NURS 8502 Discussion Exploration of Sources of Evidence

Want create site? With you can do it easy.

NURS 8502 Discussion Exploration of Sources of Evidence

Imagine it is the final week of the course, and you are ready to present your solution to address your indentified practice problem at your practicum site. You present your evidence and plan and recommend the implementation of your proposed solution. Upon hearing your presentation, a stakeholder raises questions about the implementation based on a similar practice problem affecting a business outside of nursing. Unfortunately, you had not explored sources outside of your field, and you neglected to incorporate this evidence into your plan and recommendations.

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
NURS 8502 Discussion Exploration of Sources of Evidence
From $8/Page
Order Essay

Photo Credit: Hero Images / Hero Images / Getty Images

Evidence is critical in understanding a problem and determining potential solutions to address a change. However, evidence is only as good as the exploration of sources used to gather this evidence. Flawed evidence generation can occur when sources are not carefully, thoughtfully, and thoroughly explored. Furthermore, flawed evidence generation occurs if evidence is outdated, ignored, or not considered within the context of the proposed solution or practice problem it is meant to address.

For this Discussion, you will explore the sources of evidence necessary for your identified practice problem. These sources of evidence may be derived from library databases related to nursing, or you may find sources necessary for your practice problem in the form of interviews or library databases related to other fields. Consider where you might explore sources of evidence for your practice problem. Where might you find these sources outside of your typical evidence locations? Consider why this exploration is important and meaningful for your proposed change.

To Prepare
Review the Learning Resources covering the exploration of evidence.

NURS 8502 Discussion Exploration of Sources of Evidence

Consider the evidence necessary for your identified practice problem and consider what types of sources might need to be explored.
Explore sources beyond the Walden Library database, and consider where evidence might be found outside of “typical” avenues.
By Day 3 of Week 5

Post a response detailing your exploration of sources of evidence for your practice problem. Consider multiple sources of evidence, rather than simply resources from the library: formal and informal interviews, national organizations, internal/external to your organization and/or practice. Consider library sources of information outside of nursing literature (e.g., business journals). Consider the impact of not including resources from specific sources. How might this create a flaw in your ability to support a proposed practice change? Be specific and provide examples.

By Day 5 of Week 5

Read a selection of your colleagues’ responses and respond to at least two of your colleagues on two different days by supporting or expanding on their exploration of sources. Do you see any evidence they might be missing? Explain additional perspectives on the issue or exploration of sources described by your colleague.

Submission and Grading Information
Grading Criteria

To access your rubric:

Week 5 Discussion Rubric

Post by Day 3 of Week 5 and Respond by Day 5 of Week 5

To Participate in this Discussion:

Week 5 Discussion

Name: NURS_8502_Week5_Discussion_Rubric

 

Grid View
List View

Excellent

Point range: 90–100

Good

Point range: 80–89

Fair

Point range: 70–79

Poor

Point range: 0–69

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.

Points Range: 40 (40%) – 44 (44%)

Thoroughly responds to the Discussion question(s).

Is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.

No less than 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth.

Supported by at least three current credible sources.

Points Range: 35 (35%) – 39 (39%)

Responds to most of the Discussion question(s).

Is somewhat reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

50% of the post has exceptional depth and breadth.

Supported by at least three credible references.

Points Range: 31 (31%) – 34 (34%)

Responds to some of the Discussion question(s).

One to 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.

Cited with fewer than two credible references.

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 30 (30%)

Does not respond to the Discussion question(s).

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 references.

Main Posting:

Writing

Points Range: 6 (6%) – 6 (6%)

Written clearly and concisely.

Contains no grammatical or spelling errors.

Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Written concisely.

May contain one to two grammatical or spelling errors.

Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Written somewhat concisely.

May contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors.

Contains some APA formatting errors.

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)

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 Posting:

Timely and full participation

Points Range: 9 (9%) – 10 (10%)

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation.

Posts main Discussion by due date.

Points Range: 8 (8%) – 8 (8%)

Meets requirements for full participation.

Posts main Discussion by due date.

Points Range: 7 (7%) – 7 (7%)
Posts main Discussion by due date.

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 6 (6%)

Does not meet requirements for full participation.

Does not post main Discussion by due date.

First Response:

Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.

Points Range: 9 (9%) – 9 (9%)

Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.

Responds to questions posed by faculty.

The use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.

Points Range: 8 (8%) – 8 (8%)
Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting.

Points Range: 7 (7%) – 7 (7%)
Response is on topic and may have some depth.Points Range: 0 (0%) – 6 (6%)
Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.

 

First Response:

Writing

Points Range: 6 (6%) – 6 (6%)

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

Response to faculty questions are fully 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: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues.

Response to faculty questions are mostly answered, if posed.

Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources.

Response is written in standard, edited English.

Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Response posed in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication.

Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.

Few or no credible sources are cited.

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)

Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective communication.

Response to faculty questions are missing.

No credible sources are cited.

First Response:

Timely and full participation

Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation.

Posts by due date.

Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Meets requirements for full participation.

Posts by due date.

Points Range: 3 (3%) – 3 (3%)
Posts by due date.

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 2 (2%)

Does not meet requirements for full participation.

Does not post by due date.

 

Second Response:

Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.

 

Points Range: 9 (9%) – 9 (9%)

Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.

Responds to questions posed by faculty.

The use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.

 

Points Range: 8 (8%) – 8 (8%)
Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting.

Points Range: 7 (7%) – 7 (7%)
Response is on topic and may have some depth.

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 6 (6%)
Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.

 

Second Response:

Writing

 

Points Range: 6 (6%) – 6 (6%)

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

Response to faculty questions are fully 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: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues.

Response to faculty questions are mostly answered, if posed.

Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources.

Response is written in standard, edited English.

 

Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Response posed in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication.

Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.

Few or no credible sources are cited.

 

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)

Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective communication.

Response to faculty questions are missing.

No credible sources are cited.

 

Second Response:

Timely and full participation

 

Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation.

Posts by due date.

 

Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Meets requirements for full participation.

Posts by due date.

 

Points Range: 3 (3%) – 3 (3%)
Posts by due date.

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 2 (2%)

Does not meet requirements for full participation.

Does not post by due date.

Total Points: 100
Name: NURS_8502_Week5_Discussion_Rubric

Did you find apk for android? You can find new and apps.

Full satisfaction or return your money back

Our experts will write you a top-quality paper and revise it an unlimited number of times until you're 100% satisfied - or offer a refund.

Check Prices
Get the best discount and better grades here
Pages (550 words)
$0.00
*Price with a welcome 15% discount applied.
Pro tip: If you want to save more money and pay the lowest price, you need to set a more extended deadline.
We know that being a student these days is hard. Because of this, our prices are some of the lowest on the market.

Instead, we offer perks, discounts, and free services to enhance your experience.
Sign up, place your order, and leave the rest to our professional paper writers in less than 2 minutes.
step 1
Upload assignment instructions
Fill out the order form and provide paper details. You can even attach screenshots or add additional instructions later. If something is not clear or missing, the writer will contact you for clarification.
How to get the most out of your experience with Toptutor4me
One writer throughout the entire course
If you like the writer, you can hire them again. Just copy & paste their ID on the order form ("Preferred Writer's ID" field). This way, your vocabulary will be uniform, and the writer will be aware of your needs.
The same paper from different writers
You can order essay or any other work from two different writers to choose the best one or give another version to a friend. This can be done through the add-on "Same paper from another writer."
Copy of sources used by the writer
Our college essay writers work with ScienceDirect and other databases. They can send you articles or materials used in PDF or through screenshots. Just tick the "Copy of sources" field on the order form.
Here is what our happy clients say about us.
Receiving customer feedback and reviews from legit students who have utilized our services is one of our favorite part of the job. We love seeing testimonials from happy students whom we have helped to succeed. Read through the below review page to see what our partners think.
Mathematics
Job WELL DONE! Thank You very much!!
Customer 452483, July 12th, 2021
Healthcare Writing & Communications
Excellent!! You’re awesome, thank you very much for all of your hard work & help!!
Customer 452483, October 24th, 2021
Nursing
Good job! Thank you
Customer 452487, October 17th, 2021
Nursing
Good job! Thank you.
Customer 452487, October 26th, 2021
Healthcare Writing & Communications
Perfect! Thank you for also remembering to highlight the necessary words. Appreciate all of your help and hard work!
Customer 452483, November 7th, 2021
Microbiology
Thank you so much! I appreciate what you do and all of the great help you've given me!
Customer 452483, September 6th, 2021
English 101
Perfect! Very informative! Appreciate all of your hard work! Thank you very much.
Customer 452483, September 22nd, 2021
English 101
na
Customer 452547, March 22nd, 2022
Introduction to Sociology
Thank you very much for all of your hard work!
Customer 452483, October 15th, 2021
Healthcare Writing & Communications
Perfect! Thank you so much for all of your help!
Customer 452483, October 31st, 2021
English 101
Amazing thank you!
Customer 452615, August 1st, 2022
Other
I appreciate the help.
Customer 452567, March 18th, 2022
11,595
Total Reviews
98%
Satsfaction rate
6 pages
Average paper length
40%
Customers referred by a friend
Enjoy the best prices and lifetime 15% discount
Use a coupon TOP15 and enjoy expert help with any task at the most affordable price.
Order Now Order in Chat