Assignment: Nursing Theory Essay

Assignment: Nursing Theory Essay

As the nursing profession continually evolves, practice knowledge is increasing and closing the theory-practice gap. The purpose of this discussion is to explore how nursing theory is used as a framework in nursing research, building the body of professional nursing knowledge.

Instructions

  1. Using one of the articles provided in this week’s course announcement, identify the nursing theory used to frame the nursing research.
  2. Analyze the selected nursing theory and describe how the theory applies to nursing’s metaparadigm, including each of the following:
    • Person
    • Health
    • Environment
    • Nursing

Required article

Rosa, W. E., Dossey, B. M., Koithan, M., Kreitzer, M. J., Manjrekar, P., Meleis, A. I., Mukamana, D., Ray, M. A., & Watson, J. (2020).  Nursing Science Quarterly, 33(2), 178-182. https//:10.1177/0894318420903495

Important information for writing discussion questions and participation

Welcome to class

Hello class and welcome to the class and I will be your instructor for this course. This is a -week course and requires a lot of time commitment, organization, and a high level of dedication. Please use the class syllabus to guide you through all the assignments required for the course. I have also attached the classroom policies to this announcement to know your expectations for this course. Please review this document carefully and ask me any questions if you do. You could email me at any time or send me a message via the “message” icon in halo if you need to contact me. I check my email regularly, so you should get a response within 24 hours. If you have not heard from me within 24 hours and need to contact me urgently, please send a follow up text to

I strongly encourage that you do not wait until the very last minute to complete your assignments. Your assignments in weeks 4 and 5 require early planning as you would need to present a teaching plan and interview a community health provider. I advise you look at the requirements for these assignments at the beginning of the course and plan accordingly. I have posted the YouTube link that explains all the class assignments in detail. It is required that you watch this 32-minute video as the assignments from week 3 through 5 require that you follow the instructions to the letter to succeed. Failure to complete these assignments according to instructions might lead to a zero. After watching the video, please schedule a one-on-one with me to discuss your topic for your project by the second week of class. Use this link to schedule a 15-minute session. Please, call me at the time of your appointment on my number. Please note that I will NOT call you.

Please, be advised I do NOT accept any assignments by email. If you are having technical issues with uploading an assignment, contact the technical department and inform me of the issue. If you have any issues that would prevent you from getting your assignments to me by the deadline, please inform me to request a possible extension. Note that working fulltime or overtime is no excuse for late assignments. There is a 5%-point deduction for every day your assignment is late. This only applies to approved extensions. Late assignments will not be accepted.

If you think you would be needing accommodations due to any reasons, please contact the appropriate department to request accommodations.

Plagiarism is highly prohibited. Please ensure you are citing your sources correctly using APA 7th edition. All assignments including discussion posts should be formatted in APA with the appropriate spacing, font, margin, and indents. Any papers not well formatted would be returned back to you, hence, I advise you review APA formatting style. I have attached a sample paper in APA format and will also post sample discussion responses in subsequent announcements.

Your initial discussion post should be a minimum of 200 words and response posts should be a minimum of 150 words. Be advised that I grade based on quality and not necessarily the number of words you post. A minimum of TWO references should be used for your initial post. For your response post, you do not need references as personal experiences would count as response posts. If you however cite anything from the literature for your response post, it is required that you cite your reference. You should include a minimum of THREE references for papers in this course. Please note that references should be no more than 5 years old except recommended as a resource for the class. Furthermore, for each discussion board question, you need ONE initial substantive response and TWO substantive responses to either your classmates or your instructor for a total of THREE responses. There are TWO discussion questions each week, hence, you need a total minimum of SIX discussion posts for each week. I usually post a discussion question each week. You could also respond to these as it would count towards your required SIX discussion posts for the week.

I understand this is a lot of information to cover in 5 weeks, however, the Bible says in Philippians 4:13 that we can do all things through Christ that strengthens us. Even in times like this, we are encouraged by God’s word that we have that ability in us to succeed with His strength. I pray that each and every one of you receives strength for this course and life generally as we navigate through this pandemic that is shaking our world today. Relax and enjoy the course!

Hi Class,

Please read through the following information on writing a Discussion question response and participation posts.

Contact me if you have any questions.

