Module 6 Case Study: The Condescending Dental Hygienist
Read the attached case study with a focus on the key management issues.
Using the resources provided at the end of this case study, answer the plan development and response questions as indicated in APA format.
Use a minimum of 3 scholarly references, listed in APA format. Do not use personal opinion to complete this assignment, it is based on legal and ethical issues, use scholarly sources to find your answer.
Description
- Read the case from the text on page 521
- Summarize the case
- Answer questions 1, 3-7 (omit question #2)
- Write out each question and prepare a detailed response for each question. Be specific and provide examples from the case study, text or other references.
- Format for paper (adherence to guidelines count for a significant amount in the homework assignment)
- Cover page (Title of the case; your name; date)
- Body of paper:
- Case Study Summary
- Answer questions #1; 3-7
- Each question should be typed out followed by a response to that question
- Please provide a thoughtful narrative with appropriate in text citations.
- Appropriate APA 6.0 format for in text citations
- Reference page using APA 6.0 format (included in rubric under adherence to guidelines)
- Double space your paper
- Use Times New Roman 12-point font and 1inch margin.
| A level | B level | C level | D level | |
|
Thorough and accurate adherence to guidelines; responds to all guidelines; Condescending Dental Hygienist includes all mandatory elements for the assignment; proper citations and complete; correct and placed correctly in text. (15 pts) | Majority of work displays accurate adherence to guidelines; responds to most guidelines; includes majority of mandatory elements; majority of citations complete, correct and placed correctly in text. (12 pts) | Some evidence of adherence to guidelines; Condescending Dental Hygienist some presence of mandatory elements; numerous incomplete citations, incorrect and placed incorrectly in text. (10.5 pts) | Insufficient adherence to guidelines; omits numerous mandatory elements; fails to respond to critical guidelines for content; if evidence offered, poorly cited in terms of completeness, accuracy and placement in text. (9 pts) |
| Condescending Dental Hygienist | Wide variety of sentence structures; excellent word usage, spelling, grammar, and punctuation; clear evidence of proofreading. (10 pts) | Good sentence variety; adequate use of wording, spelling, grammar, and punctuation; good evidence of proofreading. (8 pts) | Inconsistent sentence variety; often inadequate in wording, spelling, grammar, and punctuation; weak evidence of proofreading. (7 pts) | Writing lacks sentence variety; significant deficiencies in wording, spelling, grammar, and punctuation; lacks evidence of proofreading.(6 pts) |
| Condescending Dental Hygienist | Excellent, very clear description of the case, paraphrased with appropriate in text citations. (15 pts) | Good description of the case, paraphrased with proper in text citations. (12 pts) | Weak description with limited, inconsistent use of in text citations. (10.5 pts) | Summary lacks appropriate details and in text citations. (9 pts) |
| Condescending Dental Hygienist | Thorough, specific, accurate responses to questions demonstrating critical thinking and use of principles discussed in the text and lectures; evidence to support responses. (60 pts) | Good discussion and responses to questions; demonstrating critical thinking and use of principles discussed in the text and lecture; with evidence of sources used to support responses. (48 pts) | Weak responses to questions and discussion; weak evidence of critical thinking with insufficient evidence of sources used to support responses. (42 pts) | Discussion and responses to questions do not demonstrate an understanding of the concepts; lacks critical thinking and no evidence of source consulted to support responses. (36 pts) |