PLEASE FOLLOW THE INSTRUCTIONS AS INDICATED BELOW:
1). ZERO (0) PLAGIARISM
2). ATLEAST 5 REFERENCES, NO MORE THAN 5 YEARS
3). PLEASE SEE THE FOLLOWING ATTACHED RUBRIC DETAILS.
Thank you.
If you were to ask 10 people what they believe to be the most significant issue facing healthcare today, you might get 10 different answers. Escalating costs? Regulation? Technology disruption?
These and many other topics are worthy of discussion. Not surprisingly, much has been said in the research, within the profession, and in the news about these topics. Whether they are issues of finance, quality, workload, or outcomes, there is no shortage of changes to be addressed.
In this Discussion, you examine a national healthcare issue and consider how that issue may impact your work setting. You also analyze how your organization has responded to this issue.
To Prepare:
- Review the Resources and select one current national healthcare issue/stressor to focus on.
- Reflect on the current national healthcare issue/stressor you selected and think about how this issue/stressor may be addressed in your work setting.
Write a description of the national healthcare issue/stressor you selected for analysis, and explain how the healthcare issue/stressor may impact your work setting. Then, describe how your health system work setting has responded to the healthcare issue/stressor, including a description of what changes may have been implemented. Be specific and provide examples.
Rubric Detail
Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.
Content
Name: NURS_6053_Module01_Week01_Discussion_Rubric
| Excellent | Good | Fair | Poor | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Main Posting | Points: Points Range: 45 (45%) – 50 (50%) Answers all parts of the discussion question(s) expectations with reflective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.
Supported by at least three current, credible sources. Written clearly and concisely with no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. Feedback: |
Points: Points Range: 40 (40%) – 44 (44%) Responds to the discussion question(s) and is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.
At least 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth. Supported by at least three credible sources. Written clearly and concisely with one or no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. Feedback: |
Points: Points Range: 35 (35%) – 39 (39%) Responds to some of the discussion question(s).
One or 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. Post is cited with two credible sources. Written somewhat concisely; may contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors. Contains some APA formatting errors. Feedback: |
Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) – 34 (34%) Does not respond to the discussion question(s) adequately.
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 sources. Not written clearly or concisely. Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors. Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style. Feedback: |
| Main Post: Timeliness | Points: Points Range: 10 (10%) – 10 (10%) Posts main post by day 3. Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Does not post by day 3. Feedback: |
| First Response | Points: Points Range: 17 (17%) – 18 (18%) Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.
Responds fully to questions posed by faculty. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources. Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives. Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed. Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. Feedback: |
Points: Points Range: 15 (15%) – 16 (16%) Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Responses to faculty questions are 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. Feedback: |
Points: Points Range: 13 (13%) – 14 (14%) Response is on topic and may have some depth.
Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication. Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed. Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited. Feedback: |
Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) – 12 (12%) Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication. Responses to faculty questions are missing. No credible sources are cited. Feedback: |
| Second Response | Points: Points Range: 16 (16%) – 17 (17%) Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.
Responds fully to questions posed by faculty. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources. Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives. Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed. Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. Feedback: |
Points: Points Range: 14 (14%) – 15 (15%) Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Responses to faculty questions are 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. Feedback: |
Points: Points Range: 12 (12%) – 13 (13%) Response is on topic and may have some depth.
Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication. Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed. Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited. Feedback: |
Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) – 11 (11%) Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication. Responses to faculty questions are missing. No credible sources are cited. Feedback: |
| Participation | Points: Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days. Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Feedback: | Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days. Feedback: |
Show Descriptions Show Feedback
Main Posting–
Levels of Achievement: Excellent 45 (45%) – 50 (50%) Answers all parts of the discussion question(s) expectations with reflective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.
Supported by at least three current, credible sources.
Written clearly and concisely with no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. Good 40 (40%) – 44 (44%) Responds to the discussion question(s) and is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.
At least 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth.
Supported by at least three credible sources.
Written clearly and concisely with one or no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. Fair 35 (35%) – 39 (39%) Responds to some of the discussion question(s).
One or 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.
Post is cited with two credible sources.
Written somewhat concisely; may contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors.
Contains some APA formatting errors. Poor 0 (0%) – 34 (34%) Does not respond to the discussion question(s) adequately.
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 sources.
Not written clearly or concisely.
Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors.
Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style. Feedback:
Main Post: Timeliness–
Levels of Achievement: Excellent 10 (10%) – 10 (10%) Posts main post by day 3. Good 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Fair 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Poor 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Does not post by day 3. Feedback:
First Response–
Levels of Achievement: Excellent 17 (17%) – 18 (18%) Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.
Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.
Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. Good 15 (15%) – 16 (16%) Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are 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. Fair 13 (13%) – 14 (14%) Response is on topic and may have some depth.
Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.
Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited. Poor 0 (0%) – 12 (12%) Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are missing.
No credible sources are cited. Feedback:
Second Response–
Levels of Achievement: Excellent 16 (16%) – 17 (17%) Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.
Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.
Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. Good 14 (14%) – 15 (15%) Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are 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. Fair 12 (12%) – 13 (13%) Response is on topic and may have some depth.
Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.
Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited. Poor 0 (0%) – 11 (11%) Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are missing.
No credible sources are cited. Feedback:
Participation–
Levels of Achievement: Excellent 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days. Good 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Fair 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Poor 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days. Feedback:
| Total Points: 100 |
|---|
Name: NURS_6053_Module01_Week01_Discussion_Rubric
What Students Are Saying About Us
.......... Customer ID: 12*** | Rating: ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐"Honestly, I was afraid to send my paper to you, but splendidwritings.com proved they are a trustworthy service. My essay was done in less than a day, and I received a brilliant piece. I didn’t even believe it was my essay at first 🙂 Great job, thank you!"
.......... Customer ID: 14***| Rating: ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
"The company has some nice prices and good content. I ordered a term paper here and got a very good one. I'll keep ordering from this website."