Important information on Writing a Discussion Question

  • Your response needs to be a minimum of 150 words (not including your list of references)
  • There needs to be at least TWO references with ONE being a peer reviewed professional journal article.
  • Include in-text citations in your response
  • Do not include quotes—instead summarize and paraphrase the information
  • Follow APA-7th edition
  • Points will be deducted if the above is not followed

Participation –replies to your classmates or instructor

  • A minimum of 6 responses per week, on at least 3 days of the week.
  • Each response needs at least ONE reference with citations—best if it is a peer reviewed journal article
  • Each response needs to be at least 75 words in length (does not include your list of references)
  • Responses need to be substantive by bringing information to the discussion or further enhance the discussion. Responses of “I agree” or “great post” does not count for the word count.
  • Follow APA 7th edition
  • Points will be deducted if the above is not followed
  • Remember to use and follow APA-7th edition for all weekly assignments, discussion questions, and participation points.
  • Here are some helpful links
  • The is a great resource

 

 

Select only one of the four nursing theories and then using the selected theory analyze the nursing paradigm (person, health, environment, and nursing).

Estridge, K.M., Morris, D.L., Kolcaba, K., & Winkelman, C. (2018). Comfort and fluid retention in adult patients receiving hemodialysis. Nephrology Nursing Journal, 45(1), 25-33, 60.

*************************************************************************************

Barutcu, C.D. & Mert, H. (2016). Effect of support group intervention applied to the caregivers of individuals with heart failure on caregiver outcomes. Holistic Nursing Practice30, 272-282. https://doi.org/10.1097/HNP.0000000000000164

************************************************************************************

Miller Westmoreland C., & Wojnar, D. (2019). Breastfeeding support guided by Swanson’s theory of caring. MCN, American Journal of Maternal Child Nursing44, 351-356. https://doi.org/10.1097/NMC.0000000000000570

*************************************************************************************

Turan Kavradim, S., & Canli Ozer, Z.  (2020). The effect of education and telephone follow-up intervention based on the Roy Adaptation Model after myocardial infarction: Randomised controlled trial. Scandinavian Journal of Caring Science, 34, 247–260.  https://doi.org/10.1111/scs.12793

Purpose

The purpose of the graded collaborative discussions is to engage faculty and students in an interactive dialogue to assist the student in organizing, integrating, applying, and critically appraising knowledge regarding advanced nursing practice. Scholarly information obtained from credible sources as well as professional communication are required. Application of information to professional experiences promotes the analysis and use of principles, knowledge, and information learned and related to real-life professional situations. Meaningful dialogue among faculty and students fosters the development of a learning community as ideas, perspectives, and knowledge are shared.

Due Date

The initial posting to the graded collaborative discussions is due by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT. Peer and faculty responses are due by Sunday, 11:59 p.m. MT. All posts for Week 8 are due by the close of class on Saturday, 11:59 p.m. MT. Please note that the late assignment policy does not apply to the collaborative discussions.

Discussion Criteria

Review the discussion criteria:

Application of Course Knowledge

· The student post contributes unique perspectives or insights gleaned from personal experience or examples from the healthcare field. The student must accurately and fully discuss the topic for the week in addition to providing personal or professional examples. The student must completely answer the entire initial question.

Engagement in Meaningful Dialogue

· The student responds to a student peer and course faculty to further dialogue.

· Peer Response: The student responds substantively to at least one topic-related post by a student peer. A substantive post adds

Assignment Nursing Theory Essay

content or insights or asks a question that will add to the learning experience and/or generate discussion.

· A post of “I agree” with a repeat of the other student’s post does not count as a substantive post. A collection of shallow posts does not equal a substantive post.

· The peer response must occur on a separate day from the initial posting.

· The peer response must occur before Sunday, 11:59 p.m. MT.

· The peer response does not require a scholarly citation and reference unless the information is summarized and/or direct quotes are used, in which APA style standards then apply.

· Faculty Response: The student responds substantively to at least one question by course faculty. The faculty question may be directed to the student, to another student, or to the entire class.

· A post of “I agree” with a repeat of the faculty’s post does not count as a substantive post. A collection of shallow posts does not equal a substantive post.

· The faculty response must occur on a separate day from the initial posting.

· Responses to the faculty member must occur by Sunday, 11:59 p.m. MT.

· This response does not require a scholarly citation and reference unless the information is summarized and/or direct quotes are used, in which APA style standards then apply.

Integration of Evidence

· The student post provides support from a minimum of at least three (3) sources which may include assigned readings, or weekly module content, or outside scholarly sources. The scholarly source when used is: 1) evidence-based, 2) scholarly in nature, 3) published within the last 5 years, and 4) an in-text citation. The student initial response to the graded discussion must include at least 1 source. Responses to peer and/or faculty, citations and references are included when information is summarized/synthesized and/or direct quotes are used, in which APA style standards then apply.

· It is important that student utilizes support from the literature that is grounded in the literature providing sources relevant to the discussion posting. One source may come from the online weekly content.

· Scholarly Sources

· Two (2) scholarly sources should be used in the discussion board assignments across the week.

· These include peer-reviewed publications.

