Study Desk – Assessment.

 Please upload Assessment Two as a word document via NUR1201 Study Desk – Assessment.

 

Part A: 4 screen shots of online seeded forum posts (details provided p.4)

Part B: Reflection word count: 600 words (+/- 10%) (details provided p.5 & 6)

 

ASSIGNMENT REQUIREMENTS

This assignment should be the work of the individual student (excepting the peer reviewed forum posts). Copying or attempting to copy the work of others or submitting the work of another as your own are not permitted. Assessment procedure http://policy.usq.edu.au/documents/14749PL

Setting Out

• Minimum of 1.5 line spacing; Arial or Times New Roman font; 12 point.
• Ensure that the marking rubric is attached.
• Ensure that your name and student number are on every page of your assignment (header)
• Use headings to indicate sections of your assignment
• Ensure that you keep a copy of the assignment

Referencing

• In-text referencing and reference list must use APA 6^th referencing.
• Ensure all information is evidence-based and referenced appropriately
• Aim for sources no older than 7 years.
• Minimum 4 references: 2 peer-reviewed journal articles, 1 evidence-based text and 1 reputable website (aim for more than minimum)

Marking Rubric

• Assessment two will be marked against the marking rubrics – PART A (pages 6-9); PART B (pages 10-13)
• NB. Academic writing and referencing may be subject to deductions based on accuracy and quality

Supporting Assessment links at USQ

Academic writing (for example: how to write an essay) – please refer to the following link for details.

http://www.usq.edu.au/learningcentre/assignment-skills/writing-assignments/essay-writing

References (for example: how to reference APA style) – please refer to the following link for details.

http://www.usq.edu.au/library/referencing/apa-referencing-guide

 

 

PART A – FORUM POSTS

1. (5 Marks)

Select only one (1) online seeded forum post that you have written from either week 1-6 and the corresponding peer-reviewed forum post for the same week.

The online seeded forum post you choose will demonstrate one of the components of the Gibbs Reflective Cycle, either: 1. Description; 2. Feelings; 3. Values/Beliefs; 4. Analysis; 5. Conclusions; 6. Action Plan.

• Provide a screen shot of:

1. a) The online seeded forum post written by you for the week you have chosen.
2. b) The corresponding peer-reviewed forum post written by you for the same week.

• Attach

1. c) The associated marking rubric linked to these written posts.
2. (15 Marks)

Select week 7 online seeded forum post: topic – The complaints process that you have written and select the corresponding peer-reviewed forum post you wrote for this same week (week 7).

• Provide a screen shot (*) of

1. d) The online seeded forum post written by you
2. e) The corresponding peer-reviewed forum post for week 7 written by you.

• Attach

1. f) The marking rubric for week 7

Note

* How to do a screen shot guide – see Appendix I, page 14

In-text references are counted in the word count and no reference list is required for forum posts

 

 

 

PART B – REFLECTION (600 words and 30 marks):

 

In reflecting on the weekly patient experiences across the lifespan video interviews, one common theme dominated – the benefit of a health e-record.

 

Instructions

For part B reflection the topic focus is: The Health E-Record.

Please view/(listen to) the Patient Experience Video Recording – Week 1 Recording, 26 year old Elise (mother) and Violet (daughter) age 0-18months.

 

Please complete a reflection of this patient experience and relate this experience back to the topic of focus, the health e-record.

 

Please use the Gibbs Reflective Cycle (1988) that includes all of the six stages.

1. Description; 2. Feelings; 3. Values/Beliefs; 4. Analysis; 5. Conclusions; 6. Action Plan.

 

Note

See further details (pp. 6-10).

REFLECTION WORD COUNT: 600 WORDS (+/- 10%)

Introduction (50 words approx.)

Include a thesis statement and provide a clear indication of the body of the assignment

Body (500 words approx.)

Reflective Cycle – Focus your reflection on the health e-record.

Description (75 words)

Briefly discuss relevant themes of nursing care for this event.

• Feelings (50 words)

Evaluate your feelings as a nurse in relation to the patient care experience of Elise and Violet.

• Values/Beliefs (75 words)

Explain the values/beliefs that underpin your feelings as a nurse in relation to the patient care experience of Elise and Violet.

• Analysis (150 words)

Analyse the event and provide justification for the use of the health e-record for this patient care experience.

• Conclusions drawn (75 words)

Discuss positive and negative indicators for implementing the health e-record for this patient care experience.

• Action Plan (75 words)

Identify elements of care for the individual. Select and justify strategies/actions for partnering in care.

 

Essay Conclusion (50 words approx.)

Provide a synthesis of the information from the assignment, tying main points together and reflecting on the importance of the findings.

