Discussion 2 RESPONSES
IMPORTANT TERMINOLOGY AND CONCEPTS
Read a selection of your colleagues’ responses and respond to two of your colleagues who selected different terms than you. Expand upon your colleague’s posting or offer an alternative perspective.
PEER #1
Quennie Xserenity
Quennie XSerenity Main Post
Sustainability is the ability to sustain a process over an extended period. The overall goal of systems sustainability is to improve building performance, and in turn, health outcomes, care delivery, and operating system efficiency (Leonidou et al., 2022). The healthcare system has been described as a four-level framework: the patient, the care providers and staff, the organization, and the operations. My best example for this is when our hospital started in-house contract. A lot of people, full-time staff, jumped ship to do the in-house contract. We knew the organization couldn’t sustain paying such a high price for an extended period of time, so some of us stayed as full-time staff. Lo and behold, the organization lost a lot of money, but hopefully not enough to actually close down the whole place. Another example is the use of Medicare Fund. It is used to reduce the burden of individual medical costs, but with the aging population, the demand of Medicare Fund is increasing. How are we to sustain Medicare this way?
References:
Leonidou, C. N., Gruber, V., & Schlegelmilch, B. B. (2022). Consumers’ Environmental Sustainability Beliefs and Activism: A Cross-Cultural Examination.
Journal of International Marketing,
30(4), 78–104.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1069031X221128786Links to an external site.
Mollenkamp, D. T. (n.d.).
What is sustainability? how sustainabilities work, benefits, and example. Investopedia. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/sustainability.asp#:~:text=In%20the%20broadest%20sense%2C%20sustainability,available%20for%20the%20long%20term.
PEER #2
Angelor Eliscard
Main Post
New Terminology and Concepts in Nursing
Nursing as a profession has been undergoing paradigm shifts for the longest time. This shift has required nurses to be conversant with emerging medical technologies as well as the existing medical terminologies to improve the practice and patient outcomes. According to (McGonigle & Mastrian, 2024), these nursing concepts and informatics can significantly improve the nursing practice by enhancing workflow and efficiency as they enable the practitioners to integrate technology into daily clinical operations, such as the use of electronic health records to improve outcomes and patient care delivery. In addition to this, proper exploitation of nursing concepts and informatics can enhance collaboration among caregivers, improve communication with patients, and better coordinate work-related activities, thereby generally improving patient outcomes.
To be up to date with the emerging concepts and technologies in the field of nursing, nurses and other medical practitioners need to ensure that they consistently learn by attending seminars, workshops, and webinars to discuss healthcare. Also, they can volunteer to steer training sessions held by medical institutions to augment their informatic skills and stay up-to-date on the most recent technologies and medical terminologies. Nevertheless, the nursing practice is dynamic and constantly changing, and nurses have the mandate to adopt a culture of learning and adaptability (Yoder-Wise & Sportsman, 2022). Moreover, they need to be fast on their feet and be in a position to pursue opportunities for growth and innovation as a means to improve their practice and use emerging technology for healthcare advancement and improved outcomes.
Usability refers to the scope by which an application can be easily used to achieve the intended objectives efficiently and effectively. In a healthcare setting, usability is critical for ensuring the successful usage of emerging medical technologies and jargon (Roma & de Vilhena Garcia, 2020). Usability is essential for the use of medical equipment and technologies, ensuring that the equipment is used for its intended purpose and delivers the required results. For instance, whenever new medical equipment is brought into a healthcare institution, the nurses must be in a position to handle and operate the equipment.
Nevertheless, usability barriers and non-functionality affect patient outcomes. The new equipment may need to be compatible with the existing equipment in the hospital setting. This may have the impact of limiting the ability of nurses to access the necessary documentation, such as records, effectively, and this inhibits healthcare delivery. This can be addressed by integrating these technologies to operate seamlessly and in synchronization. Also, the nurses can be adequately trained on the use of these machines whenever they are brought into the facilities so that they can know and understand their usage for optimal results.