· Textbooks are not considered scholarly sources. However, in some assignments, support from textbooks may be used on a limited basis when accompanied with additional scholarly sources if specified in the assignment guidelines or with instructor approval.

· Scholarly sources may be present in the weekly readings and students may choose to utilize these.

· Wikipedia, Wikis, .com website or blogs should not be used.

· Sources should be no more than five years old unless they are historical or seminal references or approved by your instructor.

· Literature Sources:

· Grey literature is scholarly but not peer-reviewed. These resources can be used but do not meet requirements for peer-reviewed sources.

· Refer to the assignment guidelines to determine which grey literature sources (e.g., professional organization website, white papers) are appropriate to be used for discussions or assignments and would constitute receiving full credit for using this resource in the paper or discussion.

· Government reports are actually part of the grey literature – they are not peer reviewed and the government’s main purpose is not the publication of literature.

· Internet resources on dissertations, a form of grey literature, provide additional views on the scholarly level of this literature

· Papers written for Chamberlain College of Nursing should be the student’s original work and contain no more than one short quotation for every three pages or as designated in the assignment guidelines. Quotations should be avoided if possible.

(Chamberlain Guidelines for Writing Professional Papers, 2020)

Professionalism in Communication

· The post presents information in logical, meaningful, and understandable sequence, and is clearly relevant to the discussion topic. Grammar, spelling, and/or punctuation are accurate.

Wednesday Participation Requirement

· The student provides a substantive response to the graded discussion question(s) or topic(s), posted by the course faculty (not a response to a peer), by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT of each week.

Total Participation Requirement

· The student provides at least three substantive posts (one to the initial question or topic, one to a student peer, and one to a faculty question) on two different days during the week.

 

Rubric

Discussion Criteria

Highest Level Performance: A Very Good or High Level of Performance: B Acceptable Level of Performance: C Failing Level of Performance: F
Left blank 10 points 9 points 8 points 0 points
Application of Course Knowledge:

Answers initial discussion question(s)/ topic(s), demonstrating knowledge, understanding of weekly concepts.

Addresses all aspects of the initial discussion question(s) applying experiences, knowledge, and understanding. Addresses most aspects of the initial discussion question(s) applying experiences, knowledge, and understanding.

 

Addresses some aspects of the initial discussion question(s) applying experiences, knowledge, and understanding.

 

Does not address the initial question(s).

 

Engagement in Meaningful Dialogue with Peers and Faculty:

The student responds to a student peer and course faculty to further dialogue.

Responds to student peer AND course faculty furthering dialogue by providing more information and clarification, adding much depth to discussion. Responds to a student peer AND course faculty furthering the dialogue by adding some depth to the discussion. Responds to a student peer and/or course faculty, adding minimal depth to the discussion. No response post to another student or course faculty.
Integration of Evidence:

Includes assigned readings, or weekly module content, or outside scholarly sources.

Includes three sources to support weekly concepts.

A scholarly source is defined on page 2 of these guidelines. These sources may be evident across the 3 postings.

Sources are credited.*

At least 3 sources to support posts.

Sources are credited.*

At least 2 sources to support posts.

Sources are credited.*

At least 1 source to support posts.

No scholarly source provided to support posts.

 

 

Professionalism in Communication Presents information using clear, concise language in organized manner (0-1 error patterns in English grammar, spelling, syntax, and punctuation). Presents information using clear, concise language in organized manner (2-3 error patterns in English grammar, spelling, syntax, and punctuation). Presents information using understandable language; information is not organized

4-5 error patterns in English grammar, spelling, syntax, and punctuation).

Presents information that is not clear, logical, professional, or organized; reader has difficulty understanding the post; 6 or more error patterns in English grammar, spelling, syntax, punctuation).

 

 

Participation

Left blank 5 points 0 points
Participation Wednesday Response: Responds to initial discussion question(s) by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT. Posts substantive response to initial discussion question(s) by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT. Does not post substantive response to initial discussion question(s) by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT.
Total Participation

Responses: Participates in discussion thread at least three times on at least 2 different days.

Posts in discussion at least three times

AND on two different days during discussion week.

Posts fewer than three times

OR does not participate on at least two different days during discussion week.

 

NOTE: To receive credit for a week’s discussion, students may begin posting no earlier than the Sunday immediately before each week opens. Unless otherwise specified, access to most weeks begins on Sunday at 12:01 a.m. MT, and that week’s assignments are due by the next Sunday by 11:59 p.m. MT. Week 8 opens at 12:01 a.m. MT Sunday and closes at 11:59 p.m. MT Saturday.

A zero is the lowest score that a student can be assigned.

Faculty may submit any collaborative discussion posting to Turnitin in order to verify originality.