 

NOTE: In-text references are counted in the word count and a reference list is required for the reflection (APA)

 

PART B – Reflection – Marking Rubric: 30 marks

	Outstanding		Quality	Above Average	Sound		Below Expectations
ESSAY Introduction	Introduction contains a highly relevant thesis statement.   The introduction articulates well into the assignment and gives a clear indication of assignment content.		Introduction contains a relevant thesis statement.   The introduction articulates into the assignment and gives a clear indication of assignment content.	Introduction contains a thesis statement.   The introduction articulates into the assignment and gives some indication of assignment content.	Does not contain a thesis statement.   Intro states “the paper will cover… then it will cover…”		Poor or absent introduction – does not set paper up well.   Irrelevant information included in introduction.
Marks	1.5		1.25	1.0	0.75		0.5 – 0
REFLECTIVE CYCLE Description	Highly relevant, well-structured, clear and concise description of two (2) or more highly relevant themes of nursing care.   Highly relevant, specific and clear justification for focusing on each area of care.		Relevant well-structured, clear and concise description of two (2) or more relevant themes of nursing care.     Relevant, specific and clear justification for focusing on each area of care.	Above average concise description of two (2) relevant themes of nursing care.       Above average clear justification for focusing on each area of care.	Sound description of two (2) themes of nursing care.         Sound justification for focusing on each area of care. Limited relevance.		Absent, vague or limited description of themes of nursing care. Themes not relevant. Did not discuss two (2) themes.     Justification absent, vague or inappropriate.
Marks	3.0 – 2.7		2.6 – 2.3	2.2 – 1.9	1.8 – 1.5		1.4 – 0
Feelings	Highly relevant and concise examination of their feelings as a nurse in relation to the patient care experience		Relevant and concise examination of their feelings as a nurse in relation to the patient care experience	Above average examination of their feelings as a nurse in relation to the patient care experience	Sound explanation of their feelings as a nurse in relation to the patient care experience		Absent, limited, unclear discussion of their feelings.
Marks	4.0 – 3.6		3.5 – 3.1	3.0 – 2.6	2.5 – 2.0		1.9 – 0
Values/Beliefs	Highly relevant, logical clear and concise explanation on the values/beliefs that underpin their feelings – includes at least one (1) value/belief linked to personal feelings and one (1) value/belief accurately linked to relevant nursing governances.   Clear integration of highly relevant resources to support discussion on values/beliefs. More than 2 highly relevant resources used.		Relevant, logical and clear explanation on the values/beliefs that underpin their feelings– includes at least one (1) value/belief linked to personal feelings and one (1) value/belief accurately linked to relevant nursing governances.   Integrates of relevant resources to support discussion on values/beliefs. More than 2 highly relevant resources used.	Clear, above average explanation of the values/beliefs that underpin their feelings – includes one (1) value/belief linked to personal feelings and one (1) value/belief linked to nursing governances.     Supports discussion on values/beliefs using relevant resources. Minimum of 2 resources used.	Sound discussion of the values/beliefs that underpin their feelings – includes one (1) value/belief linked to personal feelings and one (1) value/belief linked to nursing governances.     Includes a minimum of 2 resources in discussion on values/beliefs.		Limited or no discussion on the values/beliefs that underpin their feelings.         Inappropriate resources that do not support the discussion on values/beliefs used. Does not include at least 2 resources.
Marks	4.0 – 3.6		3.5 – 3.1	3.0 – 2.6	2.5 – 2.0		1.9 – 0
Analysis	Highly relevant, clear and comprehensive analysis of the event and the health e-record for this patient care experience.   Highly relevant, strong justification for the health e-record for this patient care experience.   Highly relevant, strong, clear and accurate discussion of links between the health e-record and specific, relevant nursing governances.		Relevant, clear and comprehensive analysis of the event and the health e-record for this patient care experience.   Relevant, strong justification for the health e-record.       Relevant, strong, accurate discussion of links between the health e-record and specific, relevant nursing governances.	Above average analysis of the event and the health e-record for this patient care experience.     Above average justification for the health e-record for this patient care experience.     Above average discussion of relevant links between the health e-record and specific, relevant nursing governances.	Sound analysis of the event and the health e-record for this patient care experience.     Sound justification for the health e-record for this patient care experience.     Sound discussion on the links between the e-record and some nursing governances.		Vague or unclear discussion on the health e-record for this patient care experience.     Poor justification for health e-record.     Does not clearly relate nurses’ role to nursing governances. Inappropriate governances identified.
Marks	8.0 – 7.1		7.0 – 6.1	6.0 – 5.1	5.0 – 4.0		3.9 – 0
Conclusions drawn	Highly relevant, clear and concise discussion on one (1) or more highly relevant positive and one (1) or more highly relevant negative indicator for implementing the health e-record for this patient care experience.		Relevant, clear discussion on one (1) or more relevant positive and one (1) or more relevant negative indicator for implementing the health e-record for this patient care experience.	Above average discussion on one (1) relevant positive and one (1) relevant negative indicator for implementing the health e-record for this patient care experience.	Sound discussion on one (1) positive and one (1) negative indicator for implementing the health e-record for this patient care experience.		Limited or vague discussion on positive and negative indicators for implementing the health e-record for this patient care experience.
Marks	4.0 – 3.6		3.5 – 3.1	3.0 – 2.6	2.5 – 2.0		1.9 – 0
Action Plan	Outstanding, clear and concise discussion on two (2) or more highly relevant elements of care.   Highly relevant, clear and concise justification for each of the selected strategies/actions for partnering in care. Links with elements of care identified.		Quality, clear and concise discussion on two (2) or more relevant elements of care.   Relevant, clear and concise justification for the selected strategies/actions for partnering in care. Links with elements of care identified.	Above average discussion on two (2) relevant elements of care.   Above average justification for the selected strategies/actions for partnering in care. Links with elements of care identified.	Sound discussion on one (1) elements of care.     Sound justification for the selected strategies/actions provided. Links with elements of care identified.		Limited identification or does not identify appropriate elements of care.   Justification for strategies/actions vague or absent. Does not link with elements of care identified.
Marks	4.0 – 3.6		3.5 – 3.1	3.0 – 2.6	2.5 – 2.0		1.9 – 0
Conclusion