FinalProjectPartIIGuidelinesandRubric.pdf

NUR 325 Final Project Part II Guidelines and Rubric

Overview In Final Project Part I, you conducted a head-to-toe comprehensive assessment of a volunteer patient. Final Project Part II will involve the construction of a proposal for a health promotion teaching tool that will be of value for the patient. This activity will allow you the opportunity to discuss health literacy best practices and how you would use them to educate, inform, and empower your patient with regard to their health risks and/or healthy behaviors. For this final project, you will propose a health promotion teaching tool based on your assessment findings.

This assessment will address your mastery with regard to the following course outcomes:

• Interpret health assessment findings based on norms for healthy adults to inform patient health education strategies • Employ health literacy best practices for informing health promotion resources for diverse populations • Develop health education activities that utilize evidence-based practices for promoting patient safety and quality of care

Prompt

For this final project, you will analyze your findings from the comprehensive head-to-toe patient assessment you completed with your patient volunteer in Module Six. You will also propose a health promotion teaching tool based on a health risk or healthy behavior of your choice that you identified during the comprehensive assessment. Note: You do not need to create the actual teaching tool, but rather write a proposal in which you will describe the tool and discuss your rationale behind the choices you make for its development based on your patient assessment.

Schedule

Module Six Module Seven Complete Comprehensive Assessment Begin Patient Analysis based on data collected in the

Comprehensive Assessment

Complete Patient Analysis Complete Teaching Tool Proposal Submit Patient Analysis and Teaching Tool Proposal in one document

In your patient analysis and teaching tool proposal, the following critical elements must be addressed:

I. Patient Analysis A. Analyze health risks uncovered during your assessment. In other words, what indicators of disease, illness, or unhealthy behaviors the patient

engages in did you discover? If you feel there were none, be sure to explain your rationale. B. Analyze healthy behaviors the patient engages in that you discovered during your assessment. In other words, what opportunities exist for health

promotion? If you feel there were none, be sure to explain your rationale.

II. Health Promotion Teaching Tool Proposal A. Describe a health risk or healthy behavior that you identified during your assessment that you will use as the basis for your health promotion

teaching tool proposal, and explain why you chose that topic. B. Identify the goals or objectives of your proposed teaching tool based on the health risk or healthy behavior you identified. C. Specify the critical information about your topic based on your assessment findings that you would include in your teaching tool. D. Recommend specific intervention(s) for your topic that will result in improved patient outcomes or will promote health maintenance. Be sure to

support your recommendations with evidence-based research. E. Determine the medium (presentation, brochure, poster, or other format) that would be most appropriate for communicating information about

your chosen topic. Be sure to explain your rationale. F. Discuss the health literacy best practices you would employ to ensure your teaching tool is appropriate for diverse populations. Be sure to

support your claims with specific examples from evidence-based research G. Describe your plan to ensure compliance of your teaching tool with Flesch-Kincaid readability guidelines. Be sure to explain your rationale.

Final Project Part II Rubric Guidelines for Submission: Your paper should be formatted with one-inch margins and 12-point Times New Roman font, and all citations and references must appear in proper APA format.

Critical Elements Exemplary (100%) Proficient (85%) Needs Improvement (55%) Not Evident (0%) Value Patient Analysis:

Health Risks Meets “Proficient” criteria and cites specific, relevant examples to establish a robust context for the analysis

Accurately analyzes health risks uncovered during assessment and explains rationale if no risks are identified

Analyzes health risks uncovered during assessment, but with gaps in accuracy, or does not explain rationale if no risks are identified

Does not analyze health risks uncovered during assessment

10

Patient Analysis: Healthy Behaviors

Meets “Proficient” criteria and cites specific, relevant examples to establish a robust context for the analysis

Accurately analyzes healthy behaviors and explains rationale if no healthy behaviors are identified

Analyzes healthy behaviors, but with gaps in accuracy, or does not explain rationale if no healthy behaviors are identified

Does not analyze healthy behaviors

10

Teaching Tool Proposal: Identified

Meets “Proficient” criteria and uses industry-specific language to demonstrate expertise

Describes a health risk or healthy behavior identified during assessment to use as basis for proposal and explains why topic was chosen

Describes a health risk or healthy behavior identified during assessment to use as basis for proposal, but does not explain why topic was chosen

Does not describe a health risk or healthy behavior identified during assessment to use as basis for proposal

10

Teaching Tool Proposal: Goals or

Objectives

Meets “Proficient” criteria and uses industry-specific language to demonstrate expertise

Identifies appropriate goals or objectives of proposed teaching tool based on identified health risk or healthy behavior

Identifies goals or objectives of proposed teaching tool, but they are not appropriate based on identified health risk or healthy behavior

Does not identify goals or objectives of proposed teaching tool

10

Teaching Tool Proposal: Critical

Information

Meets “Proficient” criteria, and articulation is exceptionally clear and well informed

Accurately specifies critical information about topic to be included in teaching tool based on assessment findings

Specifies critical information about topic to be included in teaching tool, but with gaps in accuracy, or information is not based on assessment findings

Does not specify critical information about topic to be included in teaching tool

11

Critical Elements Exemplary (100%) Proficient (85%) Needs Improvement (55%) Not Evident (0%) Value Teaching Tool

Proposal: Specific Intervention(s)

Meets “Proficient” criteria and provides detailed explanation of how the recommended intervention(s) will support improved patient outcomes or will promote health maintenance

Recommends specific intervention(s) for topic that will result in improved patient outcomes or will promote health maintenance, and supports recommendations with evidence- based research

Recommends specific intervention(s) for topic that will not result in improved patient outcomes or will not promote health maintenance, or does not support recommendations with evidence-based research

Does not recommend specific intervention(s) for topic

11

Teaching Tool Proposal: Medium

Meets “Proficient” criteria, and rationale exhibits nuanced insight regarding communication of information

Determines the most appropriate medium for communicating information about chosen topic and explains rationale

Determines a medium that is not appropriate for communicating information about chosen topic, or does not explain rationale

Does not determine a medium for communicating information about chosen topic

10

Teaching Tool Proposal: Health

Literacy

Meets “Proficient” criteria, and examples cited demonstrate keen insight into health literacy best practices

Discusses health literacy best practices for ensuring teaching tool is appropriate for diverse populations, and supports claims with specific examples from evidence-based research

Discusses health literacy best practices for ensuring teaching tool is appropriate for diverse populations, but does not support claims with specific examples from evidence-based research

Does not discuss health literacy best practices

11

Teaching Tool Proposal:

Readability

Meets “Proficient” criteria, andrationale exhibits nuanced insight regarding readability guidelines

Comprehensively describes planto ensure compliance of teaching tool with readability guidelines and explains rationale

Describes plan to ensure compliance of teaching tool with readability guidelines, but with gaps in detail, or does not explain rationale

Does not describe plan to ensure compliance of teaching tool with readability guidelines

11

Articulation of Response

Submission is free of errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, and organization and is presented in a professional and easy-to-read format

Submission has no major errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization

Submission has major errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization that negatively impact readability and articulation of main ideas

Submission has critical errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization that prevent understanding of ideas

6

Total 100%