Discussion Rubric Levels of Achievement Outstandi ng Performan ce Excellent Performan ce Competent Performanc e Room for Improveme nt Poor Performance 27 to 29 points -Main posting addresses all criteria with 75% of post exceptional depth and breadth supported by credible references 24 to 26 points Main posting meets expectations. All criteria are addressed with 50% containing good breadth and depth. 21 to 23 points Main posting addresses most of the criteria. One to two criterion are not addressed or superficially addressed. 0 to 20 points Main posting does not address all of criteria, superficially addresses criteria. Two or more criteria are not addressed. Course Requireme nts and Attendance 20 to 20 points -Responds to two colleagues’ with posts that are reflective, are justified with credible sources, and ask questions that extend the discussion. 18 to 19 points -Responds to two colleagues’ with posts that are reflective, are justified with credible sources, and ask questions that extend the discussion. 16 to 17 points Responds to a minimum of two colleagues’ posts, are reflective, and ask questions that extend the discussion. O ne post is justified by a credible source. 14 to 15 points Responds to less than two colleagues’ posts. Posts are on topic, may have some depth, or questions. Ma y extend the discussion. No credible sources are cited 0 to 13 points Responds to less than two colleagues’ posts. Posts may not be on topic, lack depth, do not pose questions that extend the discussion Scholarly Writing Quality 30 to 30 points -The main posting clearly addresses the discussion 27 to 29 points -The main posting clearly addresses the discussion 24 to 26 points -The main posting clearly addresses the discussion criteria and is 21 to 23 points -The main posting is not clearly addressing the discussion criteria and is 0 to 20 points -The main posting is disorganized and has one reference that may lack credibility and Criteria 30 to 30 points -Main posting addresses all criteria with 75% of post exceptional depth and breadth supported by credible references ContentMain Posting Levels of Achievement Criteria Outstandi ng Performan ce criteria and is written concisely. The main posting is cited with more than two credible references that adhere to the correct format per the APA Manual 6th Edition. No spelling or grammatical errors. ***The use of scholarly sources or real life experiences needs to be included to deepen the discussion and earn points in reply to fellow students. Professional Communicati on Effectivenes s 20 to 20 points Communicat ion is professional and respectful to Excellent Performan ce Competent Performanc e Room for Improveme nt criteria and is written concisely. The main posting is cited with more than two credible references that adhere to the correct format per the APA Manual 6th Edition. No spelling or grammatical errors. written concisely. The main posting is cited with a minimum of two current credible references that adhere to the correct format per the APA Manual 6th Edition. Cont ains one to two spelling or grammatical errors. not written concisely. The main posting is cited with less than two credible references that may lack credibility and/or do not adhere to the correct format per the APA Manual 6th Edition. Cont ains more than two spelling or grammatical errors. does not adhere to the correct format per the APA Manual 6th Edition or has zero credible references. Cont ains more than two spelling or grammatical errors. 14 to 15 points 0 to 13 points Communicat ion may lack professional tone or be disrespectful 18 to 19 points Communicat ion is professional and respectful to 16 to 17 points Communicat ion is professional and respectful to Communicat ion is professional and respectful to Poor Performance colleagues and response to faculty questions are answered if posed. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas effectively written in Standard Edited English Responses posted in the discussion demonstrate effective professional communicati on through deep reflective discussion which leads to an exchange of ideas and focus on the weekly discussion topic. colleagues. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas effectively written in Standard Edited English Responses posted in the discussion demonstrate effective professional communicati on through deep reflective discussion which leads to an exchange of ideas and focus on the weekly discussion topic . Responses are cited with at least one credible reference per post and a probing question that extends the discussion. Adheres to the correct format per the APA Manual 6th Edition. No spelling or grammatical errors. colleagues. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas effectively written in Standard Edited English. Responses posted in the discussion demonstrate effective professional communicati on through deep reflective discussion which leads to an exchange of ideas and focus on the weekly discussion topic. Responses are cited with at least one credible and/or contain probing questions that extends the discussion. Adheres to the correct format per the APA Manual 6th Edition. May have one to two spelling or grammatical errors. colleagues. Provides opinions that may not be concise or ideas not effectively written in Standard Edited English. Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communicati on that does not extend the discussion, leads to an exchange of ideas and/or not focused on the weekly discussion topic. Responses are not cited and/or do not contain a probing question. May not adhere to the correct format per the APA Manual 6th Edition. May have more than two spelling or grammatical errors. to colleagues. Provides opinions that may not be concise or ideas not effectively written in Standard Edited English Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communicati on through discussion that does not extend the discussion, do not lead to an exchange of ideas and/or not focused on the weekly discussion topic. Responses are not cited and do not contain a probing question. May not adhere to the correct format per the APA Manual 6th Edition. May have multiple spelling or grammatical errors. Timely Submission 0 to 0 points All criteria met: Initial post submitted on time. Response to two peer initial posts. Respo nse on 3 separate days. -5 to 0 points 5 points deducted for responding to less than two peers or 5 points deducted for responding less than three days -10 to -5 points 5 points deducted for responding to less than two peers and 5 points deducted for responding less than three days -10 to 10 points 10 points deducted for Initial post submitted late -20 to -15 points Initial post submitted late and 5 points deducted for responding to less than two peers and/ or 5 points deducted for responding less than three d Name: NURS_5050_Week_02_Discussion_Rubric • • Grid View List View Show Descriptions Main Posting: Response to the discussion question is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.-Outstanding Performance 44 (44%) - 44 (44%) Excellent Performance 40 (40%) - 43 (43%) Competent Performance 35 (35%) - 39 (39%) Proficient Performance 31 (31%) - 34 (34%) Room for Improvement 0 (0%) - 30 (30%) Main Posting: Writing-Outstanding Performance 6 (6%) - 6 (6%) Excellent Performance 5.5 (5.5%) - 5.5 (5.5%) Competent Performance 5 (5%) - 5 (5%) Proficient Performance 4.5 (4.5%) - 4.5 (4.5%) Room for Improvement 0 (0%) - 4 (4%) Main Posting: Timely and full participation-Outstanding Performance 10 (10%) - 10 (10%) Excellent Performance 0 (0%) - 0 (0%) Competent Performance 0 (0%) - 0 (0%) Proficient Performance 0 (0%) - 0 (0%) Room for Improvement 0 (0%) - 0 (0%) First Response: Post to colleague's main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.-Outstanding Performance 9 (9%) - 9 (9%) Excellent Performance 8.5 (8.5%) - 8.5 (8.5%) Competent Performance 7.5 (7.5%) - 8 (8%) Proficient Performance 6.5 (6.5%) - 7 (7%) Room for Improvement 0 (0%) - 6 (6%) First Response: Writing-Outstanding Performance 6 (6%) - 6 (6%) Excellent Performance 5.5 (5.5%) - 5.5 (5.5%) Competent Performance 5 (5%) - 5 (5%) Proficient Performance 4.5 (4.5%) - 4.5 (4.5%) Room for Improvement 0 (0%) - 4 (4%) First Response: Timely and full participation-Outstanding Performance 5 (5%) - 5 (5%) Excellent Performance 0 (0%) - 0 (0%) Competent Performance 0 (0%) - 0 (0%) Proficient Performance 0 (0%) - 0 (0%) Room for Improvement 0 (0%) - 0 (0%) Second Response: Post to colleague's main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.