Nursing

GCU Benchmark – Human Experience Across the Health-Illness Continuum
Beyond basic disease prevention, obtaining balanced wellbeing is a continuous process. The word wellness is often misunderstood by many people. Many people think of wellness in terms of physical health, nutrition, body weight, and others, however, it is much more than that. According to Paladino and Fromme (2019), well-being should be perceived as a holistic integration of physical, mental, and spiritual wellbeing engaging the mind, fueling the body, and nurturing the spirit. Historically, wellness has been defined within a disease framework, which means reducing risks associated with health and preventing illnesses. Understanding of health Illness continuum is a way of promoting patient wellness. With this in mind, the paper discusses the health-illness continuum and its relevance to patient care.
Health-Illness Continuum and its Relation to Healthcare
The health-illness continuum reflects a process of change in which people experience different states of health and illnesses, ranging from extremely good health to death, which fluctuate throughout their lives. According to Paladino and Fromme (2019), the state of wellness is a dynamic goal and a continuous process, therefore, a decision making process is necessary daily in areas related to health. The wellness paradigm spans the whole length of the continuum. This is the direction all patients must experience or face to achieve high-level pf wellness. Owen and Çelik (2018) assert that the health-illness continuum describes the health and illness along a continuum with a high level of wellness at one end and a high level of illness and poor health at the other end.
The middle of the continuum is a neutral point where there is no discernible wellness or illness. People more either side (to and forth) of the continuum daily from the neutral point. A high level of wellness is on the right end of the continuum while illness or death is on the left end. On the left side of the neutral point is the treatment paradigm and this is where the relevance of the health-illness continuum to healthcare becomes more visible (Corrigan et al., 2017). For instance, as one moves to the left end of the continuum, healthcare and medical interventions take over until the person returns to the neutral point. Once the individual returns to the neutral point, it is his responsibility to take measures that can enable him to attain a high level of health (wellbeing).
GCU Benchmark – Human Experience Across the Health-Illness Continuum
Importance of Understanding the Health-Illness Continuum to a Health Care Provider
Understanding the health-illness continuum is very important for a nurse to provide quality and optimum care to their patients. It enables health providers to ensure that patients continue to move towards the right direction along the continuum. A better understanding of the health-illness continuum, health care providers can visualize, plan, and accomplish goals for a healthier lifestyle (Corrigan et al., 2017). For instance, once the treatment paradigm is achieved and the patient has returned to the neutral point, a healthcare provider who understands the health-illness continuum does not stop at that point. He/she may educate the patient regarding strategies to achieve a higher level of wellbeing. For instance, home health nurses extend this continuum by visiting patients at home to carry out follow-ups as well as provide essential services (Corrigan et al., 2017). They perform this because they have a good understanding of the health-illness continuum.
Reflection on My Overall State of Health
I am well educated and fully aware of the health-illness continuum. Therefore, I understand what should be done and avoided to achieve high levels of wellness. Some of the behaviors that contribute to my wellness include healthy eating habits, regular daily moderate exercise, positive attitude towards achieving wellness, and regular screening of diabetes, high blood pressure, and diabetes which have records in my family (Perugini, Iglesia, Solano, & Keyes, 2017). Other qualities I poses include commitment and perseverance to achieve a high level of webbing. I tend to ignore things that could lead to mental distress and I attend church for spiritual nourishment. Based on these behaviors, I believe that I have achieved a high level of wellness on the continuum.
Options and Resources Available To Help Me Achieve Wellness
Physical options include maintaining healthy nutrition, engaging regular physical exercise, and avoiding risky or abusive places to stay safe and others. Social options include having a positive relationship with good people while trying to manage stress and emotions. Intellectual options include reading consciously regarding good ways of achieving wellness (Payton, 2017). The spiritual option includes attending church to receive spiritual nourishment which is part of wellness. Resources available include counseling programs, healthcare facilities, friends, family, books, church, and community resources such as free fields for physical exercise.
Assessment Description
Research the health-illness continuum and its relevance to patient care. In a 750-1,000 word paper, discuss the relevance of the continuum to patient care and present a perspective of your current state of health in relation to the wellness spectrum. Include the following:
Examine the health-illness continuum and discuss why this perspective is important to consider in relation to health and the human experience when caring for patients.
Explain how understanding the health-illness continuum enables you, as a health care provider, to better promote the value and dignity of individuals or groups and to serve others in ways that promote human flourishing.
Reflect on your overall state of health. Discuss what behaviors support or detract from your health and well-being. Explain where you currently fall on the health-illness continuum.
Discuss the options and resources available to you to help you move toward wellness on the health-illness spectrum. Describe how these would assist in moving you toward wellness (managing a chronic disease, recovering from an illness, self-actualization, etc.).
You are required to cite a minimum of three peer-reviewed sources to complete this assignment. Sources must be published within the last 5 years, appropriate for the assignment criteria, and relevant to nursing practice.
Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.
This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. A link to the LopesWrite technical support articles is located in Class Resources if you need assistance.
Benchmark Information
This benchmark assesses the following competency:
RN-BSN
5.1. Understand the human experience across the health-illness continuum.
Attachments
NRS-434VN-R-IndividualHealthHistoryandExaminationAssignment-Student.docxNRS-434VN-R-Functional-Health-Pattern-Ass
Benchmark – Human Experience Across the Health-Illness Continuum – Rubric
Collapse All Benchmark – Human Experience Across The Health-Illness Continuum – RubricCollapse All
Health-Illness Importance to Health and Patient Care (C5.1)
20 points
Criteria Description
Health-Illness Importance to Health and Patient Care (C5.1)
5. Excellent
20 points
A discussion on the importance of the health-illness continuum in relation to health and the human experience in patient care is presented. The discussion demonstrates that the health-illness continuum is important to patient care. Strong rationale is offered for support.
4. Good
17.8 points
A discussion on the importance of the health-illness in relation to health and the human experience in patient care is presented. The discussion demonstrates that the health-illness continuum is important to patient care. Some rationale is needed for clarity.
3. Satisfactory
15.8 points
A general discussion on the importance of the health-illness in relation to health and the human experience in patient care is presented. The discussion generally establishes that the health-illness continuum is important to patient care. There are some inaccuracies. More information or rationale is needed.
2. Less than Satisfactory
15 points
A partial summary on the importance of the health-illness continuum is presented. The summary does not fully include the relation of the continuum to health and the human experience in patient care. There are significant inaccuracies. More evidence or information is needed.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
A discussion on the importance of the health-illness continuum is not presented.
Relation of Human-Illness Continuum to Value, Dignity, and Promotion of Human Flourishing
20 points
Criteria Description
Relation of Human-Illness Continuum to Value, Dignity, and Promotion of Human Flourishing
5. Excellent
20 points
A thorough explanation of the relationship between the health-illness continuum and the ability of a health care provider to promote the value, dignity, and flourishing of patients is logically and convincingly presented. The explanation draws clear connections between the role of the health care provider and the promotion of human flourishing. Strong rationale is offered for support.
