NURS 8302 WEEK 5 Clinical Assignment DNP Project Faculty Advisor and Site Identification INSTRUCTIONS PLUS RUBRIC

Sample Answer for NURS 8302 WEEK 5 Clinical Assignment DNP Project Faculty Advisor and Site Identification INSTRUCTIONS PLUS RUBRIC Included After Question

Looking Ahead: Clinical Assignment: DNP Project Faculty Advisor and Site Identification

Preparation for project planning will begin during the clinical component of NURS 8302. By Day 7 of Week 6, you will identify an organization that you will approach to discuss a gap in practice or practice change that you might assist with as your DNP project.

Possible appointments to explore a site for the project include those made with the chief nursing officer, director of quality improvement, or director of education. In a clinic or community agency, the contact person may be the director or someone in human resources. You may complete the project at your place of employment, as long as you are not working on your own unit or with people that you supervise.

Photo Credit: fizkes – stock.adobe.com

This project will include a development of a staff education program, development of a clinical practice guideline, or an evaluation of an existing quality improvement process. The project process cannot include patients or nursing students. The project cannot be completed at an academic setting.

Preparation for project planning will begin during the clinical component of NURS 8302. The DNP Project must follow guidelines set forth in one of the DNP Project manuals:

Clinical Practice Guidelines Manual
Staff Education Manual
Quality Improvement Evaluation Manual

NOTE: All forms and manuals are found on the DNP Capstone Resources site:
https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/research-center/program-documents/dnp

Your project team will consist of a preceptor or project mentor from the organization, and a three-member Faculty Committee from Walden who will be assigned upon completion of this course. You will begin your project in the next term through the mentoring course, NURS 8702.

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: NURS 8302 WEEK 5 Clinical Assignment DNP Project Faculty Advisor and Site Identification INSTRUCTIONS PLUS RUBRIC

Once you identify a site and have contacted the organization, you will complete the DNP Project Faculty Advisor and Site Identification—Matching Request Form identifying the site and describing the possible practice change or gap to be addressed. This form must be completed and turned in by Day 7 of Week 6.

Approaching the organization:

Identify the organization where you would like to make an appointment with organization leadership to discuss your DNP project. This can be within your workplace or at a different site. The site for the project does not need to be the same site as the clinical practicum site.
Find out from the organization if there is a key person who oversees students doing DNP projects. This might be the director of nursing, the director of staff development, or the person in charge of quality improvement initiatives. In a clinic or community organization, this might be the medical director or a non-medical person in a leadership or administrative role. If there is no key person, your first contact should be someone from nursing leadership. If you are unsure of how to proceed, discuss with your NURS 8302 Faculty.
Make an appointment with the identified person (above) to discuss the Walden University DNP project.

Briefly explain the focus of the DNP project.
- As a requirement of Walden University’s DNP degree, you are required to complete a DNP Project.
- This project will focus on a quality improvement initiative that integrates project management tools and techniques, as well as addresses a gap in nursing practice or an identified practice change.
- For the purpose of this project, a quality improvement initiative is defined as an intervention that supports an improvement in healthcare outcomes. This project will follow one of the DNP project manuals for the project and can focus on a staff education program, development of a clinical practice guideline, or an evaluation of an existing quality improvement process. The project process cannot include patients or nursing students.
- The project process requires a mentor from the organization that will work with the Walden Faculty Advisor to oversee the project process.
Explore a possible gap in practice or practice change that the organization is seeking to address through an education program, clinical practice guideline, or evaluation of change completed by the organization to improve outcomes.
Discuss identification of a project mentor for the project.
Share the next steps in the process.
- You will be assigned a Faculty Advisor when the next term begins (date).

You will contact organization representative during the first week of the term to set up a meeting with the Faculty Advisor, the organization representative, and the project mentor to discuss the project.

Next Week

To go to the next week:

Week 6

A Sample Answer For the Assignment: NURS 8302 WEEK 5 Clinical Assignment DNP Project Faculty Advisor and Site Identification INSTRUCTIONS PLUS RUBRIC

Title: NURS 8302 WEEK 5 Clinical Assignment DNP Project Faculty Advisor and Site Identification INSTRUCTIONS PLUS RUBRIC

