sources are mostly recent. (8
pts)
Minor grammatical, spelling or
mechanical errors in paper. (1012 pts)
Some over use of and
dependency on secondary
sources, but generally sources
are primary and evidencebased. Some overuse of direct
quotes instead of student
interpretation of material.
Sources are recent. (7 pts)
Some issues with parenthetical
citation and reference list
formatting or from older APA
style manual. Citations are not
as in evidence as the above
average paper. (7 pts)
Very minor issues with
parenthetical citation and
reference list formatting or
from older APA style manual.
(8 pts)
https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resour
ce/560/01/
Maximum possible points out of 9 categories = 100. Your total points =
transitions. Lacks
cohesiveness. (6 or less pts)
Very little diversity in
vocabulary and lacking in
scientific merit. (2 or less
pts)
Significant grammatical,
spelling, or mechanical
errors. (9 or less pts)
Sources are lacking, dated,
non-existent, or from nonevidence based/primary
resources. Considerable
overuse of direct quotes. (6
or less pts)
(6 or less pts) Evidence of
plagiarism will result in an
overall failing grade for the
paper and may be grounds
for disciplinary action at
the University level.

Purchase answer to see full
attachment