NURS 8210 WEEK 10 DISCUSSION Information Systems and Changing Organizational Culture INSTRUCTIONS PLUS RUBRIC -

NURS 8210 WEEK 10 DISCUSSION Information Systems and Changing Organizational Culture INSTRUCTIONS PLUS RUBRIC

Sample Answer for NURS 8210 WEEK 10 DISCUSSION Information Systems and Changing Organizational Culture INSTRUCTIONS PLUS RUBRIC Included After Question

Discussion: Welcome to the Week 10 Discussion area!

Post your responses to the Discussion based on the course requirements.

Your Discussion postings should be written in standard edited English and follow APA guidelines as closely as possible given the constraints of the online platform. Be sure to support your work with specific citations from this week’s Learning Resources and additional scholarly sources as appropriate. Initial postings must be 250–350 words (not including references).

Submission and Grading Information

Grading Criteria

To access your rubric:

Week 10 Discussion Rubric

Post by Day 3 and Respond by Day 6

To participate in this Discussion:

Week 10 Discussion

Discussion – Week 10

Collapse

Top of Form

Information Systems and Changing Organizational Culture

The Committee on the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Initiative on the Future of Nursing, at the Institute of Medicine (2011) notes that “the nursing profession is the largest segment of the nation’s health care workforce.” Nursing’s three million–plus members are known for their ability to react quickly and efficiently on the front lines of patient care. This agility is lost, however, when the nursing profession fails to evolve with the field of information technology. Have you witnessed any unintentional barriers that have excluded nurses from quickly adopting and accepting informatics systems?

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: NURS 8210 WEEK 10 DISCUSSION Information Systems and Changing Organizational Culture INSTRUCTIONS PLUS RUBRIC

Those nurses who apply strategies developed by change management experts can help expedite the adoption process by positively addressing staff concerns and implementation challenges. In this Discussion, you explore change leadership strategies through a role playing activity.

Reference:

Committee on the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Initiative on the Future of Nursing, at the Institute of Medicine. (2011). The future of nursing: Leading change, advancing health [Consensus report]. Retrieved from the Institute of Medicine of the National Academies website: http://www.iom.edu/Reports/2010/The-Future-of-Nursing-Leading-Change-Advancing-Health.aspx

To prepare:

Review the Learning Resources, focusing on the findings of the TIGER Leadership Collaborative.
Consider the TIGER Nursing Informatics Competencies model from a leadership standpoint.
Engage in the following role play: Your practice setting has appointed you to lead the implementation of a new information technology initiative. As you plan for this undertaking, you consider the various challenges that this implementation may bring to your practice.

- Select an information technology initiative that your practice could benefit from (i.e., a new information system, point-of-care service, robotics machinery, mobile devices, etc.).
- What change management strategies might you utilize to facilitate a quick and successful implementation?
- What potential barriers might the initiative bring to the practice? What leadership strategies could shift the culture toward a smooth transition?

By Day 3 post a cohesive response that addresses the following:

Briefly identify your practice setting and the information technology initiative you selected. Provide a rationale for your selection.
Evaluate the potential barriers to implementing your hypothetical initiative.
Identify the change management strategies that you would use to facilitate a successful implementation. Identify key resources that you would need to promptly overcome potential barriers.
Appraise the leadership strategies that you would employ to establish a culture that supports the new information technology initiative. Reference the TIGER Informatics Competencies where appropriate.

Read a selection of your colleagues’ postings.

By Day 6 respond to at least two of your colleagues in one or more of the following ways:

Ask a probing question, substantiated with additional background information, evidence, or research.
Share an insight from having read your colleagues’ postings, synthesizing the information to provide new perspectives.
Offer and support an alternative perspective using readings from the classroom or from your own research in the Walden Library.
Validate an idea with your own experience and additional research.
Make a suggestion based on additional evidence drawn from readings or after synthesizing multiple postings.
Expand on your colleagues’ postings by providing additional insights or contrasting perspectives based on readings and evidence.

Return to this Discussion in a few days to read the responses to your initial posting. Note what you learned and/or any insights you gained as a result of the comments made by your colleagues.

Be sure to support your work with specific citations from this week’s Learning Resources and any additional sources.

Click on the Reply button below to post your response.