 

* Using APA style and formatting, in text citations are included for all sources. Matching references are included for all in-text citations. Due to the formatting constraints of Canvas, references included in the discussion must include complete information. Canvas will not allow a hanging indent; it is not required.

Rubric Criteria

Total110 points

Criterion

1. Unsatisfactory

2. Less Than Satisfactory

3. Satisfactory

4. Good

5. Excellent

Selection of a Specific Technology Explored in This Course

Selection of a Specific Technology Explored in This Course

0 points

Selection of a specific technology explored in this course is not present.

8.8 points

Selection of a specific technology explored in this course is marginal or incomplete.

9.68 points

Selection of a specific technology explored in this course is perfunctory.

10.12 points

Selection of a specific technology explored in this course is present. Discussion is convincing. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.

11 points

Selection of a specific technology explored in this course is present. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.

Definition of Each Element of the Specified Technology Identified and Description of How Each Elemen

Definition of Each Element of the Specified Technology Identified and Description of How Each Element Would Be Measured or Evaluated

0 points

A definition of each element of the specified technology identified and a description of how each element would be measured or evaluated are not present.

13.2 points

A definition of each element of the specified technology identified and a description of how each element would be measured or evaluated are present but are marginal or incomplete.

14.52 points

A definition of each element of the specified technology identified and a description of how each element would be measured or evaluated are present but at a perfunctory level.

15.18 points

A definition of each element of the specified technology identified and a description of how each element would be measured or evaluated are present in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.

16.5 points

A definition of each element of the specified technology identified and a description of how each element would be measured or evaluated are present in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.

Documentation of Sources

Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)

0 points

Sources are not documented.

4.4 points

Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.

4.84 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.

5.06 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.

5.5 points

Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

0 points

Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.

4.4 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.

4.84 points

Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.

5.06 points

Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.

5.5 points

Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.

Argument Logic and Construction

Argument Logic and Construction

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.

7.04 points

Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.

7.74 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.

8.1 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.

8.8 points

Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.

List With Support for Three Elements of the Specified Technology That Will Be Used to Evaluate the U

List With Support for Three Elements of the Specified Technology That Will Be Used to Evaluate the User-Technology Interface Using the Course Content

0 points

A list with support of three elements of the specified technology that will be used to evaluate the user-technology interface using the course content is not present.

13.2 points

A list with support of three elements of the specified technology that will be used to evaluate the user-technology interface using the course content is present but is marginal or incomplete.

14.52 points

A list with support of three elements of the specified technology that will be used to evaluate the user-technology interface using the course content is present but at a perfunctory level.

15.18 points

A list with support of three elements of the specified technology that will be used to evaluate the user-technology interface using the course content is present in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.

16.5 points

A list with support of three elements of the specified technology that will be used to evaluate the user-technology interface using the course content is present in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.

Purpose

Purpose

0 points

Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.

6.16 points

Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.

6.78 points

Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.

7.08 points

Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.

7.7 points

Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.

Proposal That Employs Support From the Literature to Provide Practicable Suggestions for Improvement

Proposal That Employs Support From the Literature to Provide Practicable Suggestions for Improvement in the Use of Each Element of the Specified Technology

0 points

A proposal that employs support from the literature to provide practicable suggestions for improvement in the use of each element of the specified technology is not present.

13.2 points

A proposal that employs support from the literature to provide practicable suggestions for improvement in the use of each element of the specified technology is present but is marginal or incomplete.

14.52 points

A proposal that employs support from the literature to provide practicable suggestions for improvement in the use of each element of the specified technology is present but at a perfunctory level.

15.18 points

A proposal that employs support from the literature to provide practicable suggestions for improvement in the use of each element of the specified technology is present in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.

16.5 points

A proposal that employs support from the literature to provide practicable suggestions for improvement in the use of each element of the specified technology is present in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.

Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)

Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)

0 points

Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.

4.4 points

Template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent.

4.84 points

Template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.

5.06 points

Template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style.

5.5 points

All format elements are correct.

Assessment Performed Using Elements of User-Technology Interface or Human Factor Methods to Determin

Assessment Performed Using Elements of User-Technology Interface or Human Factor Methods to Determine Existing Functionality of the Specified Technology

0 points

An assessment using elements of user-technology interface or human factor methods to determine existing functionality of the specified technology is not present.

13.2 points

An assessment using elements of user-technology interface or human factor methods to determine existing functionality of the specified technology is marginal or incomplete.

14.52 points

An assessment using elements of user-technology interface or human factor methods to determine existing functionality of the specified technology is present but at a perfunctory level.

15.18 points

An assessment using elements of user-technology interface or human factor methods to determine existing functionality of the specified technology is present in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.

16.5 points

An assessment using elements of user-technology interface or human factor methods to determine existing functionality of the specified technology is present in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.

0 replies

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *