NUR 590 Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal Evaluation Plan GCU
NUR 590 Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal Evaluation Plan GCU
NUR 590 Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal Evaluation Plan GCU
The systematic evaluation plan refers to a faculty-owned, faculty-created, and a faculty-driven document that deliver or conveys the deliberate evaluation and assessment of all the end-of-program student learning outcomes, and most importantly, the faculty’s data-driven decisions to advance the achievement of learners (Espinosa, 2016). Systematic evaluation consists of various components that are used to direct different activities when it comes to the learning processes. In every educational organization, systematic evaluation is important as it aids in both the accreditation and reaccreditation processes.
Components of Systematic Evaluation
Some of the components of the systematic evaluation plan include study selection, which is often done according to the predefined eligibility criteria. The second component is the systematic and extensive searchers, which involves the identification of all the relevant published and unpublished literatures (Espinosa, 2016). Assessment of the risk of bias is the third components of the systematic evaluation plan and it involves the evaluation of the risks included in various studies. The fourth component is the presentation of the findings which is often done in an impartial and independent manner (Kettlewell & Henry, 2019). The final aspect of the systematic evaluation plan is the engagement in the discussion of the limitations of the evidence as well as the reviews. The implementation of all the components of the systematic evaluation plan often leads to the successful faculty activities.
The systematic evaluation plan is used to assure the needs of the stakeholder and the schools are met. With
the evaluation processes, the experts involved often ensure the incorporation of different items that are essential in the education processes (Kettlewell & Henry, 2019). Through following the above components, the experts involved usually ensure the incorporation of all the needs of the stakeholders. The involvement of the faculty in the systematic evaluation plan is essential because they may reveal the necessary requirements in the development processes.
Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS:NUR 590 Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal Evaluation Plan GCU
References
Espinosa, E. O. C. (2016). Systemic knowledge-based assessment of higher education programs. Hersey, NY: IGI Global.
Kettlewell, J. S., & Henry, R. J. (2019). Increasing the competitive edge in math and science. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Education.
Assessment Description
In 750-1,000 words, develop an evaluation plan to be included in your final evidence-based practice project proposal. You will use the evaluation plan in the Topic 8 assignment, during which you will synthesize the various aspects of your project into a final paper detailing your evidence-based practice project proposal.
Provide the following criteria in the evaluation, making sure it is comprehensive and concise:
- Discuss the expected outcomes for your evidence-based practice project proposal.
- Review the various data collection tools associated with your selected research design and select one data collection tool that would be effective for your research design. Explain how this tool is valid, reliable, and applicable.
- Select a statistical test for your project and explain why it is best suited for the tool you choose.
- Describe what methods you will apply to your data collection tool and how the outcomes will be measured and evaluated based on the tool you selected.
- Propose strategies that will be taken if outcomes do not provide positive or expected results.
- Describe the plans to maintain, extend, revise, and discontinue a proposed solution after implementation.
Refer to the “Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal – Assignment Overview” document for an overview of the evidence-based practice project proposal assignments.
You are required to cite a minimum of five peer-reviewed sources to complete this assignment. Sources must be published within the last 5 years and appropriate for the assignment criteria and nursing content.
Complete the “APA Writing Checklist” to ensure that your paper adheres to APA style and formatting criteria and general guidelines for academic writing. Include the completed checklist as an appendix at the end of your paper.
Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.
Get Writing nursing essay Help
This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. A link to the LopesWrite technical support articles is located in Class Resources if you need assistance.
The spirit of inquiry is defined as an insatiable curiosity that guides both learning and practice. Spirit of inquiry practices can have a significant positive impact on nurses. In nursing, the spirit of inquiry will prompt questions, challenge established and existing practices, and seek new solutions to problems. When using evidence-based practice (EBP) to address a clinical problem, it is critical to ask the right questions in the right way, obtain the best available evidence, and determine what practice changes are required (National League for Nursing, 2021). Developing nurses with an inquiry mindset within a culture that promotes a systematic approach to asking clinical questions is a critical component of the EBP journey. When conducting an evidence-based study or question, using the spirit of inquiry supports the ongoing curiosity of evidence that would dictate a clinical decision. As a nurse, it is your responsibility to determine whether an intervention is necessary, beneficial to the client, and supported by evidence-based practice. Clinical reasoning or judgment is used by nurses and members of collaborative teams to solve clinical problems. The spirit of greater exit will be established, and the first step of the evidence-based process will be launched. In predictable patient care settings, nurses will use evidence, tradition, and patient preferences to promote optimal health status in collaboration with other members of the health care team.
