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

Rasmussen NUR2868 2020 August Module 3 Project Latest

Rasmussen NUR2868 2020 August Module 3 Project Latest

 

NUR2868 Role, Scope, Quality, and Leadership in Professional Nursing Module 3 Project  

Introduction

Your first course project assignment is a written proposal that describes an assessment of the needs of the client(s) and why you feel this project would be beneficial to improve health outcomes. Include the goal of the project, the target audience, and what you expect the response to be.

This proposal must be at least 2 pages in length, not counting the cover page and reference page, and be appropriately cited in APA format.

The first course project assignment is a written introduction of your project. Your introduction should state why the topic was chosen and what the group intends to accomplish. The introduction should be 1-2 pages, in addition to a title page with all group member names, and a reference page if applicable. This assignment should be in APA format.

Concepts for Clinical Judgment

Read the article “Thinking Like a Nurse: A Research-Based Model of Clinical Judgment in Nursing” by Christine Tanner, which is linked below:

Link to article

In at least three pages, answer the following questions:

What do you feel are the greatest influences on clinical judgment? Is it experience, knowledge, or a combination of those things?

In your opinion, what part does intuition play in clinical judgment? How do you think you’ll be able to develop nursing intuition?

Additional sources are not required but if they are used, please cite them in APA format.

Submit your completed assignment by following the directions linked below. Please check the Course Calendar for specific due dates.

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS:Rasmussen NUR2868 2020 August Module 3 Project Latest

Blaine – NUR2868 RSQL Didactic – Concept Review – Exam #3
Focus on: Module 7 – Interprofessional Collaboration & Module 8 – Communication
Inteprofessional Collaboration
Effective Teams
Behaviors that lead to an effective team
oAccomplish assigned tasks realizing there is a common purpose

Rasmussen NUR2868 2020 August Module 3 Project Latest

Rasmussen NUR2868 2020 August Module 3 Project Latest

oRespectful Communication to each other
oEffective communication to each other – sharing needed information in a timely manner, not being
afraid to speak up (psychological safety)
Effective Teams result in the following benefits:
oWork together to improve health care for the clients
oParticipate to problem solve together
oUse creative approaches to solve problems
oImprove Nurse Satisfaction
Ineffective Teams
A nurse is on an interprofessioinal project team which he perceives is ineffective. He sees that certain team
members are getting singled out when they they share perspectives.
oWhat are factors of effective and ineffective team communication – including this situation?
Communication Pitfalls
oReview the ‘pitfalls’ of communication slide
oIf a nurse is older and is saying to a peer that all younger nurses think they know more than they do – which
‘pitfall’is this behavior demonstrating? (e.g. judging young nurses actions)
o A Charge nurse is providing feedback to a newer nurse – he notices that the new nurse has crossed her arms and
is gazing away. Which ‘pitfall’ behavior is being exhibited?
oA nurse states to a depressed patient that things will brighten up in the morning. What non-therapeutic
communication pitfall is this?
Barriers to Communication
What gets in the way of effective team communication
oNurses, CNAs and HUC on a surgical unit frequently do not understand their assignments and other unit
responsibilities that need to be completed before the end of shift.
oWhat gets in the way? (slide –what gets in the way of effective team communication)
When working with the interprofessional health care team, which kind of leadership style would you want to
avoid given you are working with professionals with a high level of expertise? (Think authoritative vs.
democratic. vs. transactional vs. laissez faire vs. transformational)
Communication – 93% is Body language and Tone of voice
Behaviors with our body language may be interpreted as negative (and unprofessional) by others – perhaps
when annoyed at something. Some examples include:
oSmall rolling of eyes
oRemaining standing with arms crossed over a client
oNot making eye contact with the client or family member
oTightened facial muscles
oAbrupt or louder tone of voice
NUR2868 RSQL Lecture – Exam Concept Review js

Conducting nursing research in workplaces, Remember to
oWrite Clinical Research Question (PICOT)
oIdentify and include key stakeholders
oGain buy-in and include as many persons in the process as possible
oRobust review of topic in scholarly journals
oIf human subjects, consider the Belmont Report mandate around this
oPartner with researchers and/or University or Colleges nearby that may be able to assist (if a small rural
H.C. facility)
oIdentify potential barriers or challenges with policy changes resulting from the research findings
NUR2868 RSQL Lecture – Exam Concept Review js

Company
About Us
Doing Good
Academic Integrity
StuDocu Scholarship
Jobs
Dutch Website
Contact & Help
F.A.Q.
Contact
Legal
Terms
Privacy Policy
Cookie Statement
Social
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram
YouTube
TikTok
Blog
Get the App

Copyright © 2021 StudeerSnel B.V., Keizersgracht 424, 1016 GC Amsterdam, KVK: 56829787, BTW: NL852321363B01
out of 4

Download

Help

Name:  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.

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.

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.

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.

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

6 (6%) – 6 (6%)

Written clearly and concisely.

Contains no grammatical or spelling errors.

Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Written concisely.

May contain one to two grammatical or spelling errors.

Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Written somewhat concisely.

May contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors.

Contains some APA formatting errors.

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

9 (9%) – 10 (10%)

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation.

Posts main Discussion by due date.

8 (8%) – 8 (8%)

Meets requirements for full participation.

Posts main Discussion by due date.

7 (7%) – 7 (7%)

Posts main Discussion by due date.

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.

9 (9%) – 9 (9%)

Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.

Responds to questions posed by faculty.

The use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.

8 (8%) – 8 (8%)

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

7 (7%) – 7 (7%)

Response is on topic and may have some depth.

0 (0%) – 6 (6%)

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.

First Response:

Writing

6 (6%) – 6 (6%)

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

Response to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues.

Response to faculty questions are mostly answered, if posed.

Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources.

Response is written in standard, edited English.

4 (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.

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

5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation.

Posts by due date.

4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Meets requirements for full participation.

Posts by due date.

3 (3%) – 3 (3%)

Posts by due date.

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.
9 (9%) – 9 (9%)

Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.

Responds to questions posed by faculty.

The use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.

8 (8%) – 8 (8%)

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

7 (7%) – 7 (7%)

Response is on topic and may have some depth.

0 (0%) – 6 (6%)

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.

Second Response:
Writing
6 (6%) – 6 (6%)

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

Response to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues.

Response to faculty questions are mostly answered, if posed.

Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources.

Response is written in standard, edited English.

4 (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.

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
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation.

Posts by due date.

4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Meets requirements for full participation.

Posts by due date.

3 (3%) – 3 (3%)

Posts by due date.

0 (0%) – 2 (2%)

Does not meet requirements for full participation.

Does not post by due date.

Total Points: 100

Name:  Discussion Rubric

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