4. Good
17.8 points
An explanation of the relationship between the health-illness continuum and the ability of a health care provider to promote the value, dignity, and flourishing of patients is presented. The explanation demonstrates that the health care provider does play a role in promoting human flourishing, but some additional rationale is needed for clarity.
3. Satisfactory
15.8 points
A general explanation of the relationship between the health-illness continuum and the ability of a health care provider to promote the value, dignity, and flourishing of patients is presented. There are some inaccuracies, and more information or rationale is needed to support the response.
2. Less than Satisfactory
15 points
A partial explanation of the relationship between the health-illness continuum and the ability of a health care provider to promote the value, dignity, and flourishing of patients is presented, but the connection is tenuous and key elements are omitted, incomplete, or left unexplained.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
An explanation of the relationship between the health-illness continuum and the ability of a health care provider to promote the value, dignity, and flourishing of patients is not presented.
Refection on Personal State of Health and the Health Illness Continuum
20 points
Criteria Description
Refection on Personal State of Health and the Health Illness Continuum
5. Excellent
20 points
A well-developed discussion of personal state of health is included. The discussion demonstrates strong personal insight into behaviors supporting or detracting from health and well-being. The author clearly establishes where personal health falls on the health-illness continuum.
4. Good
17.8 points
A discussion of personal state of health is included. The discussion demonstrates personal insight into overall behaviors supporting or detracting from health and well-being. The author establishes where personal health falls on the health-illness continuum.
3. Satisfactory
15.8 points
A general discussion of personal overall state of health is included. Overall the discussion demonstrates some insight into some behaviors supporting or detracting from health and well-being. The author does not clearly establish where personal health falls on the health-illness continuum.
2. Less than Satisfactory
15 points
A partial summary of personal overall state of health is included. The summary is not informative. Behaviors supporting or detracting from health and well-being are omitted or incomplete.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Reflection on personal overall state of health is omitted.
Resources Supporting Wellness
20 points
Criteria Description
Resources Supporting Wellness
5. Excellent
20 points
Options and resources available that would be extremely helpful to help the author move toward wellness on the health-illness continuum are presented. The author clearly establishes how these will assist in moving toward wellness. Insight into wellness as it pertains to the health illness continuum is demonstrated.
4. Good
17.8 points
Options and resources available that would reasonably help the author move toward wellness on the health-illness continuum are presented. The author establishes how these resources will assist in moving toward wellness.
3. Satisfactory
15.8 points
General options and resources available that would help the author move toward wellness on the health-illness continuum are presented. More information is needed to establish how this will assist in moving the author toward wellness.
2. Less than Satisfactory
15 points
Partial options and resources available that would help the author move toward wellness on the health-illness continuum are presented. It is unclear how this will assist in moving the author toward wellness.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Options and resources available to help the author move toward wellness on the health-illness continuum are omitted.
Thesis Development and Purpose
5 points
Criteria Description
Thesis Development and Purpose
5. Excellent
5 points
Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.
4. Good
4.45 points
Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.
3. Satisfactory
3.95 points
Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.
2. Less than Satisfactory
3.75 points
Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.
Argument Logic and Construction
5 points
Criteria Description
Argument Logic and Construction
5. Excellent
5 points
Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.
4. Good
4.45 points
Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.
3. Satisfactory
3.95 points
Argument is orderly but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.
2. Less than Satisfactory
3.75 points
Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)
5 points
Criteria Description
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)
5. Excellent
5 points
Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
4. Good
4.45 points
Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used.
3. Satisfactory
3.95 points
Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used.
2. Less than Satisfactory
3.75 points
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, or word choice are present.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.
Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)
2 points
Criteria Description
Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)
5. Excellent
2 points
All format elements are correct.
4. Good
1.78 points
Template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style.
3. Satisfactory
1.58 points
Template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.
2. Less than Satisfactory
1.5 points
Template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Template is not used appropriately, or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.
Documentation of Sources
3 points
Criteria Description
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)
5. Excellent
3 points
Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.
4. Good
2.67 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.
3. Satisfactory
2.37 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.
2. Less than Satisfactory
2.25 points
Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Sources are not documented.
Total 100 points

Expert Tuttuor DB R/T Research Project
Expert Tuttuor DB R/T Research Project
Prepare a 350 word draft of a clinical problem that you would like to use for your Research project.There should be an introduction to the problem (as to why it is a problem) that is documented with literature, a clear problem statement (one declarative sentence that begins with “The problem is…”, and a purpose to your project. Post this as your Initial response. (Essential I-IX).
the research problem is ” race/etnicity sex risk factor cardiovascular disease” on what you are working on it
Discussion Rubric
The initial post will be regarding the topic of the week and will be a minimum of 250 words. Make sure you provide appropriate references and utilize APA style. Peer posts will be a minimum of 75-100 words, otherwise will be counted as 0. There will be a total of 8 discussion posts worth 1.25 points each or 10 points of your grade. In order to obtain full credit students must follow the above requirements. Each discussion will be allocated to a specific Master’s Essential.
Criteria
1.25 Point
1 Point
0.75 Point
0
Participation
Weight 25.00%
100 %
3 Posts
80 %
2 Posts
60 %
1 Posts
0 %
0 Posts
Quality of informtaion
Weight 25.00%
100 %
Information is clear and relates to topic
80 %
Information is somewhat clear and might relate to topic
60 %
Information has little relation to topic and is not clearly displayed
0 %
Information is not clear and it does not relate to topic
Resources
Weight 25.00%
100 %
Provides relevant resources using APA guidelines
80 %
Provides relevant resources without APA guidelines
60 %
Limited on the resources provided with major errors in APA
0 %
Does not provide any resources
Critical Thinking
Weight 25.00%
100 %
Enhances the critical thinking process through premise reflection
80 %
Enhances the critical thinking process without premise reflection
60 %
Does enhance the critical thinking process in a very limited manner
0 %
Does not enhance the critical thinking process

NURS 6003 Discussion Begin Searching for a Peer-Reviewed Article that Pertains to your Practice Area and Interests you
Where can you find evidence to inform your thoughts and scholarly writing? Throughout your degree program, you will use research literature to explore ideas, guide your thinking, and gain new insights. As you search the research literature, it is important to use resources that are peer-reviewed and from scholarly journals. You may already have some favorite online resources and databases that you use or have found useful in the past. For this Discussion, you explore databases available through the Walden Library.
Note: Unless otherwise noted, initial postings to Discussions are due on or before Day 3, and response postings are due on or before Day 6. You are required to participate in the Discussion on at least three different days (a different day for main post and each response). It is important to adhere to the weekly time frame to allow others ample time to respond to your posting. In addition, you are expected to respond to questions directed toward your own initial posting in a timely manner.
To Prepare:
Review the information presented in the Learning Resources for using the Walden Library, searching the databases, and evaluating online resources.
Begin searching for a peer-reviewed article that pertains to your practice area and interests you.
NURS 6003 Discussion Begin Searching for a Peer-Reviewed Article that Pertains to your Practice Area and Interests you
By Day 3 of Week 4
Post the following:
Using proper APA formatting, cite the peer-reviewed article you selected that pertains to your practice area and is of particular interest to you and identify the database that you used to search for the article. Explain any difficulties you experienced while searching for this article. Would this database be useful to your colleagues? Explain why or why not. Would you recommend this database? Explain why or why not.
By Day 6 of Week 6
Respond to at least two of your colleagues’ posts by offering suggestions/strategies for working with this database from your own experience, or offering ideas for using alternative resources.
Grid View
List View
Excellent Good Fair Poor
Main Posting
Points Range: 45 (45%) – 50 (50%)
Answers all parts of the discussion question(s) expectations with reflective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.
Supported by at least three current, credible sources.
Written clearly and concisely with no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.
Points Range: 40 (40%) – 44 (44%)
Responds to the discussion question(s) and is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.
At least 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth.
Supported by at least three credible sources.
Written clearly and concisely with one or no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.
Points Range: 35 (35%) – 39 (39%)
Responds to some of the discussion question(s).
One or two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed.
Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.
Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.
Post is cited with two credible sources.
Written somewhat concisely; may contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors.
Contains some APA formatting errors.
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 34 (34%)
Does not respond to the discussion question(s) adequately.
Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria.
Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.
Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.
Contains only one or no credible sources.
Not written clearly or concisely.
Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors.
Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style.
Main Post: Timeliness
Points Range: 10 (10%) – 10 (10%)
Posts main post by day 3.
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not post by day 3.
First Response
Points Range: 17 (17%) – 18 (18%)
Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.
Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.
Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.
Points Range: 15 (15%) – 16 (16%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.
Points Range: 13 (13%) – 14 (14%)
Response is on topic and may have some depth.
Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.
Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 12 (12%)
Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are missing.
No credible sources are cited.
Second Response
Points Range: 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)
Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.
Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.
Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.
Points Range: 14 (14%) – 15 (15%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.
Points Range: 12 (12%) – 13 (13%)
Response is on topic and may have some depth.
Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.
Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 11 (11%)
Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are missing.
No credible sources are cited.
Participation
Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days.
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days.
Total Points: 100
Name: NURS_6003_Module03_Week04_Discussion_Rubric

ACC 492 WEEK 5 Final Paper
ACC 492 WEEK 5 Final Paper
Review the Form 10-K for the company selected for team assignments.
Write a 1,050- to 1,400-word paper on the following:
Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
The Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
The Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm’s Report on the Financial Statements
Explain the purpose and content of each of these reports.
Assuming the report you review is an Unqualified Opinion, express your thoughts on other types of financial statement reports such as Qualified Opinions, Adverse Opinions, and Disclaimer of Opinions.
Click the Assignment Files tab to submit your assignment in a Microsoft® Word document.
ACC 492 WEEK 5 Final Paper
ACC 492 WEEK 5 Final Paper
Review the Form 10-K for the company selected for team assignments.
Write a 1,050- to 1,400-word paper on the following:
Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
The Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
The Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm’s Report on the Financial Statements
Explain the purpose and content of each of these reports.
Assuming the report you review is an Unqualified Opinion, express your thoughts on other types of financial statement reports such as Qualified Opinions, Adverse Opinions, and Disclaimer of Opinions.
Click the Assignment Files tab to submit your assignment in a Microsoft® Word document.

Discussion: Developmental stages of children
Compare the physical assessments among school-aged children. Describe how you would modify assessment techniques to match the age and developmental stage of the child.
Choose a child between the ages of 5 and 12 years old. Identify the age of the child and describe the typical developmental stages of children that age.
Applying developmental theory based on Erickson, Piaget, or Kohlberg, explain how you would developmentally assess the child. Include how you would offer explanations during the assessment, strategies you would use to gain cooperation, and potential findings from the assessment.
Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.
This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
Developmental Assessment and the School-Aged Child – Rubric
Collapse All Developmental Assessment And The School-Aged Child – RubricCollapse All
Comparison of Physical Assessment Among School-Aged Children
27.5 points
Criteria Description
Comparison of Physical Assessment Among School-Aged Children
5. 5: Excellent
27.5 points
A detailed comparison of physical assessments among different school-aged children is presented. How assessment techniques would be modified depending on the age and developmental stage of the child is thoroughly described. Insight is demonstrated into the physical assessment of school age children.
4. 4: Good
24.48 points
A comparison of physical assessments among different school-aged children is presented. How assessment techniques would be modified depending on the age and developmental stage of the child is described. Some information is needed for clarity.
3. 3: Satisfactory
21.73 points
A general comparison of physical assessments among different school-aged children is summarized. How assessment techniques would be modified depending on the age and developmental stage of the child is generally described. More information or support is needed for clarity or accuracy.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
20.63 points
An incomplete comparison of physical assessments among different school-aged children is summarized. How assessment techniques would be modified depending on the age and developmental stage of the child is omitted or contains significant inaccuracies.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
A comparison of physical assessments among different school-aged children is omitted.
Typical Assessment for a Child of a Specific Age
27.5 points
Criteria Description
Typical Assessment for a Child of a Specific Age
5. 5: Excellent
27.5 points
The typical developmental stage of a child between the ages 5 and 12 is accurately and thoroughly described.
4. 4: Good
24.48 points
The typical developmental stage of a child between the ages 5 and 12 is described. The overall description is accurate. Some information is needed for clarity.
3. 3: Satisfactory
21.73 points
The typical developmental stage of a child between the ages 5 and 12 is generally described. The description contains some inaccuracies for the age of the child.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
20.63 points
The typical developmental stage of a child between the ages 5 and 12 is summarized. The summary contains significant inaccuracies for the age of the child.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
The typical developmental stage of a child between the ages 5 and 12 is not described.
Developmental Assessment of a Child Using a Developmental Theory (Erickson, Piaget, Kohlberg)
33 points
Criteria Description
Developmental Assessment of a Child Using a Developmental Theory (Erickson, Piaget, Kohlberg)
5. 5: Excellent
33 points
A child assessment based on a developmental theory is thoroughly described. Well-developed strategies to gain cooperation and for how explanations would be offered during the assessment are presented. The potential findings expected from the assessment are all accurate and described in detail.
4. 4: Good
29.37 points
A child assessment based on a developmental theory is described. Appropriate strategies to gain cooperation and for how explanations would be offered during the assessment are presented. The potential findings expected from the assessment are described. Some information is needed for clarity.
3. 3: Satisfactory
26.07 points
A child assessment based on a developmental theory is generally described. General strategies to gain cooperation and for how explanations would be offered during the assessment are presented. The potential findings expected from the assessment are summarized. There are minor inaccuracies.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
24.75 points
A child assessment based on a developmental theory is partially summarized. Partial strategies to gain cooperation and for how explanations would be offered during the assessment are presented. The potential findings expected from the assessment are omitted or are incorrect. There are significant inaccuracies.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
A child assessment based on a developmental theory is omitted.
Thesis Development and Purpose
5.5 points
Criteria Description
Thesis Development and Purpose
5. 5: Excellent
5.5 points
Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.
4. 4: Good
4.9 points
Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.
3. 3: Satisfactory
4.35 points
Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
4.13 points
Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.
Argument Logic and Construction
5.5 points
Criteria Description
Argument Logic and Construction
5. 5: Excellent
5.5 points
Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.
4. 4: Good
4.9 points
Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.
3. 3: Satisfactory
4.35 points
Argument is orderly but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
4.13 points
Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)
5.5 points
Criteria Description
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)
5. 5: Excellent
5.5 points
Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
4. 4: Good
4.9 points
Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used.
3. 3: Satisfactory
4.35 points
Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
4.13 points
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, or word choice are present.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.
Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)
2.2 points
Criteria Description
Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)
5. 5: Excellent
2.2 points
All format elements are correct.
4. 4: Good
1.96 points
Template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style.
3. 3: Satisfactory
1.74 points
Template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
1.65 points
Template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Template is not used appropriately, or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.
Documentation of Sources
3.3 points
Criteria Description
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)
5. 5: Excellent
3.3 points
Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.
4. 4: Good
2.94 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.
3. 3: Satisfactory
2.61 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
2.47 points
Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Sources are not documented.
Total 110 points

Developmental Assessment Assignment
Developmental Assessment Assignment
The needs of the pediatric patient differ depending on age, as do the stages of development and the expected assessment findings for each stage. In a 500-750-word paper, examine the needs of a school-aged child between the ages of 5 and 12 years old and discuss the following:
Compare the physical assessments among school-aged children. Describe how you would modify assessment techniques to match the age and developmental stage of the child.
Choose a child between the ages of 5 and 12 years old. Identify the age of the child and describe the typical developmental stages of children that age.
Applying developmental theory based on Erickson, Piaget, or Kohlberg, explain how you would developmentally assess the child. Include how you would offer explanations during the assessment, strategies you would use to gain cooperation, and potential findings from the assessment.
Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.
This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. Refer to the LopesWrite Technical Support articles for assistance.
You must proofread your paper. But do not strictly rely on your computer’s spell-checker and grammar-checker; failure to do so indicates a lack of effort on your part and you can expect your grade to suffer accordingly. Papers with numerous misspelled words and grammatical mistakes will be penalized. Read over your paper – in silence and then aloud – before handing it in and make corrections as necessary. Often it is advantageous to have a friend proofread your paper for obvious errors. Handwritten corrections are preferable to uncorrected mistakes.
Use a standard 10 to 12 point (10 to 12 characters per inch) typeface. Smaller or compressed type and papers with small margins or single-spacing are hard to read. It is better to let your essay run over the recommended number of pages than to try to compress it into fewer pages.
Likewise, large type, large margins, large indentations, triple-spacing, increased leading (space between lines), increased kerning (space between letters), and any other such attempts at “padding” to increase the length of a paper are unacceptable, wasteful of trees, and will not fool your professor.
The paper must be neatly formatted, double-spaced with a one-inch margin on the top, bottom, and sides of each page. When submitting hard copy, be sure to use white paper and print out using dark ink. If it is hard to read your essay, it will also be hard to follow your argument.
ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE CLASS
Discussion Questions (DQ)
Initial responses to the DQ should address all components of the questions asked, include a minimum of one scholarly source, and be at least 250 words.
Successful responses are substantive (i.e., add something new to the discussion, engage others in the discussion, well-developed idea) and include at least one scholarly source.
One or two sentence responses, simple statements of agreement or “good post,” and responses that are off-topic will not count as substantive. Substantive responses should be at least 150 words.
I encourage you to incorporate the readings from the week (as applicable) into your responses.
Weekly Participation
Your initial responses to the mandatory DQ do not count toward participation and are graded separately.
In addition to the DQ responses, you must post at least one reply to peers (or me) on three separate days, for a total of three replies.
Participation posts do not require a scholarly source/citation (unless you cite someone else’s work).
Part of your weekly participation includes viewing the weekly announcement and attesting to watching it in the comments. These announcements are made to ensure you understand everything that is due during the week.
APA Format and Writing Quality
Familiarize yourself with APA format and practice using it correctly. It is used for most writing assignments for your degree. Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in LoudCloud for APA paper templates, citation examples, tips, etc. Points will be deducted for poor use of APA format or absence of APA format (if required).
Cite all sources of information! When in doubt, cite the source. Paraphrasing also requires a citation.
I highly recommend using the APA Publication Manual, 6th edition.
Use of Direct Quotes
I discourage overutilization of direct quotes in DQs and assignments at the Masters’ level and deduct points accordingly.
As Masters’ level students, it is important that you be able to critically analyze and interpret information from journal articles and other resources. Simply restating someone else’s words does not demonstrate an understanding of the content or critical analysis of the content.
It is best to paraphrase content and cite your source.
LopesWrite Policy
For assignments that need to be submitted to LopesWrite, please be sure you have received your report and Similarity Index (SI) percentage BEFORE you do a “final submit” to me.
Once you have received your report, please review it. This report will show you grammatical, punctuation, and spelling errors that can easily be fixed. Take the extra few minutes to review instead of getting counted off for these mistakes.
Review your similarities. Did you forget to cite something? Did you not paraphrase well enough? Is your paper made up of someone else’s thoughts more than your own?
Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in LoudCloud for tips on improving your paper and SI score.
Late Policy
The university’s policy on late assignments is 10% penalty PER DAY LATE. This also applies to late DQ replies.
Please communicate with me if you anticipate having to submit an assignment late. I am happy to be flexible, with advance notice. We may be able to work out an extension based on extenuating circumstances.
If you do not communicate with me before submitting an assignment late, the GCU late policy will be in effect.
I do not accept assignments that are two or more weeks late unless we have worked out an extension.
As per policy, no assignments are accepted after the last day of class. Any assignment submitted after midnight on the last day of class will not be accepted for grading.
Communication
Communication is so very important. There are multiple ways to communicate with me: Questions to Instructor Forum: This is a great place to ask course content or assignment questions. If you have a question, there is a good chance one of your peers does as well. This is a public forum for the class.
Individual Forum: This is a private forum to ask me questions or send me messages. This will be checked at least once every 24 hours.