A Sample Answer For the Assignment: NURS 8210 WEEK 10 DISCUSSION Information Systems and Changing Organizational Culture INSTRUCTIONS PLUS RUBRIC

Title: NURS 8210 WEEK 10 DISCUSSION Information Systems and Changing Organizational Culture INSTRUCTIONS PLUS RUBRIC

Sault Area Hospital is an organization that supports the district of Algoma in Sault Ste Marie, Ontario. Recently, the organization has made progress in implementing a variety of health information technology to increase quality of care. Gamification of health care is an emerging trend which includes the use of game features, mechanisms, and designs to support patient care issues as well as well-being (El Morr, 2018). Gamification can be utilized within Sault Area Hospital to increase compliance and concordance with health teaching and discharge instructions. This can be beneficial to both patients and staff. With gamification, patients are challenged to complete a variety of modules and to demonstrate comprehension and understanding regarding discharge instructions. For staff members, gamification can be utilized to enhance the appeal to ensure all discharge information and education is provided to patients in a timely manner.

When implementing change, one must consider barriers which may be present. With the implementation of gamification, technology availability could be a barrier. Each room at Sault Area Hospital should be equipped with a bedside computer, however, often these computers are needing information technology (IT) support as they are not functional. Without appropriate bedside technology, the health care staff may be unable to complete gamification as required. It will be important to ensure adequate IT availability to ensure all workstations are functioning. Application and usability may be a barrier as staff may not be willing to apply gamification within their practice. A strategy to overcome this barrier would be to ensure that staff received appropriate education and training regarding gamification (Caballero & Cossio, 2010). Further barriers surround health literacy of patients. Gamification is only effective if patients understand the concept and obtain knowledge from it. This will be based upon health literacy of the patient which can vary between age and gender. With this initiative, it will be important to create strategies to engage minority populations. Keselman et al., (2008) note that those who do not access Internet health resources are financially unstable, less educated, over the age of 65, disabled, or ethnic minorities. These populations may require increased time with the staff completing the gamification.

With this proposed change, it would be beneficial to utilize change management strategies to ensure implementation is successful. With the addition of gamification, it would be beneficial to involve all staff who would be affected by this change within the design and implementation of the technology. Staff should be involved when designs are being made regarding gamification and could be involved within design, technology usage, as well as implementation plan (Ball et al., 2011). Engaging individuals is attributed to success within health informatics technology implementation (Caballero & Cossio, 2010). Although, it is difficult to involve all individuals within decision making, it would be wise to sought out suggestions from staff (Ball et al., 2011).

During implementation, it will be important to ensure support and commitment of this initiative by the leadership group (T.I.G.E.R. Technology Informatics Guiding Education Reform (2011). When implementation occurs, it will be preferable for the leader to engage with individuals and model understanding and application of the technology. Furthermore, leaders should ensure that individuals are aware of resources and assistance they provide during navigation of the new technology (T.I.G.E.R. Technology Informatics Guiding Education Reform (2011).

References

Ball, M. J., Douglas, J. V., Hinton Walker, P., DuLong, D., Gugerty, B., Hannah, K. J., . . .

Troseth, M. R. (Eds.) (2011). Nursing informatics: Where technology and caring meet

(4th ed.). London, England: Springer-Verlag.

Caballero Munoz, E., & Hullin Lucay Cossio, C.M. (2010). Engaging clinicians in health

informatics projects. Students in Health Technology and Informatics, 151. 195-206.

El Morr, C. (2018). Introduction to Health Informatics. Toronto: Canadian Scholars.

Keselman, A., Logan, R., Smith, C., Leroy, G., & Zeng-Treitler, Q. (2008). Developing

informatics tools and strategies for consumer-centered health communication, Journal

of the American Medical Informatics Association, (15), 4, 473– 483,

https://doi-org.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/10.1197/jamia.M2744

T.I.G.E.R Technology Informatics Guiding Education Reform. (2011). Informatics competencies

collaborative team. Retrieved from https://web.archive.org/web/20150910131244

A Sample Answer 2 For the Assignment: NURS 8210 WEEK 10 DISCUSSION Information Systems and Changing Organizational Culture INSTRUCTIONS PLUS RUBRIC

Title: NURS 8210 WEEK 10 DISCUSSION Information Systems and Changing Organizational Culture INSTRUCTIONS PLUS RUBRIC

The TIGER initiative was developed to bring together nursing stakeholders to brainstorm on issues that matter in the profession. TIGER addresses actions such as medication delivery of healthcare and H.I.T. (TIGER, 2011). According to TIGER initiatives, nursing stakeholders who commit to implementing improvement plans should stick to the plans to develop them as agreed.

I.T. initiative

To implement a successful information system, some steps need to be followed. The initial step would be creating a solid team to work on the project. Through forming, storming, norming, and performing, and a dynamic team can be created. The multidisciplinary team members (including I.T.) will initially get to know one another, familiarizing themselves with the project’s goal. Interprofessional collaboration practice models can be used to assist in building high-performing teams (Chaney, 2021). An effective team is one that also displays effective communication. One has clear objectives, and every member has a clear understanding of the said objectives (Kim et al., 2019). Input from end-users is very important as they can provide pointers to a successful system.

In the computer patient records system (C.P.R.S.) I noticed that there is no availability in recording continuous bladder irrigation (C.B.I.) input and output.

Change management for successful implementation

To be successful in this project, I would have to act as a mediator between end-users, management, and I.T. developers. Internal mediation is then carried out with organization leaders and nurse managers. Computer literacy is essential; therefore, a few employees will be trained as superusers to help educate fellow staff members on using the systems and troubleshooting issues should they arise. The superusers will, in turn, provide feedback and will be the change agents for implementation. Members of the help desk will be trained as well in case their services are needed. In addition, external contractors can be hired to act as backup services to the system; therefore, there should always be someone available to help.

Potential barriers

Not every employee accepts change; to ease this, it is important to include and keep stakeholder members well informed on the progress of the implementation. Effective communication is vital, let everyone be heard and ideas acted on. Security is important in H.I.T. All barriers to breaches should be set in place. The superusers would continue to track the progress of the system. Keep communication transparent. Costs and estimates are some factors that I would need to investigate since funding is equally important. Any proposed changes should be rectified promptly. I.T. also informed me that C.P.R.S. has no more space to accommodate a flow sheet, so I must rethink and currently am in the process.

References

Chaney, A. (2021). Building your team and talent. Journal of the American Association of Nurse Practitioners, 33 (10), 761-762. doi: 10.1097/JXX.0000000000000649.

Kim, L. Y., Giannitrapani, K. F., Huynh, A. K., Ganz, D. A., Hamilton, A. B., Yano, E. M., Rubenstein, L. V., & Stockdale, S. E. (2019). What makes team communication effective: a qualitative analysis of interprofessional primary care team members’ perspectives. In Journal of Interprofessional Care (Vol. 33, Issue 6, pp. 836–838). https://doi-org.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/10.1080/13561820.2019.1577809

T.I.G.E.R. Information Technology Guiding Education Reform. (2011). Informatics Competencies collaborative team. Retrieved from https://web.archive.org/web/20150910131244/http://www.thetigerinitiative.org/docs/tigerreport_informaticscompetencies.pdf

Umstead, C. N., Unertl, K. M., Lorenzi, N. M., & Novak, L. L. (2021). Enabling adoption and use of new health information technology during implementation: Roles and strategies for internal and external support personnel. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 28(7), 1543–1547. https://doi-org.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/10.1093/jamia/ocab044

Rubric Detail

Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.

Content

Name: NURS_8210_Week10_Discussion_Rubric

	Excellent	Good	Fair	Poor
RESPONSIVENESS TO DISCUSSION QUESTION Discussion post minimum requirements: *The original posting must be completed by Wednesday, Day 3, at 11:59pm MST. Two response postings to two different peer original posts, on two different days, are required by Saturday, Day 6, at 11:59pm MST. Faculty member inquiries require responses, which are not included in the minimum number of posts. Your Discussion Board postings should be written in standard edited English and follow APA style for format and grammar as closely as possible given the constraints of the online platform. Be sure to support the postings with specific citations from this week’s Learning Resources as well as resources available through the Walden University online databases. Refer to the Essential Guide to APA Style for Walden Students to ensure your in-text citations and reference list are correct.	Points Range: 8 (26.67%) – 8 (26.67%) Discussion postings and responses exceed the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: Respond to the question being asked or the prompt provided; – Go beyond what is required in some meaningful way (e.g., the post contributes a new dimension, unearths something unanticipated); -Are substantive, reflective, with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence. – Demonstrate significant ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning -Resources as well as additional resources and has read, viewed, or considered a sampling of colleagues’ postings; -Exceed the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.	Points Range: 7 (23.33%) – 7 (23.33%) Discussion postings and responses meet the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: -Respond to the question being asked or the prompt provided; -Are substantive, reflective, with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence.re -Demonstrate ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning Resources and has read, viewed, or considered a sampling of colleagues’ postings -Meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.	Points Range: 6 (20%) – 6 (20%) Discussion postings and responses are minimally responsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: – do not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question or prompt; and/or -May (lack) lack in depth, reflection, analysis, or synthesis but rely more on anecdotal than scholarly evidence; and/or -Do not adequately demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning -Resources and/or a sampling of colleagues’ postings; and/or has posted by the due date at least in part. – Lack ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Do not meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.	Points Range: 0 (0%) – 5 (16.67%) Discussion postings and responses are unresponsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: – do not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question or prompt; and/or – Lack in substance, reflection, analysis, or synthesis but rely more on anecdotal than scholarly evidence. – Lack ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Do not demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning Resources and/or a sampling of colleagues’ postings; and/or does not meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.
CONTENT KNOWLEDGE	Points Range: 8 (26.67%) – 8 (26.67%) Discussion postings and responses: -demonstrate in-depth understanding and application of concepts and issues presented in the course (e.g., insightful interpretations including analysis, synthesis and/or evaluation of topic; – are well supported by pertinent research/evidence from a variety of and multiple peer- reviewed books and journals, where appropriate; -Demonstrate significant mastery and thoughtful/accurate application of content, applicable skills or strategies presented in the course.	Points Range: 7 (23.33%) – 7 (23.33%) Discussion postings and responses: -demonstrate understanding and application of the concepts and issues presented in the course, presented with some understanding and application of concepts and issues presented in the course (e.g., insightful interpretations including analysis, synthesis and/or evaluation of topic; -are supported by research/evidence from peer-reviewed books and journals, where appropriate; and · demonstrate some mastery and application of content, applicable skills, or strategies presented in the course.	Points Range: 6 (20%) – 6 (20%) Discussion postings and responses: – demonstrate minimal understanding of concepts and issues presented in the course, and, although generally accurate, display some omissions and/or errors; –lack support by research/evidence and/or the research/evidence is inappropriate or marginal in quality; and/or lack of analysis, synthesis or evaluation of topic – demonstrate minimal content, skills or strategies presented in the course. ——-Contain numerous errors when using the skills or strategies presented in the course	Points Range: 0 (0%) – 5 (16.67%) Discussion postings and responses demonstrate: -A lack of understanding of the concepts and issues presented in the course; and/or are inaccurate, contain many omissions and/or errors; and/or are not supported by research/evidence; and/or lack of analysis, synthesis or evaluation of topic -Many critical errors when discussing content, applicable skills or strategies presented in the course.
CONTRIBUTION TO THE DISCUSSION	Points Range: 8 (26.67%) – 8 (26.67%) Discussion postings and responses significantly contribute to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by: -providing Rich and relevant examples; discerning and thought-provoking ideas; and stimulating thoughts and probes; – -demonstrating original thinking, new perspectives, and extensive synthesis of ideas supported by the literature.	Points Range: 7 (23.33%) – 7 (23.33%) Discussion postings and responses contribute to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by -providing relevant examples; thought-provoking ideas – Demonstrating synthesis of ideas supported by the literature	Points Range: 6 (20%) – 6 (20%) Discussion postings and responses minimally contribute to the quality of discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by: – providing few and/or irrelevant examples; and/or – providing few if any thought- provoking ideas; and/or -. Information that is restated from the literature with no/little demonstration of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas.	Points Range: 0 (0%) – 5 (16.67%) Discussion postings and responses do not contribute to the quality of interaction/discussion and thinking and learning as they do not: -Provide examples (or examples are irrelevant); and/or -Include interesting thoughts or ideas; and/or – Demonstrate of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas
QUALITY OF WRITING	Points Range: 6 (20%) – 6 (20%) Discussion postings and responses exceed doctoral -level writing expectations. They: · Use grammar and syntax that is clear, concise, and appropriate to doctoral level writing; · Make few if any errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · Use original language and refrain from directly quoting original source materials; -provide correct APA · Are positive, courteous, and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints.	Points Range: 5 (16.67%) – 5 (16.67%) Discussion postings and responses meet doctoral -level writing expectations. They: ·Use grammar and syntax that is clear and appropriate to doctoral level writing; ; · Make a few errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · paraphrase but refrain from directly quoting original source materials; Provide correct APA format · Are courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints;.	Points Range: 4 (13.33%) – 4 (13.33%) Discussion postings and responses are minimally below doctoral-level writing expectations. They: · Make more than occasional errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · Directly quote from original source materials and/or paraphrase rather than use original language; lack correct APA format; and/or · Are less than courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.	Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (10%) Discussion postings and responses are well below doctoral -level writing expectations. They: · Use grammar and syntax that is that is unclear · Make many errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; and –use incorrect APA format · Are discourteous and disrespectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.
Total Points: 30

Excellent

Good

Fair

Poor

RESPONSIVENESS TO DISCUSSION QUESTION

Discussion post minimum requirements:

*The original posting must be completed by Wednesday, Day 3, at 11:59pm MST. Two response postings to two different peer original posts, on two different days, are required by Saturday, Day 6, at 11:59pm MST. Faculty member inquiries require responses, which are not included in the minimum number of posts. Your Discussion Board postings should be written in standard edited English and follow APA style for format and grammar as closely as possible given the constraints of the online platform. Be sure to support the postings with specific citations from this week’s Learning Resources as well as resources available through the Walden University online databases. Refer to the Essential Guide to APA Style for Walden Students to ensure your in-text citations and reference list are correct.

Points Range: 8 (26.67%) – 8 (26.67%)

Discussion postings and responses exceed the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: Respond to the question being asked or the prompt provided; – Go beyond what is required in some meaningful way (e.g., the post contributes a new dimension, unearths something unanticipated); -Are substantive, reflective, with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence. – Demonstrate significant ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning -Resources as well as additional resources and has read, viewed, or considered a sampling of colleagues’ postings; -Exceed the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.

Points Range: 7 (23.33%) – 7 (23.33%)

Discussion postings and responses meet the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: -Respond to the question being asked or the prompt provided; -Are substantive, reflective, with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence.re -Demonstrate ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning Resources and has read, viewed, or considered a sampling of colleagues’ postings -Meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.

Points Range: 6 (20%) – 6 (20%)

Discussion postings and responses are minimally responsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: – do not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question or prompt; and/or -May (lack) lack in depth, reflection, analysis, or synthesis but rely more on anecdotal than scholarly evidence; and/or -Do not adequately demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning -Resources and/or a sampling of colleagues’ postings; and/or has posted by the due date at least in part. – Lack ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Do not meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 5 (16.67%)

Discussion postings and responses are unresponsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: – do not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question or prompt; and/or – Lack in substance, reflection, analysis, or synthesis but rely more on anecdotal than scholarly evidence. – Lack ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Do not demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning Resources and/or a sampling of colleagues’ postings; and/or does not meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.

CONTENT KNOWLEDGE

Points Range: 8 (26.67%) – 8 (26.67%)

Discussion postings and responses: -demonstrate in-depth understanding and application of concepts and issues presented in the course (e.g., insightful interpretations including analysis, synthesis and/or evaluation of topic; – are well supported by pertinent research/evidence from a variety of and multiple peer- reviewed books and journals, where appropriate; -Demonstrate significant mastery and thoughtful/accurate application of content, applicable skills or strategies presented in the course.

Points Range: 7 (23.33%) – 7 (23.33%)

Discussion postings and responses: -demonstrate understanding and application of the concepts and issues presented in the course, presented with some understanding and application of concepts and issues presented in the course (e.g., insightful interpretations including analysis, synthesis and/or evaluation of topic; -are supported by research/evidence from peer-reviewed books and journals, where appropriate; and · demonstrate some mastery and application of content, applicable skills, or strategies presented in the course.

