NR 602 Week 8 Reflection Recent:

Over the past eight weeks the curriculum in this class, the instructor, my classmates, and my clinical preceptor have all taught me many things. This course has prepared me to meet the MSN program outcome #6, the MSN Essential VII, and the Nurse Practitioner Core Competencies # 8 in many ways.

APA Writing Checklist

Use this document as a checklist for each paper you will write throughout your GCU graduate program. Follow specific instructions indicated in the assignment and use this checklist to help ensure correct grammar and APA formatting. Refer to the APA resources available in the GCU Library and Student Success Center.

☐ APA paper template (located in the Student Success Center/Writing Center) is utilized for the

correct format of the paper. APA style is applied, and format is correct throughout.

☐ The title page is present. APA format is applied correctly. There are no errors.

☐ The introduction is present. APA format is applied correctly. There are no errors.

☐ Topic is well defined.

☐ Strong thesis statement is included in the introduction of the paper.

☐ The thesis statement is consistently threaded throughout the paper and included in the

conclusion.

☐ Paragraph development: Each paragraph has an introductory statement, two or three sentences as the body of the paragraph, and a transition sentence to facilitate the flow of information. The sections of the main body are organized to reflect the main points of the author. APA format is applied correctly. There are no errors.

☐ All sources are cited. APA style and format are correctly applied and are free from error.

☐ Sources are completely and correctly documented on a References page, as appropriate to assignment and APA style, and format is free of error.

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: NR 602 Week 8 Reflection Recent:

Scholarly Resources: Scholarly resources are written with a focus on a specific subject discipline and usually written by an expert in the same subject field. Scholarly resources are written for an academic audience.

Examples of Scholarly Resources include: Academic journals, books written by experts in a field, and formally published encyclopedias and dictionaries.

Peer-Reviewed Journals: Peer-reviewed journals are evaluated prior to publication by experts in the journal’s subject discipline. This process ensures that the articles published within the journal are academically rigorous and meet the required expectations of an article in that subject discipline.

Empirical Journal Article: This type of scholarly resource is a subset of scholarly articles that reports the original finding of an observational or experimental research study. Common aspects found within an empirical article include: literature review, methodology, results, and discussion.

Adapted from “Evaluating Resources: Defining Scholarly Resources,” located in Research Guides in the GCU Library.

☐ The writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English. Utilize writing resources such as Grammarly, LopesWrite report, and ThinkingStorm to check your writing.

Check Out Also: DQ 1: Symptom Evaluation GI, GU, Endocrinology, Neuromuscular

Participation for MSN

Participation Guidelines

The weekly case study discussion is worth up to 100 points. Students are expected to participate a minimum of four times (once in Part One by Tuesday, 11:59 p.m. MT, once in Part Two by Thursday, 11:59 p.m. MT, provide a written summary in SOAP format to the Dropbox by Sunday, 11:59 p.m. MT, and one post to a student peer as required in the interactive dialogue criterion). The student must provide answers to the graded case study questions from Part One, post a treatment plan for Part Two and provide a written summation of their case in SOAP format to the Dropbox for Part Three. The written summation must be submitted in a Word document and the following file naming convention be used: Last name.week#.SOAP For example: if your last name is Smith then your Week 1 SOAP note would be saved as Smith.Week1.SOAP

