DNP 810 Week 2 Scholarly Writing using Research

DNP 810 Week 2 Scholarly Writing using Research
“Scholarly writing” is a term that indicates a set of standards are used or required for professional writing. In the DNP program, learners are expected to use scholarly writing for all coursework and in the development of their Direct Practice Improvement (DPI) Project. Standards for scholarly writing for this program are:
• Develop a clear thesis.
• Maintain an objective or unbiased perspective.
• Incorporate appropriate evidence for support (peer-reviewed research and other scholarly sources).
• Present original writing (written in one’s own words and properly citing authors for ideas, findings, etc.).
• Write and synthesize in an organized and logical manner.
• Format in APA style.
The purpose of this assignment is to familiarize the learner with the overall expectations of scholarly writing and the tools available to help you succeed. Learners in this program are expected to demonstrate scholarly writing throughout the program.
General Requirements:
• Review the topic Resources prior to completing this assignment.
• Use the “Searching Nursing Databases,” located on the Doctor of Nursing Practice page in the GCU Library, to assist you in completing this assignment.
• Refer to the “DNP Direct Practice Improvement Project Recommendations,” located in the DC Network, to assist in completing the assignment.
• A minimum of one peer-reviewed research article, published within 5 years of your anticipated graduation date, is required to complete this assignment.
• Doctoral learners are required to use APA style for their writing assignments. The APA Style Guide is located in the Student Success Center.
• 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.
• Learners will submit this assignment using the assignment dropbox in the digital classroom. In addition, learners must upload this deliverable to the Learner Dissertation Page (LDP) in the DNP PI Workspace for later use.
Directions:
The GCU DNP program requires learners to develop a Direct Practice Improvement (DPI) Project for successful completion of the program. The purpose of the DPI Project is to identify a valid patient practice problem at your practice site and propose an evidence-based intervention shown by current and authoritative research to improve the nursing practice problem.
Write an essay of 750-1,000 words, address the following:
1. Discuss the differences between quality improvement and research.
2. Explain why your DPI Project for this program is considered quality improvement and not research.
3. Describe a patient practice problem at your practice site that you are considering for your DPI Project. Explain why this would be considered a patient practice problem, how it can be addressed though a quality improvement intervention, and why it would be appropriate and feasible for your practice site.
4. Provide support for your proposed intervention with at least one peer-reviewed research article from the GCU Library. The article must be published in the United States and within 5 years of your anticipated graduation date.
Scholarly Writing Using Research – Rubric
Collapse All Scholarly Writing Using Research – RubricCollapse All
Difference Between Quality Improvement and Research
16 points
Criteria Description
The differences between quality improvement and research are explained and an understanding of the difference between quality improvement and research is demonstrated.
5. Target
16 points
The differences between quality improvement and research are thoroughly explained. A clear understanding of the difference between quality improvement and research is demonstrated.
4. Acceptable
14.72 points
The differences between quality improvement and research are adequately explained. Some detail is needed for clarity.
3. Approaching
14.08 points
The differences between quality improvement and research are summarized. Some aspects are vague. There are minor inaccuracies.
2. Insufficient
12.8 points
The differences between quality improvement and research are only partially explained. There are major inaccuracies.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
The differences between quality improvement and research are not discussed.
DPI Project and Quality Improvement
16 points
Criteria Description
Why the DPI Project for the DNP program is considered quality improvement and not research is explained.
5. Target
16 points
A thorough explanation for why the DPI Project for the DNP program is considered quality improvement and not research is presented.
4. Acceptable
14.72 points
An adequate explanation for why the DPI Project for the DNP program is considered quality improvement and not research is presented. Some detail or rationale is needed for clarity.
3. Approaching
14.08 points
A summary of why the DPI Project for the DNP program is considered quality improvement and not research is presented. Some aspects are vague. There are inaccuracies.
2. Insufficient
12.8 points
The explanation for why the DPI Project for the DNP program is considered quality improvement and not research is incomplete.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
An explanation for why the DPI Project for the DNP program is considered quality improvement and not research is omitted.
Patient Practice Problem at Practice Site
16 points
Criteria Description
A patient practice problem at the assigned practice site is proposed and explained as to why it is considered a patient practice problem, how it can be addressed through quality improvement intervention, and why it is appropriate and feasible for the assigned practice site.
5. Target
16 points
A patient practice problem at the assigned practice site is proposed. A thorough explanation for why it is considered a patient practice problem, how it can be addressed through quality improvement intervention, and why it is appropriate and feasible for the assigned practice site is presented.
4. Acceptable
14.72 points
A patient practice problem at the assigned practice site is proposed. An explanation for why it is considered a patient practice problem, how it can be addressed through quality improvement intervention, and why it is appropriate and feasible for the assigned practice site is presented. Some detail is needed for clarity or accuracy.
3. Approaching
14.08 points
A patient practice problem at the assigned practice site is proposed. A summary of why it is considered a patient practice problem, how it can be addressed through quality improvement intervention, and why it is relevant for the assigned practice site is presented. Some aspects are unclear or lack support. There are some inaccuracies.
2. Insufficient
12.8 points
