NRNP WEEK 1 DISCUSSION PAPER
NRNP WEEK 1 DISCUSSION PAPER
Discussion
Advanced practice nurses play crucial roles in the promotion of the optimum health and wellbeing of their populations. I have expectations of this course that I believe would help me achieve my goals as a family nurse practitioner. First, I expected the course to be interactive and interesting. I believe that different approaches to learning will be used to make the process fun and meet the diverse needs of the learners. I also expect the course to incorporate best practices such as teamwork, discussions, and projects to enhance our understanding and competency development (Gallagher-Ford et al., 2020; Gorsuch et al., 2020). These best practices will help us translate the knowledge we have into practice when caring different patient populations.
Good News For Our New customers . We can write this assignment for you and pay after Delivery. Our Top -rated medical writers will comprehensively review instructions , synthesis external evidence sources(Scholarly) and customize a quality assignment for you. We will also attach a copy of plagiarism report alongside and AI report. Feel free to chat Us
One of my strengths as it related to nursing practice competencies when working with adults is that I incorporate teamwork in the care process. I seek input from different healthcare providers to ensure we provide efficient, safe, and quality care to the patients. I also have the strength of adopting strategies that empower and motivate patients to be actively involved in meeting their health needs. I believe that the nurses’ role in the care process is to assist the patient meet their needs and equip them with the essential knowledge and skills. This is important in the delivery of care that promote enhanced satisfaction among adult patients (Duff, 2019). One of the weaknesses that I have is the limited knowledge and skills in the translation of evidence into practice. The practice site has not exposed me to several evidence-based practice projects to achieve this objective. Therefore, I will look for ways to improve my competencies in this area.
This course will help me achieve several objectives in the family nurse practitioner role. They include developing my knowledge and skills in translating evidence into practice, development of diagnoses and treatment, plans, and interprofessional collaboration. The interactive and student-centered nature of the course will help me achieve these goals.
References
Duff, E. (2019). A structural equation model of empowerment factors affecting nurse practitioners competence. Nurse Education in Practice, 38, 145–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nepr.2019.06.002
Gallagher-Ford, L., Koshy Thomas, B., Connor, L., Sinnott, L. T., & Melnyk, B. M. (2020). The Effects of an Intensive Evidence-Based Practice Educational and Skills Building Program on EBP Competency and Attributes. Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing, 17(1), 71–81. https://doi.org/10.1111/wvn.12397
Gorsuch, C. (ret) P. F., Gallagher Ford, L., Koshy Thomas, B., Melnyk, B. M., & Connor, L. (2020). Impact of a Formal Educational Skill-Building Program Based on the ARCC Model to Enhance Evidence-Based Practice Competency in Nurse Teams. Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing, 17(4), 258–268. https://doi.org/10.1111/wvn.12463
Please ensure that the paper is in 7th edition APA format.
Please ensure that the references are current from 2018-current.
Please follow the directions uploaded in the file.
Also, please reference the rubric listed below to ensure all information is covered.
| 44 to >39.0 ptsExcellent Point range: 90–100
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 3 current credible sources. |
39 to >34.0 ptsGood Point range: 80–89
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 3 current credible references. |
34 to >30.0 ptsFair Point range: 70–79
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. … Post is cited with fewer than 2 credible references. |
30 to >0 ptsPoor Point range: 0–69
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 1 or no credible references. |
|
44 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMain Posting:Writing |
| 6 to >5.0 ptsExcellent Point range: 90–100
Written clearly and concisely. … Contains no grammatical or spelling errors. … Further adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. |
5 to >4.0 ptsGood Point range: 80–89
Written concisely. … May contain one to two grammatical or spelling errors. … Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. |
4 to >3.0 ptsFair Point range: 70–79
Written somewhat concisely. … May contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors. … Contains some APA formatting errors. |
3 to >0 ptsPoor Point range: 0–69
Not written clearly or concisely. … Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors. … Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style. |
|
6 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMain Posting:Timely and full participation |
| 10 to >8.0 ptsExcellent Point range: 90–100
Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. … Posts main discussion by due date. |
8 to >7.0 ptsGood Point range: 80–89
Posts main discussion by due date. … Meets requirements for full participation. |
7 to >6.0 ptsFair Point range: 70–79
Posts main discussion by due date. |
6 to >0 ptsPoor Point range: 0–69
Does not meet requirements for full participation. … Does not post main discussion by due date. |
|
10 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFirst Response:Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources. |
| 9 to >8.0 ptsExcellent Point range: 90–100
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 to >7.0 ptsGood Point range: 80–89
Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting. |
7 to >6.0 ptsFair Point range: 70–79
Response is on topic, may have some depth. |
6 to >0 ptsPoor Point range: 0–69
Response may not be on topic, lacks depth. |
|
9 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFirst Response: Writing |
| 6 to >5.0 ptsExcellent Point range: 90–100
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 to >4.0 ptsGood Point range: 80–89
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 to >3.0 ptsFair Point range: 70–79
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. |
3 to >0 ptsPoor Point range: 0–69
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective communication. … Response to faculty questions are missing. … No credible sources are cited. |
|
6 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFirst Response: Timely and full participation |
| 5 to >4.0 ptsExcellent Point range: 90–100
Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. … Posts by due date. |
4 to >3.0 ptsGood Point range: 80–89
Meets requirements for full participation. … Posts by due date. |
3 to >2.0 ptsFair Point range: 70–79
Posts by due date. |
2 to >0 ptsPoor Point range: 0–69
Does not meet requirements for full participation. … Does not post by due date. |
|
5 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSecond Response:Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources. |
| 9 to >8.0 ptsExcellent Point range: 90–100
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 to >7.0 ptsGood Point range: 80–89
Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting. |
7 to >6.0 ptsFair Point range: 70–79
Response is on topic, may have some depth. |
6 to >0 ptsPoor Point range: 0–69
Response may not be on topic, lacks depth. |
|
9 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSecond Response: Writing |
| 6 to >5.0 ptsExcellent Point range: 90–100
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 to >4.0 ptsGood Point range: 80–89
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 to >3.0 ptsFair Point range: 70–79
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. |
3 to >0 ptsPoor Point range: 0–69
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective communication. … Response to faculty questions are missing. … No credible sources are cited. |
|
6 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSecond Response: Timely and full participation |
| 5 to >4.0 ptsExcellent Point range: 90–100
Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. … Posts by due date. |
4 to >3.0 ptsGood Point range: 80–89
Meets requirements for full participation. … Posts by due date. |
3 to >2.0 ptsFair Point range: 70–79
Posts by due date. |
2 to >0 ptsPoor Point range: 0–69
Does not meet requirements for full participation. … Does not post by due date. |
|
5 pt |
