Discussion: Personal Philosophy of Interprofessional Collaboration

Discussion: Personal Philosophy of Interprofessional Collaboration ORDER NOW FOR CUSTOMIZED AND ORIGINAL ESSAY PAPERS ON Discussion: Personal Philosophy of Interprofessional Collaboration Personal Philosophy of Interprofessional Collaboration The formation and declaration of a personal philosophy of interprofessional collaboration (IPC) creates the underpinnings of professional character. In moments when stress is high or tensions between team members are palpable, having an expressed philosophy can serve as a guidepost to you and even to others. In the last few weeks of the course, take time to compile and synthesize your work from previous projects in this class in order to create a professional, cohesive personal philosophy statement. This will go into your professional portfolio. Discussion: Personal Philosophy of Interprofessional Collaboration TONE: Professional/Scholarly. Person Pronouns (I, me) are permitted as this is a personal philosophy. REFERENCES: Required ORGANIZATION: Please follow the below outline to help structure your writing. I. Title page: Personal Philosophy of Interprofessional Collaboration II. Introduction: no heading needed III. Test Results: first level heading A. Enneagram (second level heading) B. Myers-Briggs (second level heading) C. Emotional Intelligence (second level heading) D. Implicit Bias (second level heading) (Hint: From Diversity and Bias Module) E. Leadership overview (second level heading) IV. Summary (first level heading- summarize your personal results and how they may influence interprofessional collaboration) V. References VI. Appendix with SEM model with short written key (Hint: from Group Theory Module). Discussion: Personal Philosophy of Interprofessional Collaboration ASSIGNMENT TYPE: Individual (no peer reviews) DELIVERABLE: 6-8 page paper including title and references following APA 7th edition guidelines and the above organizational outline. RUBRIC: See attached Rubric Writing Assignment_BTreado Writing Assignment_BTreado Criteria Ratings Pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Development 60.0 pts Full Marks Thesis statement/research question/topic is thoroughly supported by evidence, observations, and examples. Demonstrates engagement with scholarly content and defense of claims. 36.0 pts Half Marks Thesis statement/research question/topic is supported by some evidence, observations, and examples. Attempt at claim defense(s) is evident. Poor engagement with scholarly content. 0.0 pts No Marks Thesis statement/research question/topic is absent, or illogical, or it is not supported by evidence, observations, and examples. No engagement with scholarly content. 60.0 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Critical Thinking 60.0 pts Full Marks Integrates ample scholarly evidence. Includes evidence of reflection. Develops scholarly, evidence-based conclusions. Includes multiple perspectives when appropriate. Identifies ambiguities in data if present. Discussion: Personal Philosophy of Interprofessional Collaboration 36.0 pts Half Marks Brief inclusion of scholarly evidence. Conclusion(s) is weak, overstated, or drawn from little evidence. Does not consider multiple perspectives when appropriate. Does not address ambiguities if present. 0.0 pts No Marks Does not include scholarly evidence. Fails to develop a conclusion or conclusion is subjective, too simple, or too absolute. 60.0 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Organization 40.0 pts Full Marks Document design facilitates reader comprehension. Transitions are clear rhetorically with respect to sections and subsections. 24.0 pts Half Marks Document design shows attempt at organization but sometimes difficult to follow. Facilitates reader comprehension but has some lapses. 0.0 pts No Marks Document design is difficult to follow. Little effort to guide reader rhetorically. 40.0 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Grammar and Style 20.0 pts Full Marks Grammar, spelling, and punctuation are correct. Syntax varies. Tone is scholarly. Vocabulary is fluent and advanced. 12.0 pts Half Marks Some grammar, spelling, punctuation errors throughout. Incorrect syntax or word choice distracts from rhetoric or organization. Lapse in voice or tone. Vocabulary is standard and/or lacks complete fluency. 0.0 pts No Marks Prominent grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. Syntax or word choice often distracts from rhetoric or organization. Repeated fluctuation in voice or tone. Vocabulary is poor, non-fluent. Any unprofessional or derogatory components. 20.0 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome APA 20.0 pts Full Marks Follows APA Guidelines carefully. Meets length requirements. Does not exceed length requirements. 12.0 pts Half Marks Follows most APA guidelines. Meets length requirements. Does not exceed length requirements. 0.0 pts No Marks Little or no attempt to follow APA guidelines. Does not meet length requirements OR EXCEEDS LENGTH REQUIREMENTS 20.0 pts Total Points: 200.0 Previous Next attachment_1 Discussion: Personal Philosophy of Interprofessional Collaboration Get a 10 % discount on an order above $ 100 Use the following coupon code : NURSING10