Developmental Assessment Assignment
Developmental Assessment and the School-Aged Child – Rubric
Collapse All Developmental Assessment And The School-Aged Child – RubricCollapse All
Comparison of Physical Assessment Among School-Aged Children
27.5 points
Criteria Description
Comparison of Physical Assessment Among School-Aged Children
5. 5: Excellent
27.5 points
A detailed comparison of physical assessments among different school-aged children is presented. How assessment techniques would be modified depending on the age and developmental stage of the child is thoroughly described. Insight is demonstrated into the physical assessment of school age children.
4. 4: Good
24.48 points
A comparison of physical assessments among different school-aged children is presented. How assessment techniques would be modified depending on the age and developmental stage of the child is described. Some information is needed for clarity.
3. 3: Satisfactory
21.73 points
A general comparison of physical assessments among different school-aged children is summarized. How assessment techniques would be modified depending on the age and developmental stage of the child is generally described. More information or support is needed for clarity or accuracy.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
20.63 points
An incomplete comparison of physical assessments among different school-aged children is summarized. How assessment techniques would be modified depending on the age and developmental stage of the child is omitted or contains significant inaccuracies.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
A comparison of physical assessments among different school-aged children is omitted.
Typical Assessment for a Child of a Specific Age
27.5 points
Criteria Description
Typical Assessment for a Child of a Specific Age
5. 5: Excellent
27.5 points
The typical developmental stage of a child between the ages 5 and 12 is accurately and thoroughly described.
4. 4: Good
24.48 points
The typical developmental stage of a child between the ages 5 and 12 is described. The overall description is accurate. Some information is needed for clarity.
3. 3: Satisfactory
21.73 points
The typical developmental stage of a child between the ages 5 and 12 is generally described. The description contains some inaccuracies for the age of the child.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
20.63 points
The typical developmental stage of a child between the ages 5 and 12 is summarized. The summary contains significant inaccuracies for the age of the child.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
The typical developmental stage of a child between the ages 5 and 12 is not described.
Developmental Assessment of a Child Using a Developmental Theory (Erickson, Piaget, Kohlberg)
33 points
Criteria Description
Developmental Assessment of a Child Using a Developmental Theory (Erickson, Piaget, Kohlberg)
5. 5: Excellent
33 points
A child assessment based on a developmental theory is thoroughly described. Well-developed strategies to gain cooperation and for how explanations would be offered during the assessment are presented. The potential findings expected from the assessment are all accurate and described in detail.
4. 4: Good
29.37 points
A child assessment based on a developmental theory is described. Appropriate strategies to gain cooperation and for how explanations would be offered during the assessment are presented. The potential findings expected from the assessment are described. Some information is needed for clarity.
3. 3: Satisfactory
26.07 points
A child assessment based on a developmental theory is generally described. General strategies to gain cooperation and for how explanations would be offered during the assessment are presented. The potential findings expected from the assessment are summarized. There are minor inaccuracies.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
24.75 points
A child assessment based on a developmental theory is partially summarized. Partial strategies to gain cooperation and for how explanations would be offered during the assessment are presented. The potential findings expected from the assessment are omitted or are incorrect. There are significant inaccuracies.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
A child assessment based on a developmental theory is omitted.
Thesis Development and Purpose
5.5 points
Criteria Description
Thesis Development and Purpose
5. 5: Excellent
5.5 points
Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.
4. 4: Good
4.9 points
Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.
3. 3: Satisfactory
4.35 points
Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
4.13 points
Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.
Argument Logic and Construction
5.5 points
Criteria Description
Argument Logic and Construction
5. 5: Excellent
5.5 points
Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.
4. 4: Good
4.9 points
Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.
3. 3: Satisfactory
4.35 points
Argument is orderly but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
4.13 points
Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)
5.5 points
Criteria Description
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)
5. 5: Excellent
5.5 points
Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
4. 4: Good
4.9 points
Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used.
3. 3: Satisfactory
4.35 points
Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
4.13 points
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, or word choice are present.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.
Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)
2.2 points
Criteria Description
Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)
5. 5: Excellent
2.2 points
All format elements are correct.
4. 4: Good
1.96 points
Template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style.
3. 3: Satisfactory
1.74 points
Template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
1.65 points
Template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Template is not used appropriately, or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.
Documentation of Sources
3.3 points
Criteria Description
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)
5. 5: Excellent
3.3 points
Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.
4. 4: Good
2.94 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.
3. 3: Satisfactory
2.61 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
2.47 points
Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Sources are not documented.
Total 110 points

HCA 807 Week 2 Discussions
HCA807
HCA 807 Week 2 Discussions
DQ1
Why do health care organizations use segmentation?
DQ2
Managed care can be seen as a result of health care segmentation. Is this a positive or negative influence to the health care industry? Why or why not? Is it a positive outcome for the patient? Why or why not?

Assignment: NR 392 Personal PDSA Worksheet
The purpose of this assignment is for learners to understand and apply the PDSA steps using a personal example of an issue where quality could be improved.
Course Outcomes
This assignment enables the student to meet the following course outcome:
CO 1: Describe the role of the BSN nurse in collaborative quality improvement. (POs 2 and 7)
CO 2: Utilize evidence-based processes in nursing quality improvement. (PO 8)
Late Assignment Policy
If the assignment is not submitted by due date, a late deduction will be applied. See rubric below.
Directions
You will be applying the PDSA to an identified personal situation or problem that needs improvement. This is very similar to the example in Lesson 2.
Download the required Week 2 PDSA Worksheet below.
Save it to your computer with the file name: Your Last Name NR392 Week 2 PDSA Worksheet.docx
Select a personal situation or problem that you are experiencing that needs improvement. It can be home or work related.
Complete the worksheet. Worksheet contents include:
Aim statement
Needs to be a measurable goal addressing what, when, how much, and for whom.
Plan
Describe the situation and problem that needs improvement.
Describe the change that should be implemented and the predicted outcome.
Assignment: NR 392 Personal PDSA Worksheet
Identify who will be involved in implementing and evaluating the change.
Describe how the outcomes will be evaluated.
Identify when this implementation will begin and the target date for completion.
Do
Describe the implementation in detail including any problems or unexpected events that occurred.
Study
Describe in detail the outcome(s) of the implementation and how the problem was improved or not improved.
Identify whether the goal met by the target date or delayed.
Describe how the actual outcome compared to the predicted outcome.
Act
If the problem improved, describe how it will be maintained in the future. If the problem was not improved, describe how the plan will change in the next PDSA cycle. Plans should be detailed, realistic, and contain at least two actions.
Submit worksheet by due date.
Please reach out to your instructor with any questions or concerns.
Template
Week 2 PDSA Worksheet (Links to an external site.)
Best Practices
Please use your browser’s File setting to save or print this page.
Spell check for spelling and grammar errors prior to final submission.
Use the rubric as a final check prior to submission to ensure all content is clearly addressed.
Scholarly Sources and Citations
Scholarly sources are not required for the Week 2 PDSA Worksheet.
Note: Scholarly sources will be required in the Week 6 PDSA assignment.