Resources
Collapse All
Evaluation of Bedside Shift Report: A Research and Evidence-Based Practice Initiative
Read “Evaluation of Bedside Shift Report: A Research and Evidence-Based Practice Initiative,” by Schirm, Banz, Swartz, and Richmo
… Read More
https://www-sciencedirect-com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/science/article/pii/S0897189717301118#s0030
Reliability and Validity: Linking Evidence to Practice
Read “Reliability and Validity: Linking Evidence to Practice,” by Kamper, from Journal of Orthopaedic and Sports Physical The
… Read More
https://doi-org.lopes.idm.oclc.org/10.2519/jospt.2019.0702
Comparing Clinical Significance and Statistical Significance – Similarities and Differences
Read “Comparing Clinical Significance and Statistical Significance – Similarities and Differences,” by Zbrog (2021), located on t
… Read More
https://www.mhaonline.com/faq/clinical-vs-statistical-significance
Advanced Practice Nursing: Essential Knowledge for the Profession
Review Chapter 20 in Advanced Practice Nursing: Essential Knowledge for the Profession.
View Resource
Research, Evidence-Based Practice, and Clinical Improvement/Innovation Posters
Read “Research, Evidence-Based Practice, and Clinical Improvement/Innovation Posters” (2015), from AORN Journal.
https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=109809571&site=eds-live&scope=site
A Practical Definition of Evidence-Based Practice for Nursing
Read “A Practical Definition of Evidence-Based Practice for Nursing,” by Stannard, from Journal of PeriAnesthesia Nursing
… Read More
https://www-sciencedirect-com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/science/article/pii/S1089947219303181
Evidence-Based Practice Educational Intervention Studies: A Systematic Review of What Is Taught and How It I s Measured
Read “Evidence-Based Practice Educational Intervention Studies: A Systematic Review of What is Taught and How it is Measured,” by
… Read More
https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://www-proquest-com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/scholarly-journals/evidence-based-practice-educational-intervention/docview/2089734479/se-2?accountid=7374
Evidence-Based Practice in Nursing and Healthcare: A Guide to Best Practice
Read Chapter 4 and review Chapter 3 in Evidence-Based Practice in Nursing and Healthcare: A Guide to Best Practice.
View Resource
Advanced Nursing Research: From Theory to Practice
Review Chapter 25 in Advanced Nursing Research: From Theory to Practice.
View Resource
Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal: Evaluation Plan – Rubric
Collapse All
Expected Outcomes for Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal
14.4 points
Criteria Description
Expected Outcomes for Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal
- 5: Excellent
14.4 points
Expected outcomes for the evidence-based practice project proposal are discussed. Thorough explanations and strong supporting research are provided.
- 4: Good
13.25 points
Expected outcomes for the evidence-based practice project proposal are discussed. Some detail is needed for clarity or support.
- 3: Satisfactory
12.67 points
Expected outcomes for the evidence-based practice project proposal are summarized. More information is needed.
- 2: Less Than Satisfactory
11.52 points
Some expected outcomes for the evidence-based practice project proposal are only partially outlined.
- 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Expected outcomes for the evidence-based practice project proposal are not discussed.
Data Collection Tools
12 points
Criteria Description
Data Collection Tools
- 5: Excellent
12 points
A data collection tool is selected and a well-supported explanation for why the tool is valid, reliable, and applicable and would be effective for the research design is presented.
- 4: Good
11.04 points
A data collection tool is selected, and an explanation for why the tool would be effective for the research design is presented. An explanation for the tool is valid, reliable, and applicable. Some detail is needed for clarity or support.
- 3: Satisfactory
10.56 points
A data collection tool is selected, and a summary for why the tool would be effective for the research design is presented. A general explanation for the tool is valid, reliable, and applicable, but more information and support are needed.
