NURS 8114 Investigating a Critical Practice Question Through a Literature Review

NURS 8114 Investigating a Critical Practice Question Through a Literature Review
Complete Parts 1 and 2 of your Assignment:
Part 1: Literature Review: Be sure you have completed all required sections of the template (PDF) document.
Part 2: Critical Assessment paper: Reflect on comments from colleagues in response to your Week 10 Discussion post. Apply feedback of value to you in completing your synthesis of evidence to inform a practice change initiative focusing on quality improvement.
Photo Credit: [Steve Hix/Fuse]/[None]/Getty Images
Reminder: The College of Nursing requires that all papers submitted include a title page, introduction, summary, and references. The Sample Paper provided at the Walden Writing Center provides an example of those required elements (available at https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/templates/general#s-lg-box-20293632). All papers submitted must use this formatting.
By Day 7 of Week 10
Submit Parts 1 and 2 of your Assignment.
Submission and Grading Information
To submit your completed Assignment for review and grading, do the following:
Please save your Assignment using the naming convention “M4Assgn+last name+first initial.(extension)” as the name.
Click the Module 4 Assignment Rubric to review the Grading Criteria for the Assignment.
Click the Module 4 Assignment link. You will also be able to “View Rubric” for grading criteria from this area.
Next, from the Attach File area, click on the Browse My Computer button. Find the document you saved as “M4Assgn+last name+first initial.(extension)” and click Open.
If applicable: From the Plagiarism Tools area, click the checkbox for I agree to submit my paper(s) to the Global Reference Database.
NURS 8114 Investigating a Critical Practice Question Through a Literature Review
Click on the Submit button to complete your submission.
Grading Criteria
To access your rubric:
Module 4 Assignment Rubric
Check Your Assignment Draft for Authenticity
To check your Assignment draft for authenticity:
Submit your Module 4 Assignment draft and review the originality report.
Submit Your Assignment by Day 7 of Week 10
To participate in this Assignment:
Module 4 Assignment
What’s Coming Up in Module 5!
Photo Credit: [BrianAJackson]/[iStock / Getty Images Plus]/Getty Images
In the next module, you will wrap up the course with a 1-week focus on challenges and opportunities as a DNP to advocate for quality improvement by leading practice change initiatives. Prepare to inspire colleagues and be inspired as you look ahead to beginning your DNP Project in the future.
Next Module
To go to the next module:
Module 5
Name: NURS_8114_Module4_Assignment_Rubric
Grid View
List View
Excellent
90%–100%
Good
80%–89%
Fair
70%–79%
Poor
0%–69%
The Assignment:
Part 1: Literature Review of at least 10 scholarly articles:
• Using the Walden Library as your source, search to select at least 10 scholarly articles that represent current literature (i.e., published within the previous 5 years) with evidence that addresses your critical question and could inform a practice change initiative for quality improvement. Using the Individual Evidence Summary Tool template document, complete all sections for each article.
Points Range: 90 (45%) – 100 (50%)
The response uses the Individual Evidence Summary Tool template to clearly, accurately, and in detail complete all sections for at least 10 scholarly articles with evidence that addresses your critical question and could inform a practice change initiative for quality improvement.
Points Range: 80 (40%) – 89 (44.5%)
The response uses the Individual Evidence Summary Tool template to clearly and accurately complete all sections for at least 10 scholarly articles with evidence that addresses your critical question and could inform a practice change initiative for quality improvement. There may be a few minor errors in the document.
Points Range: 70 (35%) – 79 (39.5%)
The response uses the Individual Evidence Summary Tool template to complete most sections for 10 or fewer scholarly articles with evidence that vaguely or somewhat addresses your critical question and could inform a practice change initiative for quality improvement. There are several errors throughout the document.
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 69 (34.5%)
The response is an incomplete use of the Individual Evidence Summary Tool template with fewer than 10 scholarly articles, a substantial number of missing sections and inaccuracies and vague, inaccurate, and/or missing evidence in some to most articles addressing your critical question and informing a practice change initiative for quality improvement.
