Hi, I am sending new assignment now. here is the details Assignment Details: Please correct this file (First-Draft-Assignment-Main.doc) based on the instructor comments on this paper; Instructor add comments on the last page on this word file. . Basically you need to correct First-Draft-Assignment-Main.doc file. Please check below files. So that you can add more details in this file. Use your best judgment in revising your first draft to an assignment that better meets the requirements of the original assignment(Module 3- Peer Review paper.doc). Also review Module 4 File for more (Module 4 file.doc) This assignment uses a grading rubric. Instructors will be using the rubric to grade the assignment; therefore, students should review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the assignment criteria and expectations for successful completion of the assignment.

Reveals inaccurate comprehension of material and lacks the ability to apply information.

Displays a lack of comprehension but attempts to apply information. Presentation of material does not meet minimal requirements of the assignment. Demonstrates no critical thinking aspects.

Exhibits comprehension of the material and attempts to integrate it with outside material. Information represents basic thought and formulation surrounding understanding of varying components of faith across diverse religions and how health care providers handle those diversities.

Demonstrates integrative comprehension. Student exhibits thorough and thoughtful processing of material. Evidentiary support is creatively interwoven and presented in a manner that demonstrates the diversities of faith, the role they play in patient beliefs and practices, and their importance in managing patients? spiritual care.

Demonstrates integrative comprehension and thoughtful application of concepts surrounding spiritual diversity and circumstances involving application in real-world situations. Presentation of material and components includes expanded and unique perspective relative to similarities and differences of practices across various religions.

Subject matter is absent, inappropriate, and/or irrelevant.

There is weak, marginal coverage of subject matter with large gaps in presentation.

All subject matter is covered in minimal quantity and quality.

Comprehensive coverage of subject matter is evident.

Coverage extends beyond what is needed to support subject matter.

Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the thesis and/or main claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.

Sufficient justification of thesis and/or main claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.

Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of thesis and/or main claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion

Argument shows logical progression. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of thesis and/or main claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative

Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are used.

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register); sentence structure, and/or word choice are present.

Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used.

Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used.