Identify opportunities for improvement in their knowledge base.

Identify opportunities for improvement in their knowledge base.

Part 2

Purpose

The purpose of this assignment is for learners to:

1. Identify opportunities for improvement in their knowledge base.

2. Improve their knowledge base and understanding of a disease process identified as an opportunity area on the APEA predictor exam.

3. Have the opportunity to integrate knowledge and skills learned throughout all core courses in the FNP track and previous clinical courses.

4. Demonstrate the ability to analyze the literature be able to perform an evidenced-based review of their case, diagnosis, and plan, while guiding and taking feedback from peers regarding the case.

5. Demonstrate professional communication and leadership, while advancing the education of peers.

Activity Learning Outcomes

Through this discussion, the student will demonstrate the ability to:

1. Interpret subjective and objective data to develop appropriate diagnoses and evidence based management plans for patients and families with complex or multiple diagnoses across the lifespan (CO 1).

2. Develop management plans based on current scientific evidence and national guidelines (CO 4).

Requirements

Submit your First line treatment plan based on one dx from your differential list

DISCUSSION CONTENT

Category

Points

%

Description

Application of Course Knowledge

40

57%

Post contributes clinically accurateperspectives/insights applicable to the results from the physical exam and diagnoses. Initial post includes the most likely diagnosis/specific treatment plan given case study information supported by rationale and answers all questions presented in the case. Demonstrates course knowledge/assigned readings by: linking tests/interventions accuratelyto diagnoses, applies learned knowledge specifically to thesymptoms and patient informationusing original dialogue i.e., little to no direct quotes.

Evidence Based resources

20

29%

Discussion post supported by evidence from appropriate sources published within the last five years. Focus of journal articles represents a logical link between the article content and the case study information. In-text citations and full references are provided.

60

86%

Total CONTENT Points= 60 pts

DISCUSSION FORMAT

Organization

5

7%

Discussion post presented in a logical, meaningful, and understandable sequence. Headings reflect separation of criterion outlined in assignment guidelines.

**Direct quote should not exceed 15 words & must add substantively to the discussion

APA/Grammar/Spelling

5

7%

Discussion post has minimal grammar, spelling, syntax, punctuation and APA* errors. Direct quotes (if used) is limited to 1 short statement** which adds substantively to the post.

* APA style references and in text citations are required; however, there are no deductions for errors in indentation or spacing of references. All elements of the reference otherwise must be included.

10

14%

Total FORMAT Points= 10 pts

70

100%

DISCUSSION TOTAL=70 pts

Criteria

Ratings

Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDiscussion Content Possible Points = 60 Points

Application of Course Knowledge Post contributes clinically accurate perspectives/insights applicable to the results from the physical exam and new diagnoses. Initial post includes the most likely diagnosis/specific treatment plan given case study information supported by rationale and answers all questions presented in the case. Demonstrates course knowledge/assigned readings by: linking tests/interventions accurately to diagnoses, applies learned knowledge specifically to the symptoms and patient information using original dialogue i.e., little to no direct quotes.

40 pts

Excellent

Post contributes clinically accurate perspectives/insights applicable to the results from the physical exam and new diagnoses. Initial post includes the most likely diagnosis/specific treatment plan given case study information supported by rationale and answers all questions presented in the case. Demonstrates course knowledge/assigned readings by: linking tests/interventions accurately to diagnoses, applies learned knowledge specifically to the symptoms and patient information using original dialogue i.e., little to no direct quotes.

36 pts

V. Good

Post contributes clinically accurate perspectives or insights and original dialogue with little or no direct quotes, but lacks some applicability/specificity to the assigned case study in one content area or does not incorporate National guidelines into treatment plan. Partially demonstrates course knowledge/assigned readings by: linking tests/interventions accurately to diagnoses, applies learned knowledge specifically to the symptoms and patient information using original dialogue i.e., little to no direct quotes.

33 pts

Satisfactory

Post has limited clinical perspective, insights and/or applicability to assigned case study in more than one content area.

20 pts

Needs Improvement

Post has limited clinically relevant perspective, insights and/or applicability to case study or is vague without specificity and attention to detail

0 pts

Unsatisfactory

Post contributes unique perspectives or insights and original dialogue with little or no direct quotes, but lacks applicability/specificity to the case study.

40 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeEvidence Based Resources

Discussion post fully supported by evidence from appropriate sources published within the last five years including National Guidelines. Content of journal articles represents a logical link between the article content and the assigned topics/case study information. In-text citations and complete references are provided.