Developing A Shared Vision Assignment
Choose two issues or challenges that the leaders of today’s health care organizations face. Select from among the following topics:
Staff Shortage (Physicians, Nurses, Allied Health Providers, Ancillary Services)
Reorganization in Response to Merger or Consolidation of Services
Layoffs as a Result of Declining Revenues
Influx of Registry, Part-Time, and Temporary Contract Staff
Poor Performance Outcomes Leading to a Reduction in Medicare Reimbursement Dollars
Poor Job Satisfaction Rates Resulting in Turnover
You are the manager of an ancillary service department at a large, 500+ bed hospital. Develop a proposal (750-1,200 words) that is directed toward your staff, in which you address the following:
Inform the staff of the two issues (from the topics provided) your organization is facing.
Describe the impact of these issues on your department.
Describe how improved communication, collaboration, and teamwork can improve conditions in your department.
Identify at least two examples from the required or recommended readings of techniques found to foster inclusion and improve communication and collaboration.
A minimum of three academic references from credible sources are required for this assignment.
Prepare this Developing A Shared Vision Assignment assignment according to the APA guidelines found in the APA Style Guide.
This Developing A Shared Vision Assignment uses a grading rubric. Instructors will be using the rubric to grade the assignment; therefore, students should review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the assignment criteria and expectations for successful completion of the assignment.
You are required to submit this assignment to Turnitin. Only Word documents can be submitted to Turnitin.
Rubric to follow-
Developing a Shared Vision: Developing A Shared Vision Assignment
1
Unsatisfactory 0-71%
0.00%
2
Less Than Satisfactory 72-75%
75.00%
3
Satisfactory 76-79%
79.00%
4
Good 80-89%
89.00%
5
Excellent 90-100%
100.00%
80.0 %Content
10.0 %Selection of Two Issues or Challenges From Among Those Provided in the Assignment Instructions
Identification /Challenges in health care organizations are not identified.
Issues /Challenges identified are not among those listed in the assignment instructions.
Issues /Challenges are identified but description is unclear or incomplete.
One issue/challenge is identified from among those listed in the assignment instructions.
Two issues/challenges are identified from among those listed in the assignment instructions.
70.0 %Compelling Memo Describing the Issues, Their Impact on the Organization, Opportunities for Improvement, and Recommendations
Memo addressed to ancillary staff is not provided or is incomplete.
Discussion of issues, their impact on the organization, and recommendations is unclear or disorganized.
Discussion of issues includes a brief description of organizational impact and recommendations.
Description of issues includes detailed information regarding organizational impact and opportunities for improvement but recommendations are lacking.
Comprehensive and compelling discussion regarding organizational issues, their impact, opportunities for improvement, and recommendations to foster a shared vision is offered.
15.0 %Organization and Effectiveness
5.0 %Thesis Development and Purpose
Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.
Thesis and/or main claim are insufficiently developed and/or vague; purpose is not clear.
Thesis and/or main claim are apparent and appropriate to purpose.
Thesis and/or main claim are clear and forecast the development of the paper. It is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.

NURS 6003 Part 4 Finalizing the Plan Assignment
NURS 6003 Part 4 Finalizing the Plan Assignment
NURS 6003 Assignment: Academic Success and Professional Development Plan Part 4: Finalizing the Plan
At some point in every construction project, efforts turn from design and the focus moves to actual construction. With the vision in place and the tools secured, the blueprint can be finalized and approved. Then it is time to put on hardhats and begin work.
Throughout the course you have developed aspects of your . You have thought a great deal about your vision and goals, your academic and professional network of
NURS 6003 Part 4 Finalizing the Plan Assignment Slayers
support, research strategies and other tools you will need, the integrity of your work, and the value of consulting the work of others. With your portfolio in place, it is now time to finalize your blueprint for success.
Much as builders remain cognizant of the building standards as they plan and begin construction, nurses must remain mindful of the formal standards of practice that govern their specialties. A good understanding of these standards can help ensure that your success plan includes any steps necessary to excel within your chosen specialty.
In this Assignment you will continue developing your Academic Success and Professional Development Plan by developing the final component–a review of your specialty standards of practice. You will also submit your final version of the document, including Parts 1–4.
Note: For students in Nursing Education, Executive Nursing, Nursing Informatics, or Public Health Nursing, this Assignment is the first Portfolio Assignment in your program. You will have one Portfolio Assignment in each of your courses. You will need to save these Assignments for inclusion in your portfolio that you will submit in your Capstone course.
To Prepare:
Review the scope and standards of practice or competencies related to your chosen specialty in the resources for this module.
Review the MSN specializations offered at Walden by viewing the module resource, Walden University. (n.d.). Master of Science in Nursing (MSN).
Examine professional organizations related to the specialization you have chosen and identify at least one to focus on for this Assignment.
Reflect on the thoughts you shared in the Discussion forum regarding your choice of a specialty, any challenges you have encountered in making this choice, and any feedback you have received from colleagues in the Discussion.
The Assignment:
Complete the following items and incorporate them into the final version of your Academic Success and Professional Development Plan.
With the resources specific to the MSN specialization and the, Walden University. (n.d.). Master of Science in Nursing (MSN), shared in this module, write a paragraph or make a Nursing Specialty Comparison table, comparing at least two nursing specialties that include your selected specialization and second-preferred specialization.
Write a 2- to 3-paragraph justification statement identifying your reasons for choosing your MSN specialization. Incorporate feedback you received from colleagues in this Module’s Discussion forum.
Identify the professional organization related to your chosen specialization for this Assignment, and explain how you can become an active member of this organization. NURS 6003 Part 4 Finalizing the Plan Assignment
Note: Your final version of the Academic Success and Professional Development Plan should include all components as presented the Academic Success and Professional Development Plan template.
By Day 5 of Week 11
Submit your final draft of Parts 1-4 of your Academic Success and Professional Development Plan.
Submission and Grading Information
To submit your completed Assignment for review and grading, do the following:
Please save your Assignment using the naming convention “WK11Assgn+last name+first initial.(extension)” as the name.
Click the Week 11 Assignment Rubric to review the Grading Criteria for the Assignment.
Click the Week 11 Assignment link. You will also be able to “View Rubric” for grading criteria from this area.
Next, from the Attach File area, click on the Browse My Computer button. Find the document you saved as “WK11Assgn+last name+first initial.(extension)” and click Open.
If applicable: From the Plagiarism Tools area, click the checkbox for I agree to submit my paper(s) to the Global Reference Database.
Click on the Submit button to complete your submission. NURS 6003 Part 4 Finalizing the Plan Assignment
Grading Criteria
To access your rubric:
Week 11 Assignment Rubric
Check Your Assignment Draft for Authenticity
To check your Assignment draft for authenticity:
Submit your Week 11 Assignment draft and review the originality report.
Submit Your Assignment by Day 5 of Week 11
To submit your Assignment:
Week 11 Assignment
Congratulations! After you have finished all of the assignments for this module, you have completed the course. Please submit your Course Evaluation by Day 7.
