Want create site? With Free visual composer you can do it easy.

NRS 428 : In 1,500-2,000 words, describe the teaching experience and discuss your observations.

Assessment Description
The RN to BSN program at Grand Canyon University meets the requirements for
clinical competencies as defined by the Commission on Collegiate Nursing Education
(CCNE) and the American Association of Colleges of Nursing (AACN), using
nontraditional experiences for practicing nurses. These experiences come in the form
of direct and indirect care experiences in which licensed nursing students engage in
learning within the context of their hospital organization, specific care discipline, and
local communities.
Note: This is an individual assignment. In 1,500-2,000 words, describe the teaching
experience and discuss your observations. The written portion of this assignment
should include:
1. Summary of teaching plan
2. Epidemiological rationale for topic
3. Evaluation of teaching experience
4. Community response to teaching
5. Areas of strengths and areas of improvement
You are required to cite a minimum of three 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 APA guidelines found in the APA Style
Guide, 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 Lopes Write. A link to the Lopes Write
technical support articles is located in Course Resources if you need assistance.
Rubric Criteria
Total100 points
Criterion 1. Unsatisfactory 2. Less Than

Satisfactory 3. Satisfactory 4. Good 5. Excellent
Comprehensive 0 points 9.75 points 11.25 points 12.75 points 15 points

Summary of
Teaching Plan
Comprehensive
Summary of
Teaching Plan

Summary of community
teaching plan is omitted.

Summary of community
teaching plan is
incomplete. Overall, the
teaching plan is unclear.

Summary of community
teaching plan is offered, but
some elements are vague.
Some rationale or evidence
is needed for clarity and
support.

Community teaching
plan is clear with a
detailed summary of
each component. Minor
rationale is needed for
clarity or support.

Focus of community
teaching is clear,
consistent with community
teaching plan, detailed,
and well supported. The
presentation
demonstrates an ability to
create effective teaching
plans relative to a
population.

Thesis
Development and
Purpose
Thesis Development
and Purpose

0 points
Paper lacks any
discernible overall
purpose or organizing
claim.

3.25 points
Thesis is insufficiently
developed or vague.
Purpose is not clear.

3.75 points
Thesis is apparent and
appropriate to purpose.

4.25 points
Thesis is clear and
forecasts the
development of the
paper. Thesis is
descriptive and reflective
of the arguments and
appropriate to the
purpose.

5 points
Thesis is comprehensive
and contains the essence
of the paper. Thesis
statement makes the
purpose of the paper
clear.

Paper Format (use
of appropriate style
for the major and
assignment)
Paper Format (use of
appropriate style for
the major and
assignment)

0 points
Template is not used
appropriately, or
documentation format is
rarely followed correctly.

1.3 points
Appropriate template is
used, but some
elements are missing or
mistaken. A lack of
control with formatting is
apparent.

1.5 points
Appropriate template is
used. Formatting is correct,
although some minor errors
may be present.

1.7 points
Appropriate template is
fully used. There are
virtually no errors in
formatting style.

2 points
All format elements are
correct.

Community
Response to
Teaching Provided
Community
Response to
Teaching Provided

0 points
Community response to
teaching is omitted.

9.75 points
Community response to
teaching is partially
summarized. More
information is needed.

11.25 points
A summary of the community
response to teaching is
presented. Some areas are
unclear. More information is
needed for support or clarity.

12.75 points
A description of
community response to
teaching is generally
presented. Some
information is needed for
support or clarity.

15 points
A detailed description of
community response to
teaching is presented.

Evaluation of 0 points 13 points 15 points 17 points 20 points

Teaching
Experience
Evaluation of
Teaching Experience

Evaluation of teaching
experience is omitted or
incomplete.

Evaluation of teaching
experience is unclear or
underdeveloped. The
narrative is not written in
a manner that evaluates
the experience.

Evaluation of teaching
experience is summarized.
Some aspects are vague.
More detail is needed to fully
illustrate an assessment of
the experience.

Evaluation of the
teaching experience is
generally presented.
Some detail is needed
for clarity.

A comprehensive
evaluation of teaching
experience is presented.
Insight into self-appraisal
in regard to teaching is
demonstrated.

Documentation of
Sources
Documentation of
Sources (citations,
footnotes,
references,
bibliography, etc., as
appropriate to
assignment and
style)

0 points
Sources are not
documented.

1.95 points
Documentation of
sources is inconsistent
or incorrect, as
appropriate to
assignment and style,
with numerous
formatting errors.

2.25 points
Sources are documented, as
appropriate to assignment
and style, although some
formatting errors may be
present.

2.55 points
Sources are
documented, as
appropriate to
assignment and style,
and format is mostly
correct.

3 points
Sources are completely
and correctly
documented, as
appropriate to assignment
and style, and format is
free of error.

Mechanics of
Writing (includes
spelling,
punctuation,
grammar, language
use)
Mechanics of Writing
(includes spelling,
punctuation,
grammar, language
use)

0 points
Surface errors are
pervasive enough that
they impede
communication of
meaning. Inappropriate
word choice or sentence
construction is used.

3.25 points
Frequent and repetitive
mechanical errors
distract the reader.
Inconsistencies in
language choice
(register) or word choice
are present. Sentence
structure is correct but
not varied.

3.75 points
Some mechanical errors or
typos are present, but they
are not overly distracting to
the reader. Correct and
varied sentence structure
and audience-appropriate
language are employed.

4.25 points
Prose is largely free of
mechanical errors,
although a few may be
present. The writer uses
a variety of effective
sentence structures and
figures of speech.

5 points
Writer is clearly in
command of standard,
written, academic English.

Argument Logic
and Construction
Argument Logic and
Construction

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

3.25 points
Sufficient justification of
claims is lacking.
Argument lacks
consistent unity. There
are obvious flaws in the
logic. Some sources
have questionable

3.75 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

4.25 points
Argument shows logical
progression. Techniques
of argumentation are
evident. There is a
smooth progression of
claims from introduction
to conclusion. Most

5 points
Clear and convincing
argument presents a
persuasive claim in a
distinctive and compelling
manner. All sources are
authoritative.

sources. credibility. are credible. Introduction and
conclusion bracket the
thesis.

sources are
authoritative.

Epidemiological
Rationale for Topic
Epidemiological
Rationale for Topic

0 points
Epidemiological
rationale for the topic is
omitted.

9.75 points
Epidemiological
rationale is unclear or
incorrect.

11.25 points
Epidemiological rationale is
summarized and provides
some support for the topic.
More information or evidence
is needed for support.

12.75 points
Epidemiological rationale
is provided and provides
general support for the
topic. Some detail is
needed for clarity.

15 points
Strong epidemiological
rationale is provided and
demonstrates support for
the topic presented.

Areas of Strength
and Improvement
Areas of Strength
and Improvement

0 points
Areas of strength and
improvement are
omitted.

9.75 points
Areas of strength and
improvement are
partially discussed.

11.25 points
Areas of strength and
improvement are generally
discussed.

Did you find apk for android? You can find new Free Android Games and apps.