-Outstanding Performance 9 (9%) - 9 (9%) Excellent Performance 8.5 (8.5%) - 8.5 (8.5%) Competent Performance 7.5 (7.5%) - 8 (8%) Proficient Performance 6.5 (6.5%) - 7 (7%) Room for Improvement 0 (0%) - 6 (6%) Second Response: Writing-Outstanding Performance 6 (6%) - 6 (6%) Excellent Performance 5.5 (5.5%) - 5.5 (5.5%) Competent Performance 5 (5%) - 5 (5%) Proficient Performance 4.5 (4.5%) - 4.5 (4.5%) Room for Improvement 0 (0%) - 4 (4%) Second Response: Timely and full participation-Outstanding Performance 5 (5%) - 5 (5%) Excellent Performance 0 (0%) - 0 (0%) Competent Performance 0 (0%) - 0 (0%) Proficient Performance 0 (0%) - 0 (0%) Room for Improvement 0 (0%) - 0 (0%) Learning Resources Required Readings Knickman, J. R., & Kovner, A. R. (Eds.). (2015). Health care delivery in the united states (11th ed.). New York, NY: Springer Publishing. • Chapter 6, “Public Health: A Transformation for the 21st Century” (pp. 108–117) This section of Chapter 6 outlines the roles of various government health agencies, as well as the powers and responsibilities of state versus federal institutions. • Chapter 12, “Health Care Costs and Value” (pp. 253–295) Chapter 16, “The Future of Health Care Delivery and Health Policy” (pp. 333–342) These chapters relate the recent history of health care reform in the United States, beginning with the federal health reform struggles in the 1990s and leading up to the passage of President Obama’s Affordable Care Act. • National Academy of Sciences. (2011). The future of nursing: Leading change, advancing health. Institute of Medicine of the National Academies (2011). The Future of Nursing: Leading Change, Advancing Health. Copyright 2011 by the National Academies Press. Reprinted by permission. • Chapter 4, “Transforming Education” Read Chapters 4 and 7, as they will inform the Week 2 Discussion. Chapter 4 addresses the “key message” that nurses should obtain high levels of education and training through a better education system that encourages continuous academic progression, and it reviews various levels of nursing education, from undergraduate and graduate programs to the professional setting. National Academy of Sciences. (2011). The future of nursing: Leading change, advancing health. Institute of Medicine of the National Academies (2011). The Future of Nursing: Leading Change, Advancing Health. Copyright 2011 by the National Academies Press. Reprinted by permission. • Chapter 7, “Recommendations and Research Priorities” Read Chapters 4 and 7, as they will inform the Week 2 Discussion. Chapter 7 supplies context surrounding the recommendations of the Committee on the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Initiative on the Future of Nursing. The chapter specifies the committee’s scope and focus, the evidence that supports its recommendations, the costs associated with the recommendations, and methods of implementing recommendations. Responsible Reform for the Middle Class. (n.d.) The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Retrieved from http://dpc.senate.gov/healthreformbill/healthbill04.pdf This website provides a full summary and updates on the state of the Senate’s health bill. Required Media Laureate Education (Producer). (2012e). Introduction to healthcare delivery, part II: Healthcare reform. Baltimore, MD: Author. Note: The approximate length of this media piece is 16 minutes. Accessible player Optional Resources Koller, C., Brennan, T., & Bailit, M. (2010). Rhode Island’s novel experiment to rebuild primary care from the insurance side. Health Affairs, 29, 941–947. Retrieved from the Walden Library databases. This article describes the plans of Rhode Island’s Office of the Health Insurance Commissioner to strengthen and expand primary care within the state by increasing medical expenses devoted to primary care. American Hospital Association. (2011). Retrieved from http://www.aha.org/ This is the website for this national organization that represents and serves all types of hospitals, health care networks, and their patients and communities. Democratic Policy Committee (n.d.a). Affordable care act: Implementation timeline. Retrieved from http://dpc.senate.gov/healthreformbill/healthbill65.pdf This article provides information on the implementation of the Affordable Care Act from the Democratic Policy Committee. Democratic Policy Committee (n.d.b). The patient protection and affordable care act: Summary of health care and revenue provisions. Retrieved from http://dpc.senate.gov/healthreformbill/healthbill62.pdf This document outlines how the historic Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act will give 32 million Americans access to affordable health care. Democratic Policy Committee. (2010). The benefits of health reform (state-by-state reports). Retrieved from http://dpc.senate.gov/dpcdoc.cfm?doc_name=sr-111-2-41 Through this website, visitors can learn how health reform will affect them individually by state. Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation: Health Reform Source. (2012). Retrieved from http://kff.org/health-reform/ This website provides an in-depth analysis of the many aspects and issues influencing health reform.
Purchase answer to see full attachment