Module 6 (Weeks 10–11): Standards of Practice
Laureate Education (Producer). (2018). Standards of Practice [Video file]. Baltimore, MD: Author.
Laureate Education (Producer). (2018). The Walden Journey to a Masters in Nursing: Standards of Practice [Video file]. Baltimore, MD: Author.
Laureate Education (Producer). (2018). The Walden Journey to a Masters in Nursing: Final Thoughts [Video file]. Baltimore, MD: Author.
Learning Objectives
Students will:
Analyze difficulties in determining nursing specializations
Compare nursing specialties
Justify selection of MSN specialization
Analyze nursing specialization professional organization engagement strategies
Create Academic Success and Professional Development Plans
Due By
Assignment
Week 10, Days 1–2
Read the Learning Resources.
Compose your initial Discussion post.
Week 10, Day 3
Deadline to post your initial Discussion post.
Begin to compose Part 4 of your Assignment.
Week 10, Days 4–5
Compose your peer Discussion responses.
Continue to compose Part 4 of your Assignment.
Week 10, Day 6
Last day to post Discussion responses.
Week 10, Day 7
Continue to compose Part 4 of your Assignment.
Week 11, Days 1–4
Continue to compose Part 4 of your Assignment.
Week 11, Day 5
Deadline to submit Part 4 of your Assignment.
Learning Resources
Required Readings
Bickford, C. J., Marion, L., & Gazaway, S. (2015). Nursing: Scope and standards of practice, third edition – 2015. Retrieved from http://ebooks.iospress.nl/publication/12524
Cherry, B., Caramanica, L, Everett, L. Q., Fennimore, L., & Elaine, S. (2019). Leveraging the power of board leadership in professional nursing organizations. JONA: The Journal of Nursing Administration, 49(11), 517-519.
Echevarria, I. M. (2018). Make connections by joining a professional nursing organization. Nursing, 48(12), 35–38.
Truant, R., & Chan, R. J. (2017). Future ready: Strengthening oncology nursing leadership in the context of professional oncology nursing organizations. Canadian Oncology Nursing Journal, 27(1), 2-4.
Walden University. (n.d.). Master of Science in Nursing (MSN). Retrieved November 14, 2018, from https://www.waldenu.edu/masters/master-of-science-in-nursing
Document: Academic Success and Professional Development Plan Template (Word document)
Choose among the following to review your specialization’s Scope and Standards of Practice or Competencies:
Nursing Informatics
Ebook: Nursing Informatics: Scope and Standards of Practice
American Nurses Association. (2015). Nursing informatics: Scope and standards of practice (2nd ed.). Silver Spring, MD: Author.
“The Scope of Nursing Informatics Practice: Functional Areas of Nursing Informatics” (pp. 18–39)
Nursing Education
Website: Competencies for the Academic Nurse Educator
National League for Nursing. (2019). Nurse educator core competency. Retrieved from http://www.nln.org/professional-development-programs/competencies-for-nursing-education/nurse-educator-core-competency
Note: The competencies for the Academic Nurse Educator do not encompass the competencies or scope and standards of practice for the Nursing Professional Developer. The set of competencies associated with that specific role within the Nurse Education specialization will be examined in future competencies throughout your specialization program of study.
Nurse Executive
Website: Nurse Executive Competencies
American Organization for Nursing Leadership. (2015). AONL Nurse Executive competencies. Retrieved from https://www.aonl.org/resources/nurse-leader-competencies
Public Health Nursing
Website: Public Health Nursing Competencies
Quad Council Coalition. (2018). Community/Public Health Nursing [C/PHN] competencies. Retrieved from https://www.cphno.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/QCC-C-PHN-COMPETENCIES-Approved_2018.05.04_Final-002.pdf
American Nurses Association. (2013). Public health nursing: Scope and standards of practice (2nd ed.). Silver Spring, MD: Author.
APRN
Website: APRN Consensus Model
APRN Consensus Work Group & the National Council of State Boards of Nursing APRN Advisory Committee. (2008). Consensus model for APRN regulation: Licensure, accreditation, certification & education. Retrieved from https://www.nursingworld.org/~4aa7d9/globalassets/certification/aprn_consensus_model_report_7-7-08.pdf
Adult-Gerontology Acute Care and Primary Care NP Competencies
Website: AGAC and ACPC NP Competencies
Adult-Gerontology NP Competencies Work Group. (2016). Adult-gerontology acute care and primary care NP competencies. https://cdn.ymaws.com/www.nonpf.org/resource/resmgr/competencies/NP_Adult_Geri_competencies_4.pdf
Nurse Practitioner Core Competencies
Website: Nurse Practitioner Core Competencies
The National Organization of Nurse Practitioner Faculties. (2012). Nurse Practitioner core competencies. https://cdn.ymaws.com/www.nonpf.org/resource/resmgr/competencies/npcorecompetenciesfinal2012.pdf
Nurse Practitioner Programs
Website: Nurse Practitioner Programs
National Task Force on Quality Nurse Practitioner Education. (2016). Criteria for evaluation of Nurse Practitioner programs (5th ed.). https://cdn.ymaws.com/www.nonpf.org/resource/resmgr/Docs/EvalCriteria2016Final.pdf
Population-Focused NP Competencies
Website: Population-Focused Nurse Practitioner Competencies
Population-Focused Competencies Task Force. (2013). Population-focused Nurse Practitioner competencies. https://cdn.ymaws.com/www.nonpf.org/resource/resmgr/Competencies/CompilationPopFocusComps2013.pdf
Discussion: Examining Nursing Specialties
You have probably seen one or more of the many inspirational posters about decisions. A visual such as a forked road or a street sign is typically pictured, along with a quote designed to inspire.
Decisions are often not so easily inspired. Perhaps you discovered this when choosing a specialty within the MSN program. This decision is a critical part of your plan for success, and you no doubt want to get it right. This is yet another area where your network can help, as well as other sources of information that can help you make an informed choice.
Note: Unless otherwise noted, initial postings to Discussions are due on or before Day 3, and response postings are due on or before Day 6. You are required to participate in the Discussion on at least three different days (a different day for main post and each response). It is important to adhere to the weekly time frame to allow others ample time to respond to your posting. In addition, you are expected to respond to questions directed toward your own initial posting in a timely manner.
To Prepare:
Reflect on your decision to pursue a specialty within the MSN program, including your professional and academic goals as they relate to your program/specialization.
By Day 3 of Week 10
Post an explanation of your choice of a nursing specialty within the program. Describe any difficulties you had (or are having) in making your choice, and the factors that drove/are driving your decision. Identify at least one professional organization affiliated with your chosen specialty and provide details on becoming a member.
By Day 6 of Week 10
Respond to at least two of your colleagues’ posts by sharing your thoughts on their specialty, supporting their choice or offering suggestions if they have yet to choose.