Points Range: 6 (20%) – 6 (20%)

Discussion postings and responses: – demonstrate minimal understanding of concepts and issues presented in the course, and, although generally accurate, display some omissions and/or errors; –lack support by research/evidence and/or the research/evidence is inappropriate or marginal in quality; and/or lack of analysis, synthesis or evaluation of topic – demonstrate minimal content, skills or strategies presented in the course. ——-Contain numerous errors when using the skills or strategies presented in the course

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 5 (16.67%)

Discussion postings and responses demonstrate: -A lack of understanding of the concepts and issues presented in the course; and/or are inaccurate, contain many omissions and/or errors; and/or are not supported by research/evidence; and/or lack of analysis, synthesis or evaluation of topic -Many critical errors when discussing content, applicable skills or strategies presented in the course.

CONTRIBUTION TO THE DISCUSSION

Points Range: 8 (26.67%) – 8 (26.67%)

Discussion postings and responses significantly contribute to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by: -providing Rich and relevant examples; discerning and thought-provoking ideas; and stimulating thoughts and probes; – -demonstrating original thinking, new perspectives, and extensive synthesis of ideas supported by the literature.

Points Range: 7 (23.33%) – 7 (23.33%)

Discussion postings and responses contribute to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by -providing relevant examples; thought-provoking ideas – Demonstrating synthesis of ideas supported by the literature

Points Range: 6 (20%) – 6 (20%)

Discussion postings and responses minimally contribute to the quality of discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by: – providing few and/or irrelevant examples; and/or – providing few if any thought- provoking ideas; and/or -. Information that is restated from the literature with no/little demonstration of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas.

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 5 (16.67%)

Discussion postings and responses do not contribute to the quality of interaction/discussion and thinking and learning as they do not: -Provide examples (or examples are irrelevant); and/or -Include interesting thoughts or ideas; and/or – Demonstrate of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas

QUALITY OF WRITING

Points Range: 6 (20%) – 6 (20%)

Discussion postings and responses exceed doctoral -level writing expectations. They: · Use grammar and syntax that is clear, concise, and appropriate to doctoral level writing; · Make few if any errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · Use original language and refrain from directly quoting original source materials; -provide correct APA · Are positive, courteous, and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

Points Range: 5 (16.67%) – 5 (16.67%)

Discussion postings and responses meet doctoral -level writing expectations. They: ·Use grammar and syntax that is clear and appropriate to doctoral level writing; ; · Make a few errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · paraphrase but refrain from directly quoting original source materials; Provide correct APA format · Are courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints;.

Points Range: 4 (13.33%) – 4 (13.33%)

Discussion postings and responses are minimally below doctoral-level writing expectations. They: · Make more than occasional errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · Directly quote from original source materials and/or paraphrase rather than use original language; lack correct APA format; and/or · Are less than courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (10%)

Discussion postings and responses are well below doctoral -level writing expectations. They: · Use grammar and syntax that is that is unclear · Make many errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; and –use incorrect APA format · Are discourteous and disrespectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

Total Points: 30

Name: NURS_8210_Week10_Discussion_Rubric

Bottom of Form

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: NURS 8210 WEEK 10 DISCUSSION Information Systems and Changing Organizational Culture INSTRUCTIONS PLUS RUBRIC

