10 May Students maintained and submitted weekly reflective narratives throughout the course to explore the personal knowledge and skills gained througho
Students maintained and submitted weekly reflective narratives throughout the course to explore the personal knowledge and skills gained throughout this course. This assignment combines those entries into one course-long reflective journal that integrates leadership and inquiry into current practice as it applies to the Professional Capstone and Practicum course.
This final submission should also outline what students have discovered about their professional practice, personal strengths and weaknesses that surfaced during the process, additional resources and abilities that could be introduced to a given situation to influence optimal outcomes, and, finally, how the student met the competencies aligned to this course.
The final journal should address a variable combination of the following, while incorporating your specific clinical practice experiences:
- New practice approaches
- Interprofessional collaboration
- Health care delivery and clinical systems
- Ethical considerations in health care
- Practices of culturally sensitive care
- Ensuring the integrity of human dignity in the care of all patients
- Population health concerns
- The role of technology in improving health care outcomes
- Health policy
- Leadership and economic models
- Health disparities
While APA style is not required for the body of this assignment, solid academic writing is expected, and in-text citations and references should be presented using APA documentation guidelines, which can be 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 LopesWrite. A link to the LopesWrite technical support articles is located in Class Resources if you need assistance.
Benchmark Information
This benchmark assignment assesses the following programmatic competencies:
RN to BSN
2.3: Understand and value the processes of critical thinking, ethical reasoning, and decision making.
4.1: Utilize patient care technology and information management systems.
4.3: Promote interprofessional collaborative communication with health care teams to provide safe and effective care.
5.3: Provide culturally sensitive care.
5.4: Preserve the integrity and human dignity in the care of all patients.
Benchmark – Capstone Project Change Proposal – Rubric
Collapse All Benchmark – Capstone Project Change Proposal – RubricCollapse All
Revisions Incorporated as Directed by Instructor
10 points
Criteria Description
Revisions Incorporated as Directed by Instructor
5. 5: Excellent
10 points
All revisions are incorporated. The revision greatly improves the accuracy and clarity of the project.
4. 4: Good
8.9 points
The key aspects were revised. The revision generally improves the accuracy and clarity of the project.
3. 3: Satisfactory
7.9 points
Most key aspects were revised. Some aspects are still vague or contain minor inaccuracies.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
7.5 points
Revision is incomplete. Many aspects are still incomplete, inaccurate, or unclear.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Revision is omitted.
Background
10 points
Criteria Description
Background
5. 5: Excellent
10 points
Background of clinical problem are clearly and logically presented. Relevant support and rationale are evident.
4. 4: Good
8.9 points
Background of clinical problem are presented. Minor aspects are unclear or require support.
3. 3: Satisfactory
7.9 points
Background of clinical problem are summarized. There are minor omissions or inaccuracies. Some support or information is needed.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
7.5 points
Background of clinical problem is incomplete.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Background of clinical problem omitted.
Clinical Problem Statement
10 points
Criteria Description
Clinical Problem Statement
5. 5: Excellent
10 points
Clinical problem statement is clearly and logically presented. Relevant support and rationale are evident.
4. 4: Good
8.9 points
Clinical problem statement is presented. Minor aspects are unclear or require support.
3. 3: Satisfactory
7.9 points
Clinical problem statement is summarized. There are minor omissions or inaccuracies. Some support or information is needed.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
7.5 points
Clinical problem statement is incomplete.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Clinical problem statement omitted.
Purpose of Change Proposal
10 points
Criteria Description
Purpose of Change Proposal
5. 5: Excellent
10 points
Purpose of the change proposal in relation to providing patient care in the changing health care system is logically presented. Relevant support and rationale are evident.
4. 4: Good
8.9 points
Purpose of the change proposal in relation to providing patient care in the changing health care system is presented. Minor aspects are unclear or require support.
3. 3: Satisfactory
7.9 points
Purpose of the change proposal in relation to providing patient care in the changing health care system is summarized. There are minor omissions or inaccuracies. Some support or information is needed.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
7.5 points
Purpose of the change proposal in relation to providing patient care in the changing health care system is incomplete.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Purpose of the change proposal in relation to providing patient care in the changing health care system is omitted.
PICOT Question
10 points
Criteria Description
PICOT Question
5. 5: Excellent
10 points
Topic and criteria are clearly and logically presented. Relevant support and rationale are evident.
4. 4: Good
8.9 points
Topic and criteria are presented. Minor aspects are unclear or require support.
3. 3: Satisfactory
7.9 points
Topic and most criteria are presented. There are minor omissions or inaccuracies. Some support or information is needed.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
7.5 points
Topic is presented but criteria is incomplete.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
PICOT questions is omitted.
Literature Search
10 points
Criteria Description
Literature Search
5. 5: Excellent
10 points
Topic and criteria are clearly and logically presented. Relevant support and rationale are evident.
4. 4: Good
8.9 points
Topic and criteria are presented. Minor aspects are unclear or require support.