The Assignment:
Part 2: Critical Assessment
In a paper of at least 7 pages, plus cover page and references page, include the following:
• Write a critical assessment of your search outcomes that synthesizes the evidence from your literature review.
Points Range: 36 (18%) – 40 (20%)
The response provides a clear, accurate, and detailed assessment of your search outcomes that fully synthesizes the evidence from your literature review.
Points Range: 32 (16%) – 35 (17.5%)
The response provides a clear and accurate assessment of your search outcomes that synthesizes the evidence from your literature review.
Points Range: 28 (14%) – 31 (15.5%)
The response provides a vague and/or inaccurate assessment of your search outcomes that somewhat synthesizes the evidence from your literature review.
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 27 (13.5%)
The response provides a vague, inaccurate, or missing assessment of your search outcomes that minimally or fails to synthesize the evidence from your literature review.
• Demonstrate clear connections between the practice problem that informs your critical question, your appraisal of evidence that addresses the critical question, and resulting clarification on the need for a practice change initiative focusing on quality improvement. Be specific and provide examples.
Points Range: 40 (20%) – 45 (22.5%)
The response clearly, accurately, and in detail demonstrates connections between the practice problem that informs your critical question, your appraisal of evidence that addresses the critical question, and resulting clarification on the need for a practice change initiative focusing on quality improvement.
The response fully synthesizes and?integrates at least four scholarly resources that fully support the connections provided.
Points Range: 40 (20%) – 44 (22%)
The response clearly and accurately demonstrates connections between the practice problem that informs your critical question, your appraisal of evidence that addresses the critical question, and resulting clarification on the need for a practice change initiative focusing on quality improvement.
The response synthesizes and?integrates at least three scholarly resources that support the connections provided.
Points Range: 35 (17.5%) – 39 (19.5%)
The response vaguely or inaccurately demonstrates connections between the practice problem that informs your critical question, and/or your appraisal of evidence that addresses the critical question, and/or resulting clarification on the need for a practice change initiative focusing on quality improvement.
The response somewhat synthesizes and?integrates three scholarly resources that may support the connections provided.
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 34 (17%)
The response vaguely and inaccurately demonstrates, and/or is missing connections between the practice problem that informs your critical question, and/or your appraisal of evidence that addresses the critical question, and/or resulting clarification on the need for a practice change initiative focusing on quality improvement.
The response minimally and/or inaccurately synthesizes and integrates one or two scholarly resources, or resources are not scholarly, or are missing.
Written Expression and Formatting: Paragraph/
Sentence Structure
Paragraphs make clear points that support well-developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are clearly structured and carefully focused–neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance.
Points Range: 5 (2.5%) – 5 (2.5%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for structure, flow, continuity, and clarity.
Points Range: 4 (2%) – 4 (2%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for structure, flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time.
Points Range: 3 (1.5%) – 3 (1.5%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for structure, flow, continuity, and clarity 60%–79% of the time.
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 2 (1%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for structure, flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time. Written Expression and Formatting: English writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation. Points Range: 5 (2.5%) – 5 (2.5%) Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors. Points Range: 4 (2%) – 4 (2%) Contains a few (1–2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. Points Range: 3.5 (1.75%) – 3.5 (1.75%) Contains several (3–4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (1.5%) Contains many (? 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. Written Expression and Formatting: The assignment contains parenthetical/in-text citations, and at least 10 evidence-based references are listed. Points Range: 5 (2.5%) – 5 (2.5%) Contains parenthetical/in-text citations and at least 10 evidence-based references are listed. Points Range: 4 (2%) – 4 (2%) Contains parenthetical/in-text citations and 10 evidence-based references are listed. Points Range: 3.5 (1.75%) – 3.5 (1.75%) Contains parenthetical/in-text citations and fewer than 10 evidence-based references are listed. Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (1.5%) Contains no parenthetical/in-text citations and significantly fewer than 10 evidence-based references are listed, or there is no references page. Total Points: 200