Grading Rubric Guidelines

Performance Category	10	9	8	4	0
Scholarliness Demonstrates achievement of scholarly inquiry for professional and academic decisions.	Provides relevant evidence of scholarly inquiry clearly stating how the evidence informed or changed professional or academic decisions Evaluates literature resources to develop a comprehensive analysis or synthesis. Uses valid, relevant, and reliable outside sources to contribute to the threaded discussion	Provides relevant evidence of scholarly inquiry but does not clearly state how the evidence informed or changed professional or academic decisions. Evaluates information from source(s) to develop a coherent analysis or synthesis. Uses some valid, relevant, reliable outside sources to contribute to the threaded discussion.	Discusses using scholarly inquiry but does not state how scholarly inquiry informed or changed professional or academic decisions. Information is taken from source(s) with some interpretation/evaluation, but not enough to develop a coherent analysis or synthesis. Little valid, relevant, or reliable outside sources are used to contribute to the threaded discussion. Demonstrates little or no understanding of the topic.	Discusses using scholarly inquiry but does not state how scholarly inquiry informed or changed professional or academic decisions. Information is taken from source(s) without any interpretation/evaluation. The posting uses information that is not valid, relevant, or reliable	No evidence of the use of scholarly inquiry to inform or change professional or academic decisions. Information is not valid, relevant, or reliable
Performance Category	10	9	8	4	0
Application of Course Knowledge – Demonstrate the ability to analyze, synthesize, and/or apply principles and concepts learned in the course lesson and outside readings and relate them to real-life professional situations	Posts make direct reference to concepts discussed in the lesson or drawn from relevant outside sources; Applies concepts to personal experience in the professional setting and or relevant application to real life.	Posts make direct reference to concepts discussed in the lesson or drawn from relevant outside sources. Applies concepts to personal experience in their professional setting and or relevant application to real life Interactions with classmates are relevant to the discussion topic but do not make direct reference to lesson content	Posts are generally on topic but do not build knowledge by incorporating concepts and principles from the lesson. Does not attempt to apply lesson concepts to personal experience in their professional setting and or relevant application to real life Does not demonstrate a solid understanding of the principles and concepts presented in the lesson	Posts do not adequately address the question posed either by the discussion prompt or the instructor’s launch post. Posts are superficial and do not reflect an understanding of the lesson content Does not attempt to apply lesson concepts to personal experience in their professional setting and or relevant application to real life	Posts are not related to the topics provided by the discussion prompt or by the instructor; attempts by the instructor to redirect the student are ignored No discussion of lesson concepts to personal experience in the professional setting and or relevant application to real life
Performance Category	5	4	3	2	0
Interactive Dialogue Replies to each graded thread topic posted by the course instructor, by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT, of each week, and posts a minimum of two times in each graded thread, on separate days. *(5 points possible per graded thread)*	Exceeds minimum post requirements Replies to each graded thread topic posted by the course instructor, by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT, of each week, and posts three or more times in each graded thread, over three separate days. Replies to a post posed by faculty and to a peer Summarizes what was learned from the lesson, readings, and other student posts for the week.	Replies to each graded thread topic posted by the course instructor, by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT, of each week, and posts a minimum of two times in each graded thread, on separate days Replies to a question posed by a peer Summarizes what was learned from the lesson, readings, and other student posts for the week.	Meets expectations of 2 posts on 2 different days. The main post is not made by the Wednesday deadline Does not reply to a question posed by a peer or faculty	Has only one post for the week Discussion posts contain few, if any, new ideas or applications; often are a rehashing or summary of other students’ comments	Does not post to the thread No connections are made to the topic
	Minus 1 Point	Minus 2 Point	Minus 3 Point	Minus 4 Point	Minus 5 Point
Grammar, Syntax, APA Note: if there are only a few errors in these criteria, please note this for the student in as an area for improvement. If the student does not make the needed corrections in upcoming weeks, then points should be deducted. Points deducted for improper grammar, syntax and APA style of writing. The source of information is the APA Manual 6th Edition	2-3 errors in APA format. Written responses have 2-3 grammatical, spelling, and punctuation errors. Writing style is generally clear, focused, and facilitates communication.	4-5 errors in APA format. Writing responses have 4-5 grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors. Writing style is somewhat focused.	6-7 errors in APA format. Writing responses have 6-7 grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors. Writing style is slightly focused making discussion difficult to understand.	8-10 errors in APA format. Writing responses have 8-10 grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors. Writing style is not focused, making discussion difficult to understand.	Post contains greater than 10 errors in APA format. Written responses have more than 10 grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors. Writing style does not facilitate communication. The student continues to make repeated mistakes in any of the above areas after written correction by the instructor
	0 points lost				-5 points lost
Total Participation Requirements *per discussion thread*	The student answers the threaded discussion question or topic on one day and posts a second response on another day.				The student does not meet the minimum requirement of two postings on two different days
Early Participation Requirement *per discussion thread*	The student must provide a substantive answer to the graded discussion question(s) or topic(s), posted by the course instructor (not a response to a peer), by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT of each week.				The student does not meet the requirement of a substantive response to the stated question or topic by Wednesday at 11:59 pm MT.