DNP 801 Topic 2 Scholarly Writing Using Research

DNP 801 Topic 2 Scholarly Writing Using Research

DNP 801 Topic 2 Scholarly Writing Using Research

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: DNP 801 Topic 2 Scholarly Writing Using Research

Assessment Traits

Requires Lopeswrite

Assessment Description

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.

Resources

Collapse All ResourcesCollapse All

APA 7th Edition Tutorial

View the “APA 7th Edition Tutorial,” located in Student Success Center.

https://www.gcumedia.com/lms-resources/student-success-center/v3.1/#/media-element/writing-center/APA_7th_Edition_Tutorial/1FF26538-38D0-EA11-910D-005056BDE9D6

Academic Integrity

Read the “About LopesWrite” and “Plagiarism” sections of the Academic Integrity page of the GCU website.

http://students.gcu.edu/academics/academic-integrity.php

Evaluating Sources: What Is a Scholarly Source?

Read “Evaluating Sources: What Is a ‘Scholarly’ Source?” located on the GCU Library website.

https://libguides.gcu.edu/EvaluatingSources

How Writing Contributes to Learning: New Findings From a National Study and Their Local Application

Read:

Anderson, P., Anson, C. M., Fish, T., Gonyea, R. M., Marshall, M., Menefee-Libey, W., Paine, C., Palucki Blake, L., & Wea

… Read More

https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=123362130&site=eds-live&scope=site&custid=s8333196&groupid=main&profile=eds1

Initial Course Survey

In an effort for continuous improvement, Grand Canyon University would like you to take this opportunity to provide feedback about your e

… Read More

https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/GCUICS?section_id=[section_id_value]&source_id=[source_id_value]

LopesWrite

Refer to the LopesWrite page, located in the Student Success Center, for information on how to properly use this tool in the submission f

… Read More

https://www.gcumedia.com/lms-resources/student-success-center/v3.1/#/media-element/academic-integrity/lopeswrite

Plagiarism Prevention Tutorial

View the “Plagiarism Prevention Tutorial,” located the Student Success Center of the GCU website.

https://www.gcumedia.com/youtube/v2.1/?list=PLIP5_iaUyziU2URMjUIHGubHcy3GvGcLj&transcriptUrl=https://www.gcumedia.com/lms-resources/student-success-center-content/documents/writing-center/transcripts/plagiarism-prevention/plagarism-tutorial-transcript.pdf

The Doctor of Nursing Practice Essentials: A New Model for Advanced Practice Nursing

Read the following in The Doctor of Nursing Practice Essentials: A New Model for Advanced Practice Nursing:

… Read More

View Resource

 