A patient practice problem at the assigned practice site is proposed, but it is unclear why it is considered a patient practice problem or how the intervention is relevant or feasible for the practice site. The narrative has major inaccuracies or omissions.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
A patient practice problem and intervention for the assigned practice site is omitted.
Research Supporting Practice Problem Proposed
8 points
DNP 810 Week 2 Scholarly Writing using Research
Criteria Description
Research Supporting Practice Problem Proposed
5. Target
8 points
One peer-reviewed research article demonstrates clear support for the intervention proposed at the practice site. Sources are published in the United States and within 5 years of anticipated graduation date.
4. Acceptable
7.36 points
One peer-reviewed research articles demonstrate adequate support for the intervention at the proposed at the practice site. Sources are published in the United States within 5 years of anticipated graduation date.
3. Approaching
7.04 points
One peer-reviewed research article is presented and provides general support for the intervention at the proposed practice site. Sources are published in the United States within 5 years of anticipated graduation date.
2. Insufficient
6.4 points
One peer-reviewed research article is presented, but it does not demonstrate adequate support for the general practice problem proposed at the practice site. The article is published in the United States and within 5 years of anticipated graduation date.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Peer-reviewed research article is omitted or does not meet the criteria specified in the assignment.
Thesis, Position, or Purpose
4 points
Criteria Description
Communicates reason for writing and demonstrates awareness of audience.
5. Target
4 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is persuasively developed throughout and skillfully directed to a specific audience.
4. Acceptable
3.68 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is clearly communicated throughout and clearly directed to a specific audience.
3. Approaching
3.52 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is adequately developed. An awareness of the appropriate audience is demonstrated.
2. Insufficient
3.2 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is discernable in most aspects but is occasionally weak or unclear. There is limited awareness of the appropriate audience.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is not discernible. No awareness of the appropriate audience is evident.
Development, Structure, and Conclusion
4 points
Criteria Description
Advances position or purpose throughout writing; conclusion aligns to and evolves from development.
5. Target
4 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is coherently and cohesively advanced throughout. The progression of ideas is coherent and unified. A convincing and unambiguous conclusion aligns to the development of the purpose.
4. Acceptable
3.68 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is logically advanced throughout. The progression of ideas is coherent and unified. A clear and plausible conclusion aligns to the development of the purpose.
3. Approaching
3.52 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is advanced in most aspects. Ideas clearly build on each other. Conclusion aligns to the development of the purpose.
2. Insufficient
3.2 points
Limited advancement of thesis, position, or purpose is discernable. There are inconsistencies in organization or the relationship of ideas. Conclusion is simplistic and not fully aligned to the development of the purpose.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
No advancement of the thesis, position, or purpose is evident. Connections between paragraphs are missing or inappropriate. No conclusion is offered.
Evidence
4 points
Criteria Description
Selects and integrates evidence to support and advance position/purpose; considers other perspectives.
5. Target
4 points
Comprehensive and compelling evidence is included. Multiple other perspectives are integrated effectively.
4. Acceptable
3.68 points
Specific and appropriate evidence is included. Other perspectives are integrated.
3. Approaching
3.52 points
Relevant evidence that includes other perspectives is used.
2. Insufficient
3.2 points
Evidence is used but is insufficient or of limited relevance. Simplistic explanation or integration of other perspectives is present.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Evidence to support the thesis, position, or purpose is absent. The writing relies entirely on the perspective of the writer.
Mechanics of Writing
6.4 points
Criteria Description
Includes spelling, capitalization, punctuation, grammar, language use, sentence structure, etc.
5. Target
6.4 points
No mechanical errors are present. Skilled control of language choice and sentence structure are used throughout.
4. Acceptable
5.89 points
Few mechanical errors are present. Suitable language choice and sentence structure are used.
3. Approaching
5.63 points
Occasional mechanical errors are present. Language choice is generally appropriate. Varied sentence structure is attempted.
2. Insufficient
5.12 points
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors are present. Inconsistencies in language choice or sentence structure are recurrent.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Errors in grammar or syntax are pervasive and impede meaning. Incorrect language choice or sentence structure errors are found throughout.
Format/Documentation
5.6 points
Criteria Description
Uses appropriate style, such as APA, MLA, etc., for college, subject, and level; documents sources using citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc.,
5. Target
5.6 points
No errors in formatting or documentation are present. Selectivity in the use of direct quotations and synthesis of sources is demonstrated.
4. Acceptable
5.15 points
Appropriate format and documentation are used with only minor errors.
3. Approaching
4.93 points
Appropriate format and documentation are used, although there are some obvious errors.
2. Insufficient
4.48 points
Appropriate format is attempted, but some elements are missing. Frequent errors in documentation of sources are evident.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Appropriate format is not used. No documentation of sources is provided.
Total 80 points

Read more
Enjoy affordable prices and lifetime discounts
Use a coupon FIRST15 and enjoy expert help with any task at the most affordable price.
Order Now Order in Chat

Start off on the right foot this semester. Get expert-written solutions at a 20% discount