References
McGonigle, D., & Mastrian, K. (2024).
Nursing informatics and the Foundation of knowledge. Jones & Bartlett Learning.
Roma, M. S. G., & de Vilhena Garcia, E. (2020). Medical device usability: literature review, current status, and challenges.
Research on Biomedical Engineering,
36(2), 163–170.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s42600-019-00037-8Links to an external site.
Yoder-Wise, P. S., & Sportsman, S. (2022).
Leading and managing in nursing E-book: Leading and managing in nursing E-book. Elsevier Health Sciences.
Assignment Rubric Details
Close
Rubric
NURS_8210_Week2_Discussion2_Rubric
|
NURS_8210_Week2_Discussion2_Rubric
|
|
Criteria
|
Ratings
|
Pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeRESPONSIVENESS TO DISCUSSION QUESTION (20 possible points) Discussion post minimum requirements: The original posting must be completed by Day 3 at 10:59 pm CT. Two response postings to two different peer original posts, on two different days, are required by Day 6 at 10:59 pm CT. Faculty member inquiries require responses, which are not included in the peer posts. Your Discussion Board postings should be written in Standard Academic English and follow APA 7 style for format and grammar as closely as possible given the constraints of the online platform. Be sure to support the postings with specific citations from this week's learning resources as well as resources available through the Walden University library and other credible online resources (guidelines, expert opinions etc.)
|
|
20 to >19.0 pts
Excellent
• Discussion postings and responses are responsive to and exceed the requirements of the Discussion instructions. • The student responds to the question/s being asked or the prompt/s provided. Goes beyond what is required in some meaningful way (e.g., the post contributes a new dimension, unearths something unanticipated) • Demonstrates that the student has read, viewed, and considered a variety of learning resources, as well as resources available through the Walden University library and other credible online resources (guidelines, expert opinions etc.) • Exceeds the minimum requirements for discussion posts.
|
19 to >15.0 pts
Good
• Discussion postings and responses are responsive to and meet the requirements of the Discussion instructions. • The student responds to the question/s being asked or the prompt/s provided. • Demonstrates that the student has read, viewed, and considered a variety of learning resources, as well as resources available through the Walden University library and other credible online resources (guidelines, expert opinions etc.) • Meets the minimum requirements for discussion posts.
|
15 to >12.0 pts
Fair
• Discussion postings and responses are somewhat responsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. • The student may not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question/s or prompt/s. • Minimally demonstrates that the student has read, viewed, and considered a variety of learning resources, as well as resources available through the Walden University library and other credible online resources (guidelines, expert opinions etc.) • Does not meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts; has not posted by the due date at least in part.
|
12 to >0 pts
Poor
• Discussion postings and responses are unresponsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. • Does not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question/s or prompt/s. • Does not demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered a variety of learning resources, as well as resources available through the Walden University library and other credible online resources (guidelines, expert opinions etc.) • Does not meet the requirements for discussion posts; has not posted by the due date and did not discuss late post timing with faculty.
|
|
20 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCONTENT REFLECTION and MASTERY: Initial Post (30 possible points)
|
|
30 to >29.0 pts
Excellent
Initial Discussion posting: • Post demonstrates mastery and thoughtful/accurate application of content and/or strategies presented in the course. • Posts are substantive and reflective, with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence. • Initial post is supported by 3 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings.
|
29 to >23.0 pts
Good
Initial Discussion posting: • Posts demonstrate some mastery and application of content, applicable skills, or strategies presented in the course. • Posts are substantive and reflective, with analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence. • Initial post is supported by 3 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings.
|
23 to >18.0 pts
Fair
Initial Discussion posting: • Post may lack in depth, reflection, analysis, or synthesis but rely more on anecdotal than scholarly evidence. • Posts demonstrate minimal understanding of concepts and issues presented in the course, and, although generally accurate, display some omissions and/or errors. • There is a lack of support from relevant scholarly research/evidence.
