NURS 6003 Discussion: Strategies for Addressing Questions
NURS 6003 Discussion: Strategies for Addressing Questions
NURS 6003 Discussion: Strategies for Addressing Questions
In Week 1 you began building a foundation for your success by considering a network; individuals and teams that can help you to clarify and execute on the vision. A network is most helpful when you are comfortable asking questions. Chances are other members of your network have experienced similar questions and may have helped guide others toward resolutions that can be helpful now.
In this Discussion, focus on the questions you are ready to ask as your journey begins. Keep in mind that sharing questions is often a great way to help others who have similar questions—even if they do not realize it!
To Prepare:
- Reflect on questions or concerns you might have as you begin the MSN program.
- Consider the individuals, teams, and departments you previously considered in Week 1 and how they may provide support to address these questions and concerns. Then, identify potential individuals, teams, or departments within Walden or your network that you can turn to for assistance in answering these questions and/or concerns.
By Day 3
Post any questions or concerns that you are willing to share with the group. The Discussion Board represents an opportunity to network with your course colleagues, and others may have the same questions or concerns.
Support main post with 3 of more current, credible sources and cite source within content of posting and on a reference list in proper APA.
By Day 6
Respond to at least two of your colleagues on two different days, by offering a possible resolution to their question/concern with supporting documentation, if possible, or expanding on their thinking and providing an example as support.
Be sure to offer support from at least 2 current, credible sources in each required response to classmates’ main post and cite per APA.
Submission and Grading Information
Grading Criteria
To access your rubric:
Week 2 Discussion Rubric
Post by Day 3 and Respond by Day 6
To participate in this Discussion:
Week 2 Discussion
Rubric Detail
Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.
Content
Name: NURS_6003_Module02_Week02_Discussion_Rubric
Grid View
List View
Excellent Good Fair Poor
Main Posting
Points Range: 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.
Points Range: 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.
Points Range: 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.
Points Range: 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.
Main Post: Timeliness
Points Range: 10 (10%) – 10 (10%)
Posts main post by day 3.
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not post by day 3.
First Response
Points Range: 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.
Points Range: 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.
Points Range: 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.
Points Range: 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.
Second Response
Points Range: 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.
Points Range: 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.
Points Range: 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.
Points Range: 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.
Participation
Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days.
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days.
Total Points: 100
Name: NURS_6003_Module02_Week02_Discussion_Rubric
NURS_6003_Module02_Week02_Discussion_Rubric
| Excellent | Good | Fair | Poor | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Main Posting |
Points Range: 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. |
Points Range: 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. |
Points Range: 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. |
Points Range: 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. |
| Main Post: Timeliness |
Points Range: 10 (10%) – 10 (10%)
Posts main post by day 3.
|
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
|
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
|
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not post by day 3.
|
| First Response |
Points Range: 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. |
Points Range: 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. |
Points Range: 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. |
Points Range: 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. |
| Second Response |
Points Range: 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. |
Points Range: 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. |
Points Range: 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. |
Points Range: 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. |
| Participation |
Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days.
|
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
|
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
|
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days.
|
| Total Points: 100 |
|---|
Name: NURS_6003_Module02_Week02_Discussion_Rubric
Grading Rubric Guidelines
Performance Category 10 9 8 4 0
Scholarliness
Demonstrates achievement of scholarly inquiry for professional and academic decisions. • Provides relevant evidence of scholarly inquiry clearly stating how the evidence informed or changed professional or academic decisions
• Evaluates literature resources to develop a comprehensive analysis or synthesis.
• Uses valid, relevant, and reliable outside sources to contribute to the threaded discussion • Provides relevant evidence of scholarly inquiry but does not clearly state how the evidence informed or changed professional or academic decisions.
• Evaluates information from source(s) to develop a coherent analysis or synthesis.
• Uses some valid, relevant, reliable outside sources to contribute to the threaded discussion. • Discusses using scholarly inquiry but does not state how scholarly inquiry informed or changed professional or academic decisions.
• Information is taken from source(s) with some interpretation/evaluation, but not enough to develop a coherent analysis or synthesis.
• Little valid, relevant, or reliable outside sources are used to contribute to the threaded discussion.