Rubric Detail

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

Content

Name: NURS_8302_Week6_Discussion_Rubric

	Excellent 90–100	Good 80–89	Fair 70–79	Poor : 0–69
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.	Points Range: 40 (40%) – 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. No less than 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth. Supported by at least three current credible sources.	Points Range: 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 the post has exceptional depth and breadth. Supported by at least three credible references.	Points Range: 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. Cited with fewer than two credible references.	Points Range: 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 one or no credible references.
Main Posting: Writing	Points Range: 6 (6%) – 6 (6%) Written clearly and concisely. Contains no grammatical or spelling errors. Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.	Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Written concisely. May contain one to two grammatical or spelling errors. Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.	Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Written somewhat concisely. May contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors. Contains some APA formatting errors.	Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) 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	Points Range: 9 (9%) – 10 (10%) Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. Posts main Discussion by due date.	Points Range: 8 (8%) – 8 (8%) Meets requirements for full participation. Posts main Discussion by due date.	Points Range: 7 (7%) – 7 (7%) Posts main Discussion by due date.	Points Range: 0 (0%) – 6 (6%) Does not meet requirements for full participation. Does not post main Discussion by due date.
First Response: Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.	Points Range: 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.	Points Range: 8 (8%) – 8 (8%) Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting.	Points Range: 7 (7%) – 7 (7%) Response is on topic and may have some depth.	Points Range: 0 (0%) – 6 (6%) Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.
First Response: Writing	Points Range: 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.	Points Range: 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.	Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Response posed in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication. Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed. Few or no credible sources are cited.	Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective communication. Response to faculty questions are missing. No credible sources are cited.
First Response: Timely and full participation	Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. Posts by due date.	Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Meets requirements for full participation. Posts by due date.	Points Range: 3 (3%) – 3 (3%) Posts by due date.	Points Range: 0 (0%) – 2 (2%) Does not meet requirements for full participation. Does not post by due date.
Second Response: Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.	Points Range: 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.	Points Range: 8 (8%) – 8 (8%) Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting.	Points Range: 7 (7%) – 7 (7%) Response is on topic and may have some depth.	Points Range: 0 (0%) – 6 (6%) Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.
Second Response: Writing	Points Range: 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.	Points Range: 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.	Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Response posed in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication. Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed. Few or no credible sources are cited.	Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective communication. Response to faculty questions are missing. No credible sources are cited.
Second Response: Timely and full participation	Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. Posts by due date.	Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Meets requirements for full participation. Posts by due date.	Points Range: 3 (3%) – 3 (3%) Posts by due date.	Points Range: 0 (0%) – 2 (2%) Does not meet requirements for full participation. Does not post by due date.
Total Points: 100

Excellent

90–100

Good

80–89

Fair

70–79

Poor

: 0–69

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.

Points Range: 40 (40%) – 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.

No less than 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth.

Supported by at least three current credible sources.

Points Range: 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 the post has exceptional depth and breadth.

Supported by at least three credible references.

Points Range: 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.

Cited with fewer than two credible references.

Points Range: 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 one or no credible references.

Main Posting:

Writing

Points Range: 6 (6%) – 6 (6%)

Written clearly and concisely.

Contains no grammatical or spelling errors.

Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Written concisely.

May contain one to two grammatical or spelling errors.

Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Written somewhat concisely.

May contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors.

Contains some APA formatting errors.

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)

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

Points Range: 9 (9%) – 10 (10%)

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation.

Posts main Discussion by due date.

Points Range: 8 (8%) – 8 (8%)

Meets requirements for full participation.

Posts main Discussion by due date.

Points Range: 7 (7%) – 7 (7%)

Posts main Discussion by due date.

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 6 (6%)

Does not meet requirements for full participation.

Does not post main Discussion by due date.

First Response:

Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.

Points Range: 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.

Points Range: 8 (8%) – 8 (8%)

Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting.

Points Range: 7 (7%) – 7 (7%)

Response is on topic and may have some depth.

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 6 (6%)

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.

First Response:
Writing

Points Range: 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.

Points Range: 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.

Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Response posed in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication. Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.

Few or no credible sources are cited.

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)

Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective communication.

Response to faculty questions are missing.

No credible sources are cited.

First Response:
Timely and full participation

Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation.

Posts by due date.

Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Meets requirements for full participation.

Posts by due date.

Points Range: 3 (3%) – 3 (3%)

Posts by due date.

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 2 (2%)

Does not meet requirements for full participation.

Does not post by due date.

Second Response:
Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.

Points Range: 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.

Points Range: 8 (8%) – 8 (8%)

Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting.

Points Range: 7 (7%) – 7 (7%)

Response is on topic and may have some depth.

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 6 (6%)

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.

Second Response:
Writing

Points Range: 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.

Points Range: 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.

Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Response posed in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication.

Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.

Few or no credible sources are cited.

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)

Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective communication.

Response to faculty questions are missing.

No credible sources are cited.

Second Response:
Timely and full participation

Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation.

Posts by due date.

Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Meets requirements for full participation.

Posts by due date.

Points Range: 3 (3%) – 3 (3%)

Posts by due date.

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 2 (2%)

Does not meet requirements for full participation.

Does not post by due date.

Total Points: 100

Name: NURS_8302_Week6_Discussion_Rubric

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: NURS 8302 WEEK 5 Clinical Assignment DNP Project Faculty Advisor and Site Identification INSTRUCTIONS PLUS RUBRIC

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.