Submission and Grading Information
Grading Criteria
To access your rubric:
Week 10 Discussion Rubric
Post by Day 3 and Respond by Day 6 of Week 10
To participate in this Discussion:
Week 10 Discussion
Rubric Detail
Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.
Content
Name: NURS_6003_Module06_Week11_Assignment_Rubric
Grid View
List View
Excellent Good Fair Poor
Complete the following items and incorporate them into the final version of your Academic Success and Professional Development Plan:
Write a paragraph or make a Nursing Specialty Comparison table comparing at least two nursing specialties, including your selected specialization and second-preferred specialization.
Write a 2-3 paragraph justification statement identifying your reasons for choosing your MSN specialization. Incorporate feedback you received from colleagues in this week’s Discussion Forum.
Identify the professional organization related to the specialization you have chosen to focus on for this Assignment and explain how you can become an active member of this organization.
Points Range: 77 (77%) – 85 (85%)
A fully completed and detailed paragraph or comparison matrix table is provided that accurately and fully describes the selected and second-preferred specialization.
A clear and accurately justified statement describes in detail the reasons for choosing the MSN specialization with sufficient evidence of incorporating feedback from colleagues in this week’s Discussion Forum.
The response clearly identifies and accurately describes in detail the professional organization related to the specialization selected. The response clearly and accurately describes in detail how to become an active member of this organization.
Points Range: 68 (68%) – 76 (76%)
A partially completed paragraph or comparison matrix table is provided that partially describes the selected and second-preferred specialization.
A partially justified statement describes the reasons for choosing the MSN specialization with some evidence of incorporating feedback from colleagues in this week’s Discussion Forum.
The response partially describes the professional organization related to the specialization selected. The response partially describes how to become an active member of this organization.
Points Range: 59 (59%) – 67 (67%)
A vague or inaccurately completed paragraph or comparison matrix table is provided describing the selected and second-preferred specialization.
A vague or inaccurately justified statement describes the reasons for choosing the MSN specialization with vague evidence of incorporating feedback from colleagues in this week’s Discussion Forum.
The response vaguely or inaccurately describes the professional organization related to the specialization selected. The response vaguely or inaccurately describes how to become an active member of this organization.
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 58 (58%)
A vague and inaccurately completed paragraph or comparison matrix table is provided describing the selected and second-preferred specialization or is missing.
A vague and inaccurately justified statement describes the reasons for choosing the MSN specialization with vague and inaccurate evidence of incorporating feedback from colleagues in this week’s Discussion Forum, or is missing.
The response vaguely and inaccurately describes the professional organization related to the specialization selected. The response vaguely and inaccurately describes how to become an active member of this organization, or is missing.
Written Expression and Formatting – Paragraph Development and Organization: NURS 6003 Part 4 Finalizing the Plan Assignment
Paragraphs make clear points that support well developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused–neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement and introduction is provided which delineates all required criteria.
Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity.
A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion is provided which delineates all required criteria.
Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time.
Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is stated, yet is brief and not descriptive.
Points Range: 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%- 79% of the time. NURS 6003 Part 4 Finalizing the Plan Assignment
Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is vague or off topic.
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time. No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion was provided. Written Expression and Formatting – English writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors. Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Contains a few (1-2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. Points Range: 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%) Contains several (3-4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Contains many (? 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding. Written Expression and Formatting – The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, running head, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list. NURS 6003 Part 4 Finalizing the Plan Assignment Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Uses correct APA format with no errors. Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Contains a few (1-2) APA format errors. Points Range: 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%) Contains several (3-4) APA format errors. Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Contains many (? 5) APA format errors. Total Points: 100 Name: NURS_6003_Module06_Week11_Assignment_Rubric NURS_6003_Module06_Week11_Assignment_Rubric Excellent Good Fair Poor Complete the following items and incorporate them into the final version of your Academic Success and Professional Development Plan: · Write a paragraph or make a Nursing Specialty Comparison table comparing at least two nursing specialties, including your selected specialization and second-preferred specialization. · Write a 2-3 paragraph justification statement identifying your reasons for choosing your MSN specialization. Incorporate feedback you received from colleagues in this week’s Discussion Forum. · Identify the professional organization related to the specialization you have chosen to focus on for this Assignment and explain how you can become an active member of this organization. Points Range: 77 (77%) – 85 (85%) A fully completed and detailed paragraph or comparison matrix table is provided that accurately and fully describes the selected and second-preferred specialization. A clear and accurately justified statement describes in detail the reasons for choosing the MSN specialization with sufficient evidence of incorporating feedback from colleagues in this week’s Discussion Forum. The response clearly identifies and accurately describes in detail the professional organization related to the specialization selected. The response clearly and accurately describes in detail how to become an active member of this organization. Points Range: 68 (68%) – 76 (76%) A partially completed paragraph or comparison matrix table is provided that partially describes the selected and second-preferred specialization. A partially justified statement describes the reasons for choosing the MSN specialization with some evidence of incorporating feedback from colleagues in this week’s Discussion Forum. The response partially describes the professional organization related to the specialization selected. The response partially describes how to become an active member of this organization. Points Range: 59 (59%) – 67 (67%) A vague or inaccurately completed paragraph or comparison matrix table is provided describing the selected and second-preferred specialization. A vague or inaccurately justified statement describes the reasons for choosing the MSN specialization with vague evidence of incorporating feedback from colleagues in this week’s Discussion Forum. The response vaguely or inaccurately describes the professional organization related to the specialization selected. The response vaguely or inaccurately describes how to become an active member of this organization. Points Range: 0 (0%) – 58 (58%) A vague and inaccurately completed paragraph or comparison matrix table is provided describing the selected and second-preferred specialization or is missing. A vague and inaccurately justified statement describes the reasons for choosing the MSN specialization with vague and inaccurate evidence of incorporating feedback from colleagues in this week’s Discussion Forum, or is missing. The response vaguely and inaccurately describes the professional organization related to the specialization selected. The response vaguely and inaccurately describes how to become an active member of this organization, or is missing. Written Expression and Formatting – Paragraph Development and Organization: Paragraphs make clear points that support well developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused–neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement and introduction is provided which delineates all required criteria. Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion is provided which delineates all required criteria. Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time. Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is stated, yet is brief and not descriptive. Points Range: 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%- 79% of the time. Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is vague or off topic. Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time. No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion was provided. Written Expression and Formatting – English writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors. Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Contains a few (1-2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. Points Range: 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%) Contains several (3-4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Contains many (? 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding. Written Expression and Formatting – The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, running head, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list. Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Uses correct APA format with no errors. Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Contains a few (1-2) APA format errors. Points Range: 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%) Contains several (3-4) APA format errors. Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Contains many (? 5) APA format errors. Total Points: 100 Name: NURS_6003_Module06_Week11_Assignment_Rubric