ASSIGNMENT

Category

Points

Description

Introduction

20

Introduces your topic for practice change and it’s general area of either (a) clinical outcomes, (b) safety and quality, (c) leadership or (d) health policy.. Tell the reader what the purpose of the paper is and present a preview of what the paper will include.

Assessment and resulting project topic and PICOT questions

30

In weeks 1 and 2 you began articulating your interest in being a doctoral prepared clinical leader for practice change. From your existing clinical expertise, reflection, study and beginning organizational assessment within your planned clinical site; you derived and described a clinical problem. In this section of the paper, describe the background and development of this clinical practice issue that you propose to address. Complete the section by stating the practice problem in two distinct sentences (problem and etiology), stating why this statement format is important; and then state the problem in PICOT format and tell your reader about the purpose of using this format to describe the problem.

Reflection on Nursing’s Metaparadigm, Theory and Ways of Knowing  as frameworks guiding practice and study

45

Introduce your reader to nursing’s metaparadigm and discuss how your chosen theory and the Ways of Knowing have guided development of ideas you have for practice change.

Use examples from the theorist’s work that relate to your study of nursing phenomenon. In other words, describe your practice problem and explain the ways in which the theory applies to your topic. Use relevant examples to illustrate and support your ideas. Describe your practice problem within the context of nursing’s meta-paradigm and the theoretical insights.

Development and Discussion

45

Tell your reader where you stood on your clinical concern before you studied it in light of theory, ways of knowing and the literature. What values, background and other factors influenced your thinking? Then summarize one literature that influenced your thinking on this issue. Describe the author’s purpose, what their main argument was and which of their ideas you found most influential. Which ideas supported your original thinking and which advanced your understanding beyond what you originally thought? In other words, show readers how what you have learned both validated or challenged your own thinking. Complete this section by stating what you anticipate next regarding your progress in developing a practice change project.

Conclusion

20

Includes the main ideas and major conclusions. Summarizes the benefits of the selected theory for an eventual DNP Project.

Clarity of writing

75

 Demonstrates (a) Appropriate use of language, (b) setting and maintaining context, (c) organization given a sense of overall introduction, development and conclusion as well as paragraphs organized by main point with supporting evidence and analysis and (d) support for a position and development of ideas.

References

20

A minimum of five scholarly resources used including at least one 'primary' source written by the theorist.  The course textbook may be used but does not count towards the required minimum number of scholarly references.

APA format

20

1. All information taken from another source, even if summarized, must be appropriately cited in the manuscript and listed in the references using APA (6th ed.) format.

2.     Correct APA (6th ed.) format for document setup

3.     Correct APA (6th ed.) format for title and reference pages.

Total:

275 pts

A quality paper will meet or exceed all of the above requirements.

Assignment Criteria

Meets Criteria

Partially Meets Criteria

Does Not Meet Criteria

Introduction

(20 pts.)

Introduces topic for practice change and it’s general area of either (a) clinical outcomes, (b) safety and quality, (c) leadership or (d) health policy. Clearly articulates relationships between ideas and concepts. Tell the reader what the purpose of the paper is and present a preview of what the paper will include.

18 - 20 points

Throughout the writing, provides and maintains a sense of focus and purpose

13–17 points

Gives audience some sense of focus and purpose, telling what the paper is about.

0–12 points

Assessment and resulting project topic and PICOT questions

(30 pts.)

Maintains a refined sense of structure in relation to the academic framework and professional nursing process

28-30 points

Consistently articulates relationships between points of development but may be missing transitions, main points, evidence or analysis

22-27 points

Shows ability to use some examples or evidence but does not support most generalizations with evidence nor develop ideas through appropriate content

0-21 points

Reflection on Nursing’s Metaparadigm, Theory and Ways of Knowing  as frameworks guiding practice and study

(45 pts.)

Effectively integrates academic frameworks/theories into the context of nursing and thoughtfully challenges existing frameworks and approaches.

42-45 points

Demonstrates appropriate application of designated ideas but does not synthesize or evaluate or validate them with substantiated thinking or use of valid sources.

34-41 points

Does not articulate ideas accurately, nor identify key elements that indicate understanding of frameworks and theories.

0 - 33 points

Development and Discussion

(45 pts.)

Relates any of own relevant work and develops ideas with appropriate depth, variety and sufficient interest to engage the reader.

42-45 points

Supports most generalizations with examples and or evidence meaningful to the audience but does not develop ideas with appropriate depth, variety or sufficient interest to engage the reader.

34-41 points

Articulates some ideas accurately but misses key elements or is inaccurate, does not demonstrate understanding of the content.

0 - 33 points

Conclusion

(20 pts.)

Excellent understanding of theory. Conclusions are well evidenced and fully developed.

18 - 20 points

Basic understanding and/or limited use of original explanation and/or inappropriate emphasis on an area.

13–17 points

Little understanding of theory. Little to no original explanation; inappropriate emphasis on an area.

0–12 points

Clarity of writing

(75 pts.)

Excellent understanding of criteria for effective writing.

Persuasively develops thesis (central idea) with specific and compelling evidence.

Demonstrates ability to introduce and support original ideas.

Evaluates, analyzes, and synthesizes information from sources.

Effectively and consistently establishes clear and logical connections between ideas.

Flows smoothly and effectively from introduction to conclusion.

Includes clear topic sentences and fully-developed, well-organized paragraphs.

Demonstrates accurate, fluent grammar, mechanics, and spelling.

70 – 75 points

Basic understanding of criteria for effective writing.

While the reader can understand the writer's general purpose, the focus is slightly blurred by inconsistent response to the issue or by lack of originality.

An appropriate organizational plan is generally followed, with only minor inconsistencies present. 

Support for the central idea is adequate, and most details and examples contribute to unity and help achieve the writer’s purpose. 

The style is competent but not distinctive. 

A few minor errors in sentence-level grammar, punctuation, capitalization, or spelling are present, but they do not significantly distract the reader and do not interfere with meaning.             67-69 points

Writing needs development.

The paper is unfocused and the reader is confused about the writer's purpose.  Ideas show little insight or analytical ability.

The connections between sentences and paragraphs are often loose, and the reader has difficulty following the relationships among ideas.

Not enough detail has been included to support the central idea.  Details typically do not relate to the paper’s purposes. 

Problems such as wordiness, excessive passive voice, awkward constructions, weak verbs, repetitive structure are common. 

Errors in grammar, punctuation, capitalization, or spelling are pervasive and frequently distract the reader and interfere with the meaning.

0-66 points

References

(20 pts)

Minimum of 5 scholarly references used.

At least one ‘primary’ source written by the selected theorist.

References are current - within a 5-year time frame unless a valid rationale is provided for use of older references.

18 - 20 points

Only 4 scholarly references used.

At least one ‘primary’ source written by the selected theorist.

References are current - within a 5-year time frame unless a valid rationale is provided for use of older references.

13–17 points

Less than 4 scholarly references used.

OR

Did not use one ‘primary’ source written by the theorist.

OR

References not current –

within a 5-year time frame unless a valid rationale is provided for use of older references.

0–12 points

APA format

(20 pts)

APA format correct with no more than 1-2 minor errors.

18 - 20 points

3-5 errors in APA format and/or 1-2 citations are missing.

13–17 points

APA formatting contains multiple errors and/or several citations are missing.

0–12 points

Total Points Possible = 275   points