  1. Scholarly Writing Using Research – Rubric
  2. Collapse All Scholarly Writing Using Research – RubricCollapse All
  3. Difference Between Quality Improvement and Research
  4. 16 points
  5. Criteria Description
  6. The differences between quality improvement and research are explained and an understanding of the difference between quality improvement and research is demonstrated.
  7. Target
  8. 16 points
  9. The differences between quality improvement and research are thoroughly explained. A clear understanding of the difference between quality improvement and research is demonstrated.
  10. Acceptable
  11. 72 points
  12. The differences between quality improvement and research are adequately explained. Some detail is needed for clarity.
  13. Approaching
  14. 08 points
  15. The differences between quality improvement and research are summarized. Some aspects are vague. There are minor inaccuracies.
  16. Insufficient
  17. 8 points
  18. The differences between quality improvement and research are only partially explained. There are major inaccuracies.
  19. Unsatisfactory
  20. 0 points
  21. The differences between quality improvement and research are not discussed.
  22. DPI Project and Quality Improvement
  23. 16 points
  24. Criteria Description
  25. Why the DPI Project for the DNP program is considered quality improvement and not research is explained.
  26. Target
  27. 16 points
  28. A thorough explanation for why the DPI Project for the DNP program is considered quality improvement and not research is presented.
  29. Acceptable
  30. 72 points
  31. 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.
  32. Approaching
  33. 08 points
  34. 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.
  35. Insufficient
  36. 8 points
  37. The explanation for why the DPI Project for the DNP program is considered quality improvement and not research is incomplete.
  38. Unsatisfactory
  39. 0 points
  40. An explanation for why the DPI Project for the DNP program is considered quality improvement and not research is omitted.
  41. Patient Practice Problem at Practice Site
  42. 16 points
  43. Criteria Description
  44. 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.
  45. Target
  46. 16 points
  47. 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.
  48. Acceptable
  49. 72 points
  50. 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.
  51. Approaching
  52. 08 points
  53. 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.
  54. Insufficient
  55. 8 points
  56. 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.
  57. Unsatisfactory
  58. 0 points
  59. A patient practice problem and intervention for the assigned practice site is omitted.
  60. Research Supporting Practice Problem Proposed
  61. 8 points
  62. Criteria Description
  63. Research Supporting Practice Problem Proposed
  64. Target
  65. 8 points
  66. 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.
  67. Acceptable
  68. 36 points
  69. 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.
  70. Approaching
  71. 04 points
  72. 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.
  73. Insufficient
  74. 4 points
  75. 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.
  76. Unsatisfactory
  77. 0 points
  78. Peer-reviewed research article is omitted or does not meet the criteria specified in the assignment.
  79. Thesis, Position, or Purpose
  80. 4 points
  81. Criteria Description
  82. Communicates reason for writing and demonstrates awareness of audience.
  83. Target
  84. 4 points
  85. The thesis, position, or purpose is persuasively developed throughout and skillfully directed to a specific audience.
  86. Acceptable
  87. 68 points
  88. The thesis, position, or purpose is clearly communicated throughout and clearly directed to a specific audience.
  89. Approaching
  90. 52 points
  91. The thesis, position, or purpose is adequately developed. An awareness of the appropriate audience is demonstrated.
  92. Insufficient
  93. 2 points
  94. The thesis, position, or purpose is discernable in most aspects but is occasionally weak or unclear. There is limited awareness of the appropriate audience.
  95. Unsatisfactory
  96. 0 points
  97. The thesis, position, or purpose is not discernible. No awareness of the appropriate audience is evident.
  98. Development, Structure, and Conclusion
  99. 4 points
  100. Criteria Description
  101. Advances position or purpose throughout writing; conclusion aligns to and evolves from development.
  102. Target
  103. 4 points
  104. 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.
  105. Acceptable
  106. 68 points
  107. 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.
  108. Approaching
  109. 52 points
  110. The thesis, position, or purpose is advanced in most aspects. Ideas clearly build on each other. Conclusion aligns to the development of the purpose.
  111. Insufficient
  112. 2 points
  113. 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.
  114. Unsatisfactory
  115. 0 points
  116. No advancement of the thesis, position, or purpose is evident. Connections between paragraphs are missing or inappropriate. No conclusion is offered.
  117. Evidence
  118. 4 points
  119. Criteria Description
  120. Selects and integrates evidence to support and advance position/purpose; considers other perspectives.
  121. Target
  122. 4 points
  123. Comprehensive and compelling evidence is included. Multiple other perspectives are integrated effectively.
  124. Acceptable
  125. 68 points
  126. Specific and appropriate evidence is included. Other perspectives are integrated.
  127. Approaching
  128. 52 points
  129. Relevant evidence that includes other perspectives is used.
  130. Insufficient
  131. 2 points
  132. Evidence is used but is insufficient or of limited relevance. Simplistic explanation or integration of other perspectives is present.
  133. Unsatisfactory
  134. 0 points
  135. Evidence to support the thesis, position, or purpose is absent. The writing relies entirely on the perspective of the writer.
  136. Mechanics of Writing
  137. 4 points
  138. Criteria Description
  139. Includes spelling, capitalization, punctuation, grammar, language use, sentence structure, etc.
  140. Target
  141. 4 points
  142. No mechanical errors are present. Skilled control of language choice and sentence structure are used throughout.
  143. Acceptable
  144. 89 points
  145. Few mechanical errors are present. Suitable language choice and sentence structure are used.
  146. Approaching
  147. 63 points
  148. Occasional mechanical errors are present. Language choice is generally appropriate. Varied sentence structure is attempted.
  149. Insufficient
  150. 12 points
  151. Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors are present. Inconsistencies in language choice or sentence structure are recurrent.
  152. Unsatisfactory
  153. 0 points
  154. Errors in grammar or syntax are pervasive and impede meaning. Incorrect language choice or sentence structure errors are found throughout.
  155. Format/Documentation
  156. 6 points
  157. Criteria Description
  158. Uses appropriate style, such as APA, MLA, etc., for college, subject, and level; documents sources using citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc.,
  159. Target
  160. 6 points
  161. No errors in formatting or documentation are present. Selectivity in the use of direct quotations and synthesis of sources is demonstrated.