- 2: Less Than Satisfactory
9.6 points
A data collection tool is selected, but it is unclear why the tool would be effective for the research design. A valid, reliable, and applicable explanation for the tool is incomplete.
- 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
A data collection tool is not discussed.
Statistical Test for Project
12 points
Criteria Description
Statistical Test for Project
- 5: Excellent
12 points
A statistical test is selected, and a well-supported explanation for why the test is best suited for the tool is clearly presented.
- 4: Good
11.04 points
A statistical test is selected, and an explanation for why the test is best suited for the tool is presented. Some detail is needed for clarity or support.
- 3: Satisfactory
10.56 points
A statistical test is selected, and a summary for why the test is best suited for the tool is presented. More information or support is needed.
- 2: Less Than Satisfactory
9.6 points
A statistical test is selected, but it is unclear why the test is best suited for the tool.
- 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
A statistical test is omitted.
Methods Applied to Data Collection Tool
12 points
Criteria Description
Methods Applied to Data Collection Tool
- 5: Excellent
12 points
Methods that will be applied to the data collection are thoroughly discussed. A discussion of how the outcomes will be measured and evaluated based on the tool selected are presented.
- 4: Good
11.04 points
Methods that will be applied to the data collection are discussed. A discussion of how the outcomes will be measured and evaluated based on the tool selected is presented. Some detail is needed for clarity or support.
- 3: Satisfactory
10.56 points
Methods that will be applied to the data collection are outlined. A summary of how the outcomes will be measured and evaluated based on the tool selected is presented. More information or support is needed.
- 2: Less Than Satisfactory
9.6 points
Methods that will be applied to the data collection tool partially discussed. It is unclear how the outcomes will be measured and evaluated based on the tool selected.
- 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Methods that will be applied to the data collection tool are not discussed.
Strategies for Outcomes That Are Nonpositive
14.4 points
Criteria Description
Strategies for Outcomes That Are Nonpositive
- 5: Excellent
14.4 points
Strategies for nonpositive outcomes are presented. Some detail is needed for clarity or support.
- 4: Good
13.25 points
Clear and well-supported strategies for nonpositive outcomes are presented.
- 3: Satisfactory
12.67 points
General strategies for nonpositive outcomes are presented. More information and support are needed.
- 2: Less Than Satisfactory
11.52 points
Strategies for nonpositive outcomes are incomplete.
- 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Strategies for nonpositive outcomes are not discussed.
Plans to Maintain, Extend, Revise, and Discontinue Proposed Solution
13.2 points
Criteria Description
Plans to Maintain, Extend, Revise, and Discontinue Proposed Solution
- 5: Excellent
13.2 points
Detailed and well-supported plans to maintain, extend, revise, and discontinue a proposed solution after implementation are presented.
- 4: Good
12.14 points
Plans to maintain, extend, revise, and discontinue a proposed solution after implementation are presented. Some detail is needed for clarity or support.
- 3: Satisfactory
11.62 points
General plans to maintain, extend, revise, and discontinue a proposed solution after implementation are presented. More information and support are needed.
- 2: Less Than Satisfactory
10.56 points
Plans to maintain, extend, revise, and discontinue a proposed solution after implementation are incomplete.
- 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Plans to maintain, extend, revise, and discontinue a proposed solution after implementation are not discussed.
Required Sources
6 points
Criteria Description
Required Sources
- 5: Excellent
6 points
Number of required resources is met. Sources are current, and appropriate for the assignment criteria and nursing content.
- 4: Good
5.52 points
Number of required sources is met. Sources are current, but not all sources are appropriate for the assignment criteria and nursing content.
- 3: Satisfactory
5.28 points
Number of required sources is met, but sources are outdated or inappropriate.
- 2: Less Than Satisfactory
4.8 points
Number of required sources is only partially met.
- 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Sources are not included.
Thesis Development and Purpose
8.4 points
Criteria Description
Thesis Development and Purpose
- 5: Excellent
8.4 points
Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.
- 4: Good
7.73 points
Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.
- 3: Satisfactory
7.39 points
Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.
- 2: Less Than Satisfactory
6.72 points
Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.
- 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.
Argument Logic and Construction
9.6 points
Criteria Description
Argument Logic and Construction
- 5: Excellent
9.6 points
Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.
- 4: Good
8.83 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.
- 3: Satisfactory
8.45 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.
- 2: Less Than Satisfactory
7.68 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.
- 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)
6 points
Criteria Description
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)
- 5: Excellent
6 points
Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
- 4: Good
5.52 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.
- 3: Satisfactory
5.28 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.
- 2: Less Than Satisfactory
4.8 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.
- 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.
Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)
6 points
Criteria Description
Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)
- 5: Excellent
6 points
Template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style.
- 4: Good
5.52 points
Template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent.
- 3: Satisfactory
5.28 points
Template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.
- 2: Less Than Satisfactory
4.8 points
All format elements are correct.
- 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Template is not used appropriately, or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.
Documentation of Sources
6 points
Criteria Description
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)
- 5: Excellent
6 points
Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.
- 4: Good
5.52 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.
- 3: Satisfactory
5.28 points
Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.
- 2: Less Than Satisfactory
4.8 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.
- 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Sources are not documented.
ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE CLASS
Discussion Questions (DQ)
Initial responses to the DQ should address all components of the questions asked, include a minimum of one scholarly source, and be at least 250 words.
Successful responses are substantive (i.e., add something new to the discussion, engage others in the discussion, well-developed idea) and include at least one scholarly source.
One or two sentence responses, simple statements of agreement or “good post,” and responses that are off-topic will not count as substantive. Substantive responses should be at least 150 words.
I encourage you to incorporate the readings from the week (as applicable) into your responses.
Weekly Participation
Your initial responses to the mandatory DQ do not count toward participation and are graded separately.
In addition to the DQ responses, you must post at least one reply to peers (or me) on three separate days, for a total of three replies.
Participation posts do not require a scholarly source/citation (unless you cite someone else’s work).
Part of your weekly participation includes viewing the weekly announcement and attesting to watching it in the comments. These announcements are made to ensure you understand everything that is due during the week.
APA Format and Writing Quality
Familiarize yourself with APA format and practice using it correctly. It is used for most writing assignments for your degree. Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in LoudCloud for APA paper templates, citation examples, tips, etc. Points will be deducted for poor use of APA format or absence of APA format (if required).
Cite all sources of information! When in doubt, cite the source. Paraphrasing also requires a citation.
I highly recommend using the APA Publication Manual, 6th edition.
Use of Direct Quotes
I discourage overutilization of direct quotes in DQs and assignments at the Masters’ level and deduct points accordingly.
As Masters’ level students, it is important that you be able to critically analyze and interpret information from journal articles and other resources. Simply restating someone else’s words does not demonstrate an understanding of the content or critical analysis of the content.
It is best to paraphrase content and cite your source.
LopesWrite Policy
For assignments that need to be submitted to LopesWrite, please be sure you have received your report and Similarity Index (SI) percentage BEFORE you do a “final submit” to me.
Once you have received your report, please review it. This report will show you grammatical, punctuation, and spelling errors that can easily be fixed. Take the extra few minutes to review instead of getting counted off for these mistakes.
Review your similarities. Did you forget to cite something? Did you not paraphrase well enough? Is your paper made up of someone else’s thoughts more than your own?
Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in LoudCloud for tips on improving your paper and SI score.
Late Policy
The university’s policy on late assignments is 10% penalty PER DAY LATE. This also applies to late DQ replies.
Please communicate with me if you anticipate having to submit an assignment late. I am happy to be flexible, with advance notice. We may be able to work out an extension based on extenuating circumstances.
If you do not communicate with me before submitting an assignment late, the GCU late policy will be in effect.
I do not accept assignments that are two or more weeks late unless we have worked out an extension.
As per policy, no assignments are accepted after the last day of class. Any assignment submitted after midnight on the last day of class will not be accepted for grading.
Communication
Communication is so very important. There are multiple ways to communicate with me:
Questions to Instructor Forum: This is a great place to ask course content or assignment questions. If you have a question, there is a good chance one of your peers does as well. This is a public forum for the class.
Individual Forum: This is a private forum to ask me questions or send me messages. This will be checked at least once every 24 hours.