|
18 to >0 pts
Poor
Initial Discussion posting: • Post lacks in substance, reflection, analysis, or synthesis. • Posts do not generalize, extend thinking or evaluate concepts and issues within the topic or context of the discussion. • Relevant examples and scholarly resources are not provided.
|
|
30 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCONTRIBUTION TO THE DISCUSSION: First Response (20 possible points)
|
|
20 to >19.0 pts
Excellent
Discussion response: • Significantly contributes to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning. • Provides rich and relevant examples and thought-provoking ideas that demonstrates new perspectives, and synthesis of ideas supported by the literature. • Scholarly sources are correctly cited and formatted. • First response is supported by 2 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings. • Responds to questions posed by faculty.
|
19 to >15.0 pts
Good
Discussion response: • Contributes to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Provides relevant examples and/or thought-provoking ideas • Scholarly sources are correctly cited and formatted. • First response is supported by 2 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings. • Responds to questions posed by faculty.
|
15 to >12.0 pts
Fair
Discussion response: • Minimally contributes to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Provides few examples to support thoughts. • Information provided lacks evidence of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas. • There is a lack of support from relevant scholarly research/evidence. • No response to questions posed by faculty.
|
12 to >0 pts
Poor
Discussion response: • Does not contribute to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Lacks relevant examples or ideas. • There is a lack of support from relevant scholarly research/evidence. • No response to questions posed by faculty.
|
|
20 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCONTRIBUTION TO THE DISCUSSION: Second Response (20 possible points)
|
|
20 to >19.0 pts
Excellent
Discussion response: • Significantly contributes to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning. • Provides relevant examples and thought-provoking ideas that demonstrates new perspectives, and extensive synthesis of ideas supported by the literature. • Second response is supported by 2 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings. • Scholarly sources are correctly cited and formatted. • Responds to questions posed by faculty.
|
19 to >15.0 pts
Good
Discussion response: • Contributes to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Provides relevant examples and/or thought-provoking ideas • Second response is supported by 2 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings. • Scholarly sources are correctly cited and formatted. • Responds to questions posed by faculty.
|
15 to >12.0 pts
Fair
Discussion response: • Minimally contributes to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Provides few examples to support thoughts. • Information provided lacks evidence of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas. • Minimal scholarly sources provided to support post. • Does not respond to questions posed by faculty.
|
12 to >0 pts
Poor
Discussion response: • Does not contribute to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Lacks relevant examples or ideas. • No sources provided. • Does not respond to questions posed by faculty.
|
|
20 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeQUALITY OF WRITING (10 possible points)
|
|
10 to >9.0 pts
Excellent
Discussion postings and responses exceed doctoral level writing expectations: • Use Standard Academic English that is clear, concise, and appropriate to doctoral level writing. • Make few if any errors in spelling, grammar, that does not affect clear communication. • Uses correct APA 7 format as closely as possible given the constraints of the online platform. • Are positive, courteous, and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints.
|
9 to >8.0 pts
Good
Discussion postings and responses meet doctoral level writing expectations: • Use Standard Academic English that is clear and appropriate to doctoral level writing • Makes a few errors in spelling, grammar, that does not affect clear communication. • Uses correct APA 7 format as closely as possible given the constraints of the online platform. • Are courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints.
|
8 to >6.0 pts
Fair
Discussion postings and responses are somewhat below doctoral level writing expectations: • Posts contains multiple spelling, grammar, and/or punctuation deviations from Standard Academic English that affect clear communication. • Numerous errors in APA 7 format • May be less than courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.
|
6 to >0 pts
Poor
Discussion postings and responses are well below doctoral level writing expectations: • Posts contains multiple spelling, grammar, and/or punctuation deviations from Standard Academic English that affect clear communication. • Uses incorrect APA 7 format • Are discourteous and disrespectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.
|
|
10 pts
|
|
Total Points: 100
|
Tinacherry100$
WK.2_2.Discussion2RESPONSES.docx