    DNP 801 Topic 2 Scholarly Writing Using Research
    DNP 801 Topic 2 Scholarly Writing Using Research
  162. Acceptable
  163. 15 points
  164. Appropriate format and documentation are used with only minor errors.
  165. Approaching
  166. 93 points
  167. Appropriate format and documentation are used, although there are some obvious errors.
  168. Insufficient
  169. 48 points
  170. Appropriate format is attempted, but some elements are missing. Frequent errors in documentation of sources are evident.
  171. Unsatisfactory
  172. 0 points
  173. Appropriate format is not used. No documentation of sources is provided.
  174. Total 80 points

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: DNP 801 Topic 2 Scholarly Writing Using Research

Grading Rubric

Performance Category 100% or highest level of performance

100%

16 points

Very good or high level of performance

88%

14 points

Acceptable level of performance

81%

13 points

Inadequate demonstration of expectations

68%

11 points

Deficient level of performance

56%

9 points

 

Failing level

of performance

55% or less

0 points

 Total Points Possible= 50           16 Points    14 Points 13 Points        11 Points           9 Points          0 Points
Scholarliness

Demonstrates achievement of scholarly inquiry for professional and academic topics.

Presentation of information was exceptional and included all of the following elements:

  • Provides evidence of scholarly inquiry relevant to required TD topic(s).
  • Presents specific information from scholarly sources to develop a comprehensive presentation of facts.
  • Uses at least one outside scholarly reference that is relevant, less than 5 years old (use of older references requires instructor permission) and reliable for the required topic.*
  • Uses in-text citation and full reference at end of posting when presenting another person’s thoughts as quotes or paraphrase of information.
Presentation of information was good, but was superficial in places and included all of the following elements:

  • Provides evidence of scholarly inquiry relevant to required TD topic(s).
  • Presents specific information from scholarly sources to develop a comprehensive presentation of facts.
  • Uses at least one outside scholarly reference that is relevant, less than 5 years old (use of older references requires instructor permission) and reliable for the required topic.*
  • Uses in-text citation and full reference at end of posting when presenting another person’s thoughts as quotes or paraphrase of information.
Presentation of information was minimally demonstrated in all of the following elements:

  • Provides evidence of scholarly inquiry relevant to required TD topic(s).
  • Presents specific information from scholarly sources to develop a comprehensive presentation of facts.
  • Uses at least one outside scholarly reference that is relevant, less than 5 years old (use of older references requires instructor permission) and reliable for the required topic.*
  • Uses in-text citation and full reference at end of posting when presenting another person’s thoughts as quotes or paraphrase of information.
 

Presentation of information is unsatisfactory in one of the following elements:

  • Provides evidence of scholarly inquiry relevant to required TD topic(s).
  • Presents specific information from scholarly sources to develop a comprehensive presentation of facts.
  • Uses at least one outside scholarly reference that is relevant, less than 5 years old (use of older references requires instructor permission) and reliable for the required topic.*
  • Uses in-text citation and full reference at end of posting when presenting another person’s thoughts as quotes or paraphrase of information.
 

Presentation of information is unsatisfactory in two of the following elements:

  • Provides evidence of scholarly inquiry relevant to required TD topic(s).
  • Presents specific information from scholarly sources to develop a comprehensive presentation of facts.
  • Uses at least one outside scholarly reference that is relevant, less than 5 years old (use of older references requires instructor permission) and reliable for the required topic.*
  • Uses in-text citation and full reference at end of posting when presenting another person’s thoughts as quotes or paraphrase of information.
Presentation of information is unsatisfactory in three or more of the following elements

  • Provides evidence of scholarly inquiry relevant to required TD topic(s).
  • Presents specific information from scholarly sources to develop a comprehensive presentation of facts.
  • Uses at least one outside scholarly reference that is relevant, less than 5 years old (use of older references requires instructor permission) and reliable for the required topic.*
  • Uses in-text citation and full reference at end of posting when presenting another person’s thoughts as quotes or paraphrase of information
 16 Points  14 Points  13 Points 11 Points 9 Points  0 Points
Application of Course Knowledge

Demonstrate the ability to analyze and apply principles, knowledge and information learned in the outside readings and relate them to real-life professional situations

Presentation of information was exceptional and included all of the following elements:

  • Applies principles, knowledge and information from scholarly resources to the required topic.
  • Applies facts, principles or concepts learned from scholarly resources to a professional experience.
  • Application of information is comprehensive and specific to the required topic.
Presentation of information was good, but was superficial in places and included all of the following elements:

  • Applies principles, knowledge and information from scholarly resources to the required topic.
  • Applies facts, principles or concepts learned from scholarly resources to a professional experience.
  • Application of information is comprehensive and specific to the required topic.
Presentation of information was minimally demonstrated in the all of the following elements:

