Writer choice
36027
Post a description of the priority you selected and the benefits and challenges of further researching this area. Provide an overview of the articles you found (using appropriate APA citations) relating to this priority, and highlight any key findings. Explain how continued research in this area could strengthen the ability of nurses to lead in both individual organizations and as advocates of health care reform.
TOPIC:
Identification of the personal and professional characteristics most critical to leadership of health care organizations, such as accountable care organizations, health care homes, medical homes, and clinics.
To prepare:
• Review Chapter 7 in The Future of Nursing: Leading Change, Advancing Health report provided in the Learning Resources. Focus on the information in Box 7.3, “Research Priorities for Transforming Nursing Leadership.”
• Select one of the research priorities listed in Box 7.3 that is of particular interest to you and applicable to your career interests. Consider the benefits and challenges of researching and addressing this priority in nursing.
• Using the Walden library, identify two to three current articles that address your selected research priority. Consider the current state of research efforts on this priority.
• Reflect on how the research findings for your area of priority impact nurses as leaders in organizations and health care reform. Why is research on this priority important?
Rubric Detail
Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.
Name: NURS_5050_Week_02_Discussion_Rubric
• Grid View
• List View
Outstanding Performance Excellent Performance Competent Performance Proficient Performance Room for Improvement
Main Posting:
Response to the discussion question is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources. 44 (44%) – 44 (44%)
Thoroughly responds to the discussion question(s)
is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.
supported by at least 3 current, credible sources 40 (40%) – 43 (43%)
Responds to the discussion question(s)
is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.
75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth
supported by at least 3 credible references 35 (35%) – 39 (39%)
Responds to most of the discussion question(s)
is somewhat reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.
50% of post has exceptional depth and breadth
supported by at least 3 credible references 31 (31%) – 34 (34%)
Responds to some of the discussion question(s)
one to 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 fewer than 2 credible references 0 (0%) – 30 (30%)
Does not respond to the discussion question(s)
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 1 or no credible references
Main Posting:
Writing 6 (6%) – 6 (6%)
Written clearly and concisely
Contains no grammatical or spelling errors
Fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style 5.5 (5.5%) – 5.5 (5.5%)
Written clearly and concisely
May contain one or no grammatical or spelling error
Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Written concisely
May contain one to two grammatical or spelling error
Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style 4.5 (4.5%) – 4.5 (4.5%)
Written somewhat concisely
May contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors
Contains some APA formatting errors 0 (0%) – 4 (4%)
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 Posting:
Timely and full participation 10 (10%) – 10 (10%)
Meets requirements for timely and full participation
posts main discussion by due date 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
NA 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
NA 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
NA 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not meet requirement for full participation
First Response:
Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources. 9 (9%) – 9 (9%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings
responds to questions posed by faculty
the use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives 8.5 (8.5%) – 8.5 (8.5%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings 7.5 (7.5%) – 8 (8%)
Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting 6.5 (6.5%) – 7 (7%)
Response is on topic, may have some depth 0 (0%) – 6 (6%)
Response may not be on topic, lacks depth
First Response:
Writing 6 (6%) – 6 (6%)
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues
Response to faculty questions are fully 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 5.5 (5.5%) – 5.5 (5.5%)
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues
Response 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 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues
Response to faculty questions are mostly answered if posed
Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources
Response is written in Standard Edited English 4.5 (4.5%) – 4.5 (4.5%)
Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication
Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered if posed
Few or no credible sources are cited 0 (0%) – 4 (4%)
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective
Response to faculty questions are missing
No credible sources are cited
First Response:
Timely and full participation 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for timely and full participation
posts by due date 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
NA 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
NA 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
NA 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not meet requirement for full participation
Second Response:
Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources. 9 (9%) – 9 (9%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings * responds to questions posed by faculty
the use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives 8.5 (8.5%) – 8.5 (8.5%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings 7.5 (7.5%) – 8 (8%)
Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting 6.5 (6.5%) – 7 (7%)
Response is on topic, may have some depth 0 (0%) – 6 (6%)
Response may not be on topic, lacks depth
Second Response:
Writing 6 (6%) – 6 (6%)
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues
Response to faculty questions are fully 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 5.5 (5.5%) – 5.5 (5.5%)
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues
Response 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 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues
Response to faculty questions are mostly answered if posed
Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources
Response is written in Standard Edited English 4.5 (4.5%) – 4.5 (4.5%)
Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication
Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered if posed
Few or no credible sources are cited 0 (0%) – 4 (4%)
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective
Response to faculty questions are missing
No credible sources are cited
Second Response:
Timely and full participation 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for timely and full participation
Posts by due date 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
NA 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
NA 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
NA 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not meet requirement for full participation
Collepals.com Plagiarism Free Papers
Are you looking for custom essay writing service or even dissertation writing services? Just request for our write my paper service, and we'll match you with the best essay writer in your subject! With an exceptional team of professional academic experts in a wide range of subjects, we can guarantee you an unrivaled quality of custom-written papers.
Get ZERO PLAGIARISM, HUMAN WRITTEN ESSAYS
Why Hire Collepals.com writers to do your paper?
Quality- We are experienced and have access to ample research materials.
We write plagiarism Free Content
Confidential- We never share or sell your personal information to third parties.
Support-Chat with us today! We are always waiting to answer all your questions.