20 pts

Excellent

Discussion post fully supported by evidence from appropriate sources published within the last five years including National Guidelines. Content of journal articles represents a logical link between the article content and the assigned topics/case study information. In-text citations and complete references are provided.

18 pts

V. Good

Discussion post is partially supported by evidence from appropriate sources published within the last five years. In-text citations and complete references are provided. Evidence-based reference(s) used but may not fully demonstrate National guidelines or fully support treatment recommendations.

16 pts

Satisfactory

Discussion post is supported by evidence from appropriate resources however, National Guidelines are not referenced in regard to diagnostic testing and treatment planning OR Journal articles do not represent logical link between the article content and assigned topics/ case study.

10 pts

Needs Improvement

Discussion post not fully supported by evidence from appropriate sources published within the last five years OR does not include National Guidelines AND Content of journal articles does not represents a logical link between the article content and the assigned topics/case study information. In-text citations and complete references are provided.

0 pts

Unsatisfactory

Discussion post is not supported by evidence from appropriate sources published within the last five years. National Guidelines are not used to support post. References and in-text citations may be incomplete.

20 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDiscussion Format Possible Points = 10 Points

Organization Discussion post presented in a logical, meaningful, and understandable sequence. Headings reflect separation of criterion outlined in assignment guidelines.

5 pts

Excellent

Discussion post presented in a logical, meaningful, and understandable sequence. Organization of topics and transitions among ideas lends clarity to the discussion. Headings and paragraph spacing are used logically and contribute to evidence of the assigned diseases being compared and contrasted.

4 pts

V. Good

Discussion post presented in a logical, meaningful, and understandable sequence, however minimal transitions, headings and spacing used to organize thoughts.

3 pts

Satisfactory

May be unclear or difficult to follow in places. Headings, paragraphs and spacing.

2 pts

Needs Improvement

May be unclear or difficult to follow in places. Weak linkages between assigned diseases.

0 pts

Unsatisfactory

Discussion topics not linked through organization of thoughts, paragraph, spacing or headings. Lack of organization contributes to lack of understanding of thought process.

5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAPA/Grammar/Spelling

DISCUSSION CONTENT Category Points % Description Application of Course Knowledge 65 50% Post contributes clinically accurate perspectives/insights applicable to the results from the physical exam and diagnoses. Initial post includes the most likely diagnosis/specific treatment plan given case study information supported by rationale and answers all questions presented in the case. Demonstrates course knowledge/assigned readings by: linking tests/interventions accurately to diagnoses, applies learned knowledge specifically to the symptoms and patient information using original dialogue i.e., little to no direct quotes. Evidence Based resources 25 19% Discussion post supported by evidence from appropriate sources published within the last five years. Focus of journal articles represents a logical link between the article content and the case study information. In-text citations and full references are provided. Interactive Dialogue 30 23% Presents case study findings and responds substantively to at least one peer including evidence from appropriate sources, and all direct faculty questions posted. Substantive posts contribute new, novel perspectives to the discussion using original dialogue (not quotes from sources) 120 92% Total CONTENT Points= 120 pts DISCUSSION FORMAT Category Points % Description Organization 5 4% Discussion post presented in a logical, meaningful, and understandable sequence. Headings reflect separation of criterion outlined in assignment guidelines. **Direct quote should not exceed 15 words & must add substantively to the discussion APA/Grammar/Spelling 5 4% Discussion post has minimal grammar, spelling, syntax, punctuation and APA* errors. Direct quotes (if used) is limited to 1 short statement** which adds substantively to the post. * APA style references and in text citations are required; however, there are no deductions for errors in indentation or spacing of references. All elements of the reference otherwise must be included. 10 8% Total FORMAT Points= 10 pts DISCUSSION TOTAL= 130 points

5 pts

Excellent

Zero errors in grammar/spelling. Strong ability to communicate thoughts and ideas concisely.

4 pts

V. Good

Zero to 2 errors in grammar/spelling but no effect on ability to communicate thoughts and ideas.

3 pts

Satisfactory

3-6 errors in grammar/spelling with no effect on ability to communicate thoughts and ideas.

2 pts

Needs Improvement

>6 errors in grammar/spelling which contributes somewhat to effectiveness of ability to communicate thoughts and ideas.

bottom of post
Scroll to Top