  • Applies principles, knowledge and information from scholarly resources to the required topic.
  • Applies facts, principles or concepts learned from scholarly resources to a professional experience.
  • Application of information is comprehensive and specific to the required topic.
Presentation of information is unsatisfactory in one of the following elements:

  • Applies principles, knowledge and information from scholarly resources to the required topic.
  • Applies facts, principles or concepts learned from and scholarly resources to a professional experience.
  • Application of information is comprehensive and specific to the required topic.
Presentation of information is unsatisfactory in two of the following elements:

  • Applies principles, knowledge and information from scholarly resources to the required topic.
  • Applies facts, principles or concepts learned from scholarly resources to a professional experience.
  • Application of information is comprehensive and specific to the required topic.
Presentation of information is unsatisfactory in three of the following elements

  • Applies principles, knowledge and information and scholarly resources to the required topic.
  • Applies facts, principles or concepts learned scholarly resources to a professional experience.
  • Application of information is comprehensive and specific to the required topic.
   10 Points 9 Points  6 Points  0 Points
Interactive Dialogue

Initial post should be a minimum of 300 words (references do not count toward word count)

The peer and instructor responses must be a minimum of 150 words each (references do not count toward word count)

Responses are substantive and relate to the topic.

Demonstrated all of the following:

  • Initial post must be a minimum of 300 words.
  • The peer and instructor responses must be a minimum of 150 words each.
  • Responses are substantive
  • Responses are related to the topic of discussion.
Demonstrated 3 of the following:

  • Initial post must be a minimum of 300 words.
  • The peer and instructor responses must be a minimum of 150 words each.
  • Responses are substantive
  • Responses are related to the topic of discussion.
Demonstrated 2 of the following:

  • Initial post must be a minimum of 300 words.
  • The peer and instructor responses must be a minimum of 150 words each.
  • Responses are substantive
  • Responses are related to the topic of discussion.
Demonstrated 1 or less of the following:

  • Initial post must be a minimum of 300 words.
  • The peer and instructor responses must be a minimum of 150 words each.
  • Responses are substantive
  • Responses are related to the topic of discussion.
  8 Points 7 Points  6 Points         5 Points          4 Points  0 Points
Grammar, Syntax, APA

Points deducted for improper grammar, syntax and APA style of writing.

The source of information is the APA Manual 6th Edition

Error is defined to be a unique APA error. Same type of error is only counted as one error.

The following was present:

  • 0-3 errors in APA format

AND

  • Responses have 0-3 grammatical, spelling or punctuation errors

AND

  • Writing style is generally clear, focused on topic,and facilitates communication.
The following was present:

  • 4-6 errors in APA format.

AND/OR

  • Responses have 4-5 grammatical, spelling or punctuation errors

AND/OR

  • Writing style is somewhat focused on topic.
The following was present:

  • 7-9 errors in APA format.

AND/OR

  • Responses have 6-7 grammatical, spelling or punctuation errors

AND/OR

  • Writing style is slightly focused on topic making discussion difficult to understand.
 

The following was present:

  • 10- 12 errors in APA format

AND/OR

  • Responses have 8-9 grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors

AND/OR

  • Writing style is not focused on topic, making discussion difficult to understand.
 

The following was present:

  • 13 – 15 errors in APA format

AND/OR

  • Responses have 8-10 grammatical, spelling or punctuation errors

AND/OR

  • Writing style is not focused on topic, making discussion difficult to understand.

AND/OR

  • The student continues to make repeated mistakes in any of the above areas after written correction by the instructor.
The following was present:

  • 16 to greater errors in APA format.

AND/OR

  • Responses have more than 10 grammatical, spelling or punctuation errors.

AND/OR

  • Writing style does not facilitate communication
  0 Points Deducted 5 Points Lost
Participation

Requirements

Demonstrated the following:

  • Initial, peer, and faculty postings were made on 3 separate days
Failed to demonstrate the following:

  • Initial, peer, and faculty postings were made on 3 separate days
  0 Points Lost 5 Points Lost
Due Date Requirements Demonstrated all of the following:

  • The initial posting to the graded threaded discussion topic is posted within the course no later than Wednesday, 11:59 pm MT.

A minimum of one peer and one instructor responses are to be posted within the course no later than Sunday, 11:59 pm MT.

Demonstrates one or less of the following.

  • The initial posting to the graded threaded discussion topic is posted within the course no later than Wednesday, 11:59 pm MT.

A minimum of one peer and one instructor responses are to be posted within the course no later than Sunday, 11:59 pm MT.

Also Check Out: DNP 801 Topic 1 Preconference Evaluation Individual Success Plan ISP