Which is Not a quality needed when working with a child to help solve a problem with a peer?
a. Firmness
b. Politeness
c. Empathy
d. Persistence
The post Which is Not a quality needed when working with a child to help solve a problem with a peer? appeared first on homeworkhandlers.com.
Changes in culture and technology have resulted in patient populations that are often well informed and educated, even before consulting or considering a healthcare need delivered by a health professional. Fueled by this, health professionals are increasingly involving patients in treatment decisions. However, this often comes with challenges, as illnesses and treatments can become complex.
What has your experience been with patient involvement in treatment or healthcare decisions?
In this Discussion, you will share your experiences and consider the impact of patient involvement (or lack of involvement). You will also consider the use of a patient decision aid to inform best practices for patient care and healthcare decision making.
To Prepare:
NOTE: To ensure compliance with HIPAA rules, please DO NOT use the patient’s real name or any information that might identify the patient or organization/practice.
Post a brief description of the situation you experienced and explain how incorporating or not incorporating patient preferences and values impacted the outcome of their treatment plan. Be specific and provide examples. Then, explain how including patient preferences and values might impact the trajectory of the situation and how these were reflected in the treatment plan. Finally, explain the value of the patient decision aid you selected and how it might contribute to effective decision making, both in general and in the experience you described. Describe how you might use this decision aid inventory in your professional practice or personal life.
Rubric:
Levels of Achievement:Excellent 45 (45%) – 50 (50%) Answers all parts of the discussion question(s) expectations with reflective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.
Supported by at least three current, credible sources.
Written clearly and concisely with no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.Good 40 (40%) – 44 (44%) Responds to the discussion question(s) and is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.
At least 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth.
Supported by at least three credible sources.
Written clearly and concisely with one or no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.Fair 35 (35%) – 39 (39%) Responds to some of the discussion question(s).
One or 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 two credible sources.
Written somewhat concisely; may contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors.
Contains some APA formatting errors.Poor 0 (0%) – 34 (34%) Does not respond to the discussion question(s) adequately.
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 one or no credible sources.
Not written clearly or concisely.
Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors.
Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style.Feedback:
Levels of Achievement:Excellent 10 (10%) – 10 (10%) Posts main post by day 3.Good 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Fair 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Poor 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Does not post by day 3.Feedback:
Levels of Achievement:Excellent 17 (17%) – 18 (18%) Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.
Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.
Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.Good 15 (15%) – 16 (16%) Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are 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.Fair 13 (13%) – 14 (14%) Response is on topic and may have some depth.
Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.
Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.Poor 0 (0%) – 12 (12%) Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are missing.
No credible sources are cited.Feedback:
Levels of Achievement:Excellent 16 (16%) – 17 (17%) Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.
Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.
Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.Good 14 (14%) – 15 (15%) Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are 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.Fair 12 (12%) – 13 (13%) Response is on topic and may have some depth.
Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.
Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.Poor 0 (0%) – 11 (11%) Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are missing.
No credible sources are cited.Feedback:
Levels of Achievement:Excellent 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days.Good 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Fair 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Poor 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
As a DNP-prepared nurse, you will likely encounter many different methods of disseminating the findings and implications of an evidence-based project. Each method has unique benefits. As discussed in this course, oral presentations can be an effective medium for delivering the findings of DNP projects.
For this Discussion, consider what makes an oral presentation effective. How might presentation approaches vary for an academic presentation versus a practice-based presentation?
To prepare:
By tomorrow Wednesday 7/17, write a minimum of 550-word essay in APA format with at least three scholarly references that include the level one headers below:
Post a cohesive response that addresses the following:
1) Share three or more insights related to presentation approaches.
2) Explain how this information may be used to promote the delivery of an effective DNP Project presentation. Be sure to note any considerations related to the intended audience that are important.
Required Readings
Oermann, M. H., & Hays, J. C. (2016). Writing for publication in nursing (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Springer Publishing Company.
· Chapter 14, “Final Paper and Submission to Journal”
In this chapter, the authors describe the steps in preparing the components of a final paper to submit to a journal. The chapter provides examples of the components and a checklist.
· Chapter 15, “Editorial Review Process”
This chapter explains the editorial review process from the point at which a paper is received to the final editorial decision.
· Chapter 16, “Publishing Process”
Chapter 16 explores the publishing process that begins with the acceptance of a paper.
Forsyth, D. M., Wright, T. L., Scherb, C. A., & Gaspar, P. M. (2010). Disseminating evidence-based practice projects: Poster design and evaluation. Clinical Scholars Review, 3(1), 14–21.
This article provides suggestions for EBP poster creation and describes the development process of a Poster Evaluation Rubric for Evidence-Based Practice.
Hand, H. (2010). Reflections on preparing a poster for an RCN conference. Nurse Researcher, 17(2), 52–59.
In this article, the author describes the planning, preparation, and presentation of a poster she developed for an RCN annual nursing research conference.
Ploeg, J., Skelly, J., Rowan, M., Edwards, N., Davies, B., Grinspun, D., & . . . Downey, A. (2010). The role of nursing best practice champions in diffusing practice guidelines: A mixed methods study. Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing, 7(4), 238–251.
This article details a study that sought to determine how nurses championing a best practice influence the diffusion of Best Practice Guideline recommendations.
Walden University. (n.d.). Disseminating your research. Retrieved from https://crq.adobeconnect.com/researchtutorials/default/CONTENT/Disseminating_Your_Research/welcome.html
This presentation provides a tutorial for those who wish to disseminate their research. It discusses reasons for and methods of disseminating your research, as well as venues for publication and key considerations.
In this module, we learned about the rarity of what Aristotle calls “soul friendship” or what Emerson calls “divine” friendship. Most philosophers concur that cultivating such a friendship requires an openness to it, an awareness that it will not likely occur, and a stringent honesty and affection.
In at least 250 words total, please answer each of the following, drawing upon your reading materials and your personal insight:
Evaluation Criteria
Your initial post should be at least 250 words and must substantively integrate the assigned readings from the module with proper APA style formatting.
The post In this module, we learned about the rarity of what Aristotle calls “soul friendship” or what Emerson calls “divine” friendship appeared first on homeworkhandlers.com.
We are experienced and have access to ample research materials to guarantee quality A+ papers. Our Professional Writers can handle all subjects and deliver your papers on time.
For any questions, feedback, or comments, we have an ethical customer support team that is always waiting on the line for your inquiries.
Send us an E-mail: support@homeworkhandlers.com or Call us: +1 (518)-934-6741
