leadership
cloudia1. Read the ANA's Code of Ethics for Nurses with Interpretive Statements (2015)
American Nurses Association. (2015). Code of ethics for nurses with interpretive statements. Washington, DC: Author.
2. Read one of the following articles as assigned by your instructor.
· Substance Abuse read: Substance Abuse-A CaseStudy Brown, L.A. (2016). Substance Abuse. A case study. Nursing2016 46(6), 58-61.
Reflect on the article you were assigned to read and respond to the following questions:
1. What was the author’s central message, or main ideas/concepts they were trying to convey to the reader?What are the ethical implications related to the issue you read about? What ethical principle would apply? Use assigned readings from this week to support your discussion.
2. What are the legal implications related to the issue you read about? Use assigned readings from this week to support your discussion.
3. As a nurse leader, if faced with the issue you just described, how difficult would it be for you to address the issue with one of your staff or colleagues? What standards and/or laws would support the action you took, or didn’t take, and what is the outcome you would hope to achieve?
Rubric
Criteria Exemplary Satisfactory Needs Improvement Unacceptable Quality of Initial Posting
Initial Posting includes all components and meets or exceeds all requirements indicated in the discussion prompt. Thoroughly synthesizes, analyzes, and integrates relevant ideas from assigned readings and/or scholarly literature and cites source. Initial posting is 250-300 words. (8 pts)
Initial posting/response includes all components and meets all requirements indicated in the instructions. Each question or part of the discussion prompt is addressed. Displays basis synthesis, analysis, or integration of ideas from the readings and/or scholarly literature and sites source. Initial posting is 250-300 words. (5 pts)
Initial posting is missing some components and/or does not fully meet the requirements indicated in the discussion prompt. Displays incomplete integration or understanding of course readings or does not integrate course readings or other scholarly literature into posting. Initial posting is less than 250 words (2 pts)
No initial posting. (0 pts)
Quality of Peer Responses
Reply posting(s) builds on the ideas of other students, contributes to developing new discussion and deepening the discussion. Responses are supported by course readings and/or other scholarly literature Required peer responses are 150- 200 words. (5 pts)
Reply posting(s) show an understanding of the ideas of other students, but may be restrictive in developing new discussion or deepening the discussion. Required response(s) are supported by course readings and/or other scholarly literature Required peer responses are 150-200 each. (3 pts)
Reply posting(s) show basic agreement or restatement of the students’ ideas, but do not develop or contribute to new discussion. There is a lack of support from the course readings or other scholarly literature. Required peer responses are less than 150 words. (1 pt)
No peer response. (0 pt)
Structure Writing is clear, concise, and well organized with excellent sentence/paragraph construction. Thoughts are expressed in a coherent and logical manner. There are no more than three spelling, grammar, syntax errors, or APA errors with in-text citations and references. (2 pts)
Writing is mostly clear, concise, and well organized with good sentence/paragraph construction. Thoughts are expressed in a coherent and logical manner. There are no more than five spelling, grammar, syntax errors, or APA errors with in-text citations and references. For audio/video discussion post: Discussion post is somewhat clear, organized, and articulate. Credits author/source in discussion. (1 pt)
Writing is unclear and/or disorganized. Thoughts are not expressed in a logical manner. There are more than five spelling, grammar, syntax errors or APA errors with in-text citations and references. For audio/video discussion post: Discussion post is unclear, and/or unorganized. Does not credit author/source in discussion. (.25 pts)
No posting (0 pt)
Rubric Criteria Exemplary Satisfactory Needs Improvement Unacceptable
Quality of Initial
Posting
Initial Posting includes all
components and meets or exceeds
all requirements indicated in the
discussion prompt. Thoroughly
synthesizes, analyzes, and
integrates relevant ideas from
assigned readings and/or scholarly
literature and cites source. Initial
posting is 250-300 words.
(8 pts)
Initial posting/response includes all
components and meets all
requirements indicated in the
instructions. Each question or part
of the discussion prompt is
addressed. Displays basis synthesis,
analysis, or integration of ideas
from the readings and/or scholarly
literature and sites source. Initial
posting is 250-300 words.
(5 pts)
Initial posting is missing some
components and/or does not fully
meet the requirements indicated
in the discussion prompt. Displays
incomplete integration or
understanding of course readings
or does not integrate course
readings or other scholarly
literature into posting. Initial
posting is less than 250 words
(2 pts)
No initial posting. (0 pts)
Quality of Peer
Responses
Reply posting(s) builds on the
ideas of other students,
contributes to developing new
discussion and deepening the
discussion. Responses are
supported by course readings
and/or other scholarly literature
Required peer responses are 150-
200 words.
(5 pts)
Reply posting(s) show an
understanding of the ideas of other
students, but may be restrictive in
developing new discussion or
deepening the discussion. Required
response(s) are supported by
course readings and/or other
scholarly literature Required peer
responses are 150-200 each.
(3 pts)
Reply posting(s) show basic
agreement or restatement of the
students’ ideas, but do not
develop or contribute to new
discussion. There is a lack of
support from the course readings
or other scholarly literature.
Required peer responses are less
than 150 words.
(1 pt)
No peer response. (0 pt)
Structure
Writing is clear, concise, and well
organized with excellent
sentence/paragraph construction.
Thoughts are expressed in a
coherent and logical manner.
There are no more than three
spelling, grammar, syntax errors,
or APA errors with in-text citations
and references.
(2 pts)
Writing is mostly clear, concise, and
well organized with good
sentence/paragraph construction.
Thoughts are expressed in a
coherent and logical manner. There
are no more than five spelling,
grammar, syntax errors, or APA
errors with in-text citations and
references.
For audio/video discussion post:
Discussion post is somewhat clear,
organized, and articulate. Credits
author/source in discussion.
(1 pt)
Writing is unclear and/or
disorganized. Thoughts are not
expressed in a logical manner.
There are more than five spelling,
grammar, syntax errors or APA
errors with in-text citations and
references.
For audio/video discussion post:
Discussion post is unclear, and/or
unorganized. Does not credit
author/source in discussion.
(.25 pts)
No posting (0 pt)
Rubric
Criteria |
Exemplary |
Satisfactory |
Needs Improvement |
Unacceptable |
Quality of Initial Posting |
Initial Posting includes all components and meets or exceeds all requirements indicated in the discussion prompt. Thoroughly synthesizes, analyzes, and integrates relevant ideas from assigned readings and/or scholarly literature and cites source. Initial posting is 250-300 words. (8 pts) |
Initial posting/response includes all components and meets all requirements indicated in the instructions. Each question or part of the discussion prompt is addressed. Displays basis synthesis, analysis, or integration of ideas from the readings and/or scholarly literature and sites source. Initial posting is 250-300 words. (5 pts) |
Initial posting is missing some components and/or does not fully meet the requirements indicated in the discussion prompt. Displays incomplete integration or understanding of course readings or does not integrate course readings or other scholarly literature into posting. Initial posting is less than 250 words (2 pts) |
No initial posting. (0 pts) |
Quality of Peer Responses |
Reply posting(s) builds on the ideas of other students, contributes to developing new discussion and deepening the discussion. Responses are supported by course readings and/or other scholarly literature Required peer responses are 150-200 words. (5 pts) |
Reply posting(s) show an understanding of the ideas of other students, but may be restrictive in developing new discussion or deepening the discussion. Required response(s) are supported by course readings and/or other scholarly literature Required peer responses are 150-200 each. (3 pts) |
Reply posting(s) show basic agreement or restatement of the students’ ideas, but do not develop or contribute to new discussion. There is a lack of support from the course readings or other scholarly literature. Required peer responses are less than 150 words. (1 pt) |
No peer response. (0 pt) |
Structure |
Writing is clear, concise, and well organized with excellent sentence/paragraph construction. Thoughts are expressed in a coherent and logical manner. There are no more than three spelling, grammar, syntax errors, or APA errors with in-text citations and references. (2 pts) |
Writing is mostly clear, concise, and well organized with good sentence/paragraph construction. Thoughts are expressed in a coherent and logical manner. There are no more than five spelling, grammar, syntax errors, or APA errors with in-text citations and references. For audio/video discussion post: Discussion post is somewhat clear, organized, and articulate. Credits author/source in discussion. (1 pt) |
Writing is unclear and/or disorganized. Thoughts are not expressed in a logical manner. There are more than five spelling, grammar, syntax errors or APA errors with in-text citations and references. For audio/video discussion post: Discussion post is unclear, and/or unorganized. Does not credit author/source in discussion. (.25 pts) |
No posting (0 pt) |
Reviewed 02.2020