• Demonstrates little or no understanding of the topic. • Discusses using scholarly inquiry but does not state how scholarly inquiry informed or changed professional or academic decisions.
• Information is taken from source(s) without any interpretation/evaluation.
• The posting uses information that is not valid, relevant, or reliable • No evidence of the use of scholarly inquiry to inform or change professional or academic decisions.
• Information is not valid, relevant, or reliable
Performance Category 10 9 8 4 0
Application of Course Knowledge –
Demonstrate the ability to analyze, synthesize, and/or apply principles and concepts learned in the course lesson and outside readings and relate them to real-life professional situations • Posts make direct reference to concepts discussed in the lesson or drawn from relevant outside sources;
• Applies concepts to personal experience in the professional setting and or relevant application to real life. • Posts make direct reference to concepts discussed in the lesson or drawn from relevant outside sources.
• Applies concepts to personal experience in their professional setting and or relevant application to real life
• Interactions with classmates are relevant to the discussion topic but do not make direct reference to lesson content • Posts are generally on topic but do not build knowledge by incorporating concepts and principles from the lesson.
• Does not attempt to apply lesson concepts to personal experience in their professional setting and or relevant application to real life
• Does not demonstrate a solid understanding of the principles and concepts presented in the lesson • Posts do not adequately address the question posed either by the discussion prompt or the instructor’s launch post.
• Posts are superficial and do not reflect an understanding of the lesson content
• Does not attempt to apply lesson concepts to personal experience in their professional setting and or relevant application to real life • Posts are not related to the topics provided by the discussion prompt or by the instructor; attempts by the instructor to redirect the student are ignored
• No discussion of lesson concepts to personal experience in the professional setting and or relevant application to real life
Performance Category 5 4 3 2 0
Interactive Dialogue
Replies to each graded thread topic posted by the course instructor, by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT, of each week, and posts a minimum of two times in each graded thread, on separate days.
(5 points possible per graded thread) • Exceeds minimum post requirements
• Replies to each graded thread topic posted by the course instructor, by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT, of each week, and posts three or more times in each graded thread, over three separate days.
• Replies to a post posed by faculty and to a peer
• Summarizes what was learned from the lesson, readings, and other student posts for the week. • Replies to each graded thread topic posted by the course instructor, by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT, of each week, and posts a minimum of two times in each graded thread, on separate days
• Replies to a question posed by a peer
Summarizes what was learned from the lesson, readings, and other student posts for the week. • Meets expectations of 2 posts on 2 different days.
• The main post is not made by the Wednesday deadline
• Does not reply to a question posed by a peer or faculty • Has only one post for the week
• Discussion posts contain few, if any, new ideas or applications; often are a rehashing or summary of other students’ comments • Does not post to the thread
• No connections are made to the topic
Minus 1 Point Minus 2 Point Minus 3 Point Minus 4 Point Minus 5 Point
Grammar, Syntax, APA
Note: if there are only a few errors in these criteria, please note this for the student in as an area for improvement. If the student does not make the needed corrections in upcoming weeks, then points should be deducted.
Points deducted for improper grammar, syntax and APA style of writing.
The source of information is the APA Manual 6th Edition • 2-3 errors in APA format.
• Written responses have 2-3 grammatical, spelling, and punctuation errors.
• Writing style is generally clear, focused, and facilitates communication. • 4-5 errors in APA format.
• Writing responses have 4-5 grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors.
• Writing style is somewhat focused. • 6-7 errors in APA format.
• Writing responses have 6-7 grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors.
• Writing style is slightly focused making discussion difficult to understand. • 8-10 errors in APA format.
• Writing responses have 8-10 grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors.
• Writing style is not focused, making discussion difficult to understand. • Post contains greater than 10 errors in APA format.
• Written responses have more than 10 grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors.
• Writing style does not facilitate communication.
• The student continues to make repeated mistakes in any of the above areas after written correction by the instructor
0 points lost
-5 points lost
Total Participation Requirements
per discussion thread The student answers the threaded discussion question or topic on one day and posts a second response on another day. The student does not meet the minimum requirement of two postings on two different days
Early Participation Requirement
per discussion thread The student must provide a substantive answer to the gr