3. 3: Satisfactory
7.9 points
Topic and most criteria are presented. There are minor omissions or inaccuracies. Some support or information is needed.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
7.5 points
Topic is presented but criteria is incomplete.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Literature search strategy employed omitted.
Evaluation of Literature
10 points
Criteria Description
Evaluation of Literature
5. 5: Excellent
10 points
Evaluation of literature is clearly and logically presented. Relevant support and rationale are evident.
4. 4: Good
8.9 points
Evaluation of literature is presented. Minor aspects are unclear or require support.
3. 3: Satisfactory
7.9 points
Evaluation of literature is summarized. There are minor omissions or inaccuracies. Some support or information is needed.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
7.5 points
Evaluation of literature is incomplete.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Evaluation of literature omitted.
Change or Nursing Theory
10 points
Criteria Description
Change or Nursing Theory
5. 5: Excellent
10 points
Change or nursing theory is logically presented. Relevant support and rationale are evident.
4. 4: Good
8.9 points
Change or nursing theory is presented. Minor aspects are unclear or require support.
3. 3: Satisfactory
7.9 points
Change or nursing theory is summarized. There are minor omissions or inaccuracies. Some support or information is needed.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
7.5 points
Change or nursing theory is incomplete.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Change or nursing theory omitted.
Implementation Plan and Outcome Measures
20 points
Criteria Description
Implementation Plan and Outcome Measures
5. 5: Excellent
20 points
Implementation plan and outcome measures are clearly and logically presented. Relevant support and rationale are evident.
4. 4: Good
17.8 points
Implementation plan and outcome measures are presented. Minor aspects are unclear or require support.
3. 3: Satisfactory
15.8 points
Implementation plan and outcome measures are summarized. There are minor omissions or inaccuracies. Some support or information is needed.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
15 points
Implementation plan and outcome measures are presented is incomplete.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Implementation plan and outcome measures are omitted.
Use of Evidence-Based Practice in Intervention Plan
20 points
Criteria Description
Use of Evidence-Based Practice in Intervention Plan
5. 5: Excellent
20 points
Use of evidence-based practice in intervention plan is clearly and logically presented. Relevant support and rationale are evident.
4. 4: Good
17.8 points
Use of evidence-based practice in intervention plan is presented. Minor aspects are unclear or require support.
3. 3: Satisfactory
15.8 points
Use of evidence-based practice in intervention plan is summarized. There are minor omissions or inaccuracies. Some support or information is needed.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
15 points
Use of evidence-based practice in intervention plan is incomplete.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Use of evidence-based practice in intervention plan omitted.
Plan for Evaluating Proposed Nursing Intervention
20 points
Criteria Description
Plan for Evaluating Proposed Nursing Intervention
5. 5: Excellent
20 points
Plan for evaluating proposed nursing intervention is clearly and logically presented. Relevant support and rationale are evident.
4. 4: Good
17.8 points
Plan for evaluating proposed nursing intervention is presented. Minor aspects are unclear or require support.
3. 3: Satisfactory
15.8 points
Plan for evaluating proposed nursing intervention is summarized. There are minor omissions or inaccuracies. Some support or information is needed.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
15 points
Plan for evaluating proposed nursing intervention is incomplete.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Plan for evaluating proposed nursing intervention omitted.
Potential Barriers and Plan to Overcome Barriers
20 points
Criteria Description
Potential Barriers and Plan to Overcome Barriers
5. 5: Excellent
20 points
Potential barriers and plan to overcome barriers are clearly and logically presented. Relevant support and rationale are evident.
4. 4: Good
17.8 points
Potential barriers and plan to overcome barriers are presented. Minor aspects are unclear or require support.
3. 3: Satisfactory
15.8 points
Potential barriers and plan to overcome barriers are summarized. There are minor omissions or inaccuracies. Some support or information is needed.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
15 points
Potential barriers and plan to overcome barriers are incomplete.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Potential barriers and plan to overcome barriers are omitted.
Thesis Development and Purpose
10 points
Criteria Description
Thesis Development and Purpose
5. 5: Excellent
10 points
Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.
4. 4: Good
8.9 points
Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.
3. 3: Satisfactory
7.9 points
Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
7.5 points
Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.
Argument Logic and Construction
10 points
Criteria Description
Argument Logic and Construction
5. 5: Excellent
10 points
Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.
4. 4: Good
8.9 points
Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.
3. 3: Satisfactory
7.9 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 are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
7.5 points
Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
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 sources.
Criteria 3Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)
10 points
Criteria Description
Criteria 3Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)
5. 5: Excellent
10 points
Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
4. 4: Good
8.9 points
Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used.
3. 3: Satisfactory
7.9 points
Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
7.5 points
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, or word choice are present.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.
Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)
4 points
Criteria Description
Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)
5. 5: Excellent
4 points
All format elements are correct.
4. 4: Good
3.56 points
Template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style.
3. 3: Satisfactory
3.16 points
Template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
3 points
Template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.
Documentation of Sources
6 points
Criteria Description
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)
5. 5: Excellent
6 points
Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.
4. 4: Good
5.34 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.
3. 3: Satisfactory
4.74 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
4.5 points
Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Sources are not documented.