Grading Rubric

Criteria	Exceptional Outstanding or highest level of performance	Exceeds Very good or high level of performance	Meets Satisfactory level of performance	Needs Improvements Poor or failing level of performance	Developing Unsatisfactory level of performance
Total Points Possible= 100
	30 Points	26 Points	24 Points	11 Points	0 Points
Application of Course Knowledge	Post contributes unique perspectives/insights applicable to the results from the physical exam and diagnosis (es).Part One: Initial post includes at least three (3) appropriate differential diagnoses with rationale and answers all questions presented in the case. Demonstrates course knowledge/assigned readings by: linking questions and tests/interventions to diagnoses,linking diseases by identifying symptoms and patient information. Parts Two and Three: Primary and secondary diagnoses and treatment plan supported with rationale from the literature. Differential diagnoses are eliminated. All five (5) parts of the treatment plan are thorough, specific and evidence-based.	Post contributes unique perspectives or insights, but may lack some applicability to presented case study patients.Part One: Initial post includes at least two (2) appropriate differential diagnoses with rationale and answers most of the questions presented in the case. One to two (1-2) elements of specificity identified in course expectations not met Parts Two and Three: Confirmed diagnosis (es) and treatment plan partially applicable and evidence-based for each case study patient.	Post has limited perspective, insights and/or applicability to presented case study patients.Part One: Initial post does not address each patient or does not include at least two (2) differential diagnoses for each patient. Some evidence-based rationale may be missing. Does not answer questions presented in the case. Two (2) or more elements of specificity from course expectations not met. Parts Two and Three: Confirmed diagnosis and treatment plan are not applicable to specific case study or some sections may not be evidence-based.	Post perspectives are not consistent with current practice. Three (3) or more elements from course expectations missing from parts two and/or three, differential diagnoses not eliminated from Part Two and/or Three.	Post offers no insight or application to the case study presentation.
	30 Points	26 Points	24 Points	11 Points	0 Points
Support from Evidence-Based Practice (EBP)	Initial discussion posts in Parts One, Two and SOAP note are supported by evidence from appropriate sources published within the last 5 years. In-text citations and full references are provided.	Initial discussion posts for Parts One, Two, and SOAP note are partially supported by evidence from appropriate sources published within the last 5 years. In-text citations and full references are provided. Evidence-based reference( s) used but may not fully support the treatment plan.	Initial discussion posts for Parts One, Two, and SOAP note are partially supported by evidence.Sources may not be scholarly in nature or may be older than 5 years. In-text citations and/or full references may be incomplete or missing.	Citations to non-scholarly websites given as rationale to support differential diagnoses and/or treatment plan.	Discussion posts contain no evidence-based practice reference or citation. *Students should note that factitious sources, sources that are clearly not read by the student and used, or sources that have incorrect dates will result in an automatic zero (0) for this section for the week.
	10 Points	9 Points	8 Points	4 Points	0 Points
Organization	Discussion posts and SOAP notes presents case study findings in a logical, meaningful, and understandable sequence. Each problem-based learning case study patient is presented individually in all discussion posts and SOAP notes. Part One: Discussion questions addressed individually for each patient.	Discussion posts and SOAP notes are relevant to the topic but may be unclear or difficult to follow in places. Part One: Discussion questions may not be addressed individually for each patient. Part Two or SOAP note contains all elements but may not be written following SOAP note format.	Discussion posts and SOAP notes not fully relevant to the topic. May be unclear or difficult to follow in places. Part Two and SOAP note do not contain all components and/or may be missing data.	Discussion post presents case findings and plan or intervention that are sometimes unclear to follow and may not always be relevant to topic.	Discussion post is not relevant to case study.
	26 Points	23 Points	21 Points	10 Points	0 Points
Interactive Dialogue	Presents case study findings and responds substantively to at least one topic-related post of a peer including evidence from appropriate sources, and all direct faculty questions posted in Parts One and Two.	Presents case study findings and responds substantively to at least one topic-related post of a peer. Does include evidence from appropriate sources. Responds to some direct faculty questions posted in Parts One and Two.	Responds to a student peer and faculty questions but the posts adds limited content or insights to the discussion. Does include evidence from appropriate sources.	Responds to a student peer and/or faculty, but the nature of the response is not substantive. Does not include evidence from any sources.	Does not respond to a topic-related peer post and/or does not respond to faculty questions posted by Sunday.
	4 Points	3 Points	2 Points	1 Points	0 Points
Grammar, Syntax, APA	APA format, grammar, spelling, and/or punctuation are accurate, or with zero to one errors.	Two to four errors in APA format, grammar, spelling, and syntax noted.	Five to seven errors in APA format, grammar, spelling, and syntax noted.	Eight to nine errors in APA format, grammar, spelling, and syntax noted.	Post contains greater than ten errors in APA format, grammar, spelling, and/or punctuation or repeatedly makes the same errors after faculty feedback.
	0 Points Deducted				Points Deducted for Late or Missing Posts
Participation Enters first post to part one by 11:59 p.m. MT on Tuesday; First post to part two by 11:59 p.m. MT on Thursday; and submits written summation by Sunday 11:59 p.m. MT. Written submission (SOAP notes) will NOT be accepted after Sunday 11:59 p.m. MT.	Enters first post to Part One by 11:59 p.m. MT on Tuesday; first post to Part Two by 11:59 p.m. MT on Thursday; and enters peer response/faculty responses and written summation (SOAP) by Sunday 11:59 p.m. MT.				Ten percent (10%) per day for each late discussion post. *See Calculating Late Posting Penalty Document Written submissions including SOAPs will not be accepted after Sunday 11:59 p.m. MT of the week they are due. 33 points deducted per part if Part One, Part Two or SOAP note is/are not submitted by Sunday by 11:59 p.m. MT of the week they are due.

NR 602 Week 8 Reflection Recent: