Chat with us, powered by LiveChat This week, you will bring together all of the assignments you have completed thus far, and compose the rough draft of your change project paper. - Essayabode

This week, you will bring together all of the assignments you have completed thus far, and compose the rough draft of your change project paper. At this point, you will have submitted each section and received feedback. An attempt to incorporate all previous assignment feedback should be evident. 
Your rough draft contains all of the expected components of the final draft and is presented in APA format including a cover page, references, and appendices when warranted. Your rough draft is your opportunity to polish previously submitted assignments and combine the sections in a comprehensive paper that show your change project is ready to be implemented.

 

You will take this time to identify and address any weaknesses or gaps in your change project. Your rough draft should only require minor revisions before the final paper.

 

Your paper should be between 20 and 30 pages in length, not including the cover page, references, and any appendices. It must follow current APA manual style and format. Each section of the paper should be clearly identified using proper headings.

 

Review the rubric for more information on how the assignment will be graded.

 

Rubric

 

NURS_691B_DE – NURS 691-B Rubric: Culminating Experience Evidence-Based Change Project Paper Rubic (rough draft)

 

Criteria Ratings Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIntroduction and Background

 

3.5 to >2.87 pts

Meets Expectations

 

The change project topic is introduced. All background information is included. Project importance within the field or significance for the designated facility is described.

 

2.87 to >2.63 pts

Approaches Expectations

 

The change project topic is introduced. Most of the background information is included, but a few key elements are missing. Project importance within the field or significance for the designated facility is introduced, but not fully described.

 

2.63 to >2.07 pts

Falls Below Expectations

 

The change project topic is listed, but there is no supporting background information included. The project importance within the field or significance at the facility is unclear.

 

2.07 to >0 pts

Does Not Meet Expectations

 

The content is generally unclear. There is no clear evidence of why the project was chosen for the facility or the nursing field in general.

 

3.5 pts

 

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeProblem Identification and Description in PICOT Format

 

3.5 to >2.87 pts

Meets Expectations

 

Presents a thorough and insightful analysis of the chosen topic/problem. Describes the problem thoroughly, including the target population description and history/background information at the assigned clinic or hospital. The significance and applicability to nursing is included and well presented. Includes an appropriate topic identification related to an advanced practice nursing issue or practice problem of concern. Population is fully defined and present in the research question. Includes specific interventions, identifies comparisons, and presents appropriate outcomes in a timely manner for the question. Overall, the question is well-built using the PICOT format.

 

2.87 to >2.63 pts

Approaches Expectations

 

Presents an accurate analysis of the topic/problem, but leaves out some details in describing the target population or history/background information at the assigned clinic or hospital. The significance and applicability to nursing is included but lacks a few details. Includes an appropriate topic identification related to an advanced practice nursing issue or practice problem of concern. Population description is too generic. Interventions, comparisons, outcomes, and a timeframe are too general, making it hard to observe a well-used PICOT format.

 

2.63 to >2.07 pts

Falls Below Expectations

 

Provides insufficient explanation of the topic/problem occurring at the facility. The target population and history/background information is lacking. The significance and applicability to nursing is included, but it is somewhat unclear or vague. Includes a topic identification, but it’s not appropriately related to an advanced practice nursing issue or practice problem of concern. Population description is very generic. Interventions, comparison, outcomes, and a timeframe may be vague or missing. PICOT format is present, but all areas, of the question are very generic, making it difficult to follow how the research will be collected.

 

2.07 to >0 pts

Does Not Meet Expectations

 

Does not sufficiently describe the topic/problem. There is no description of the target population or history/background information. The significance and applicability to nursing is absent or severely lacking. Does not include an appropriate selected topic related to an advanced practice nursing issue or practice problem of concern. Population description is not adequately identified. Interventions, comparison, outcomes, and a timeframe are not adequately identified in the research question showing no use of the PICOT format.

 

3.5 pts

 

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCritical Appraisal/Literature Review

 

3.5 to >2.87 pts

Meets Expectations

 

The minimum requirement of peer-reviewed articles, books, or limited non-research literature (tool kits or standardized procedures) are present. Literature is supported by scientific evidence that is credible and timely. Subtopics are used to support the main topic. In-text citations are present and correctly formatted. Presents a thorough and insightful analysis of significant findings related to the change project topic. Ideas are synthesized and professionally sound and creative. Insightful and comprehensive conclusions and solutions are present.

 

2.87 to >2.63 pts

Approaches Expectations

 

All but one of the minimum requirements of peer-reviewed articles, books, or limited non-research literature (tool kits or standardized procedures) are present. Literature is supported by scientific evidence that is credible and timely. Only a few subtopics are used to support the main topic. In-text citations are present, but might be improperly formatted. Presents an accurate analysis of significant findings related to the change project topic. Ideas are professionally sound and creative, but are in a list format by source rather than synthesized.

 

2.63 to >2.07 pts

Falls Below Expectations

 

Several of the minimum requirements of peer-reviewed articles, books, or limited non-research literature (tool kits or standardized procedures) are not present. Literature is not supported by scientific evidence that is credible and timely. Subtopics are not used to support the main topic. In-text citations are missing or improperly formatted. Provides insufficient analysis of significant findings related to the change project topic. Ideas are not professionally sound and creative. They are in a list format.

 

2.07 to >0 pts

Does Not Meet Expectations

 

Well below the minimum requirements of sources. Literature included is not supported by scientific evidence that is credible and timely. Subtopics are not used to support the main topic. In-text citations are missing. Literature is listed, but not analyzed/synthesized.

 

3.5 pts

 

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeProject Aims, Values, and Desired Outcomes

 

7 to >5.74 pts

Meets Expectations

 

The project, aims, values, and desired outcomes are well-developed. They are clear and thorough. Aims include examples of projected features and functions. Values include implementation benefits for specific stakeholders. Desired outcomes state the purpose, have a quality focus, and describe the benefits that will occur as a result of implementation.

 

5.74 to >5.25 pts

Approaches Expectations

 

The project aims, values, and desired outcomes are somewhat clear. Aims include examples of projected features and functions. Values include implementation benefits for specific stakeholders. The desired outcomes state the purpose, have some focus, and briefly describe the benefits that will occur as a result of implementation, but the information may be vague or unclear.

 

5.25 to >4.13 pts

Falls Below Expectations

 

The project aims, values, and desired outcomes are unclear and lack detail. Aims and values may be in conflict with the desired outcomes.

 

4.13 to >0 pts

Does Not Meet Expectations

 

The content is generally unclear. There is no clear evidence of what the project, aims, values, or desired outcomes are. There might just be a list of project objectives.

 

7 pts

 

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeTheoretical Framework

 

7 to >5.74 pts

Meets Expectations

 

Identifies independent theories or conceptual models that relate to the change project topic and describes how they will be applied to the change project. Thoroughly discusses how each element of the phenomenon applies to the framework. Clearly applies each element of the theory to the elements of the phenomenon under study. Develops the rationale for the sample selection criteria, and expertly discusses, analyzes, and critiques pertinent research that uses the framework.

 

5.74 to >5.25 pts

Approaches Expectations

 

Identifies independent theories or conceptual models that relate to the change project topic and describes how they will be applied to the change project. Discusses how most elements of the phenomenon applies to the framework, but may lack specific details. Attempts to apply each element of the theory to the elements of the phenomenon under study but may not make clear connections. Develops the rationale for the sample selection criteria, and briefly discusses pertinent research that uses the framework, but may be somewhat lacking in analysis and/or critique.

 

5.25 to >4.13 pts

Falls Below Expectations

 

Identifies independent theories or conceptual models but they may only indirectly relate to the change project topic. May not not discuss how elements of the phenomenon apply to the framework Connections to each element of the theory to the elements of the phenomenon are vague and unclear. The rationale for the sample selection criteria and pertinent research that uses the framework may be missing or severely lacking in analysis and/or critique.

 

4.13 to >0 pts

Does Not Meet Expectations

 

Fails to identify a theory or conceptual model or is written in such a way that no relationships can be identified.

 

7 pts

 

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIntervention

 

7 to >5.74 pts

Meets Expectations

 

Provides keen insight into obstacles and proposes sound, creative solutions or interventions based on the literature review findings. Expertly compares other views on the problem and solutions with detail. Uses examples to thoroughly address the FNP role in the intervention and discusses implications for clinical practice. Thoughtfully discusses the implications of the change project and its significance to the nursing profession and filling gaps in knowledge. Accurately categorizes and thoroughly explains specific methods of data collection to be used. Explains in detail how data will be analyzed and used. Provides a sound justification for subject selection and sampling procedure. Accurately and thoroughly describes potential limitations to data collection and control.

 

5.74 to >5.25 pts

Approaches Expectations

 

Identifies some obstacles and proposes some solutions or interventions based on the literature review but few connections are made. Minimally compares other views on the problem and solutions. Minimally, addresses the FNP role in the intervention and discusses implications for clinical practice. Briefly discusses the implications of the change project and its significance to the nursing profession but may lack specific details. Explains methods of data collection to be used and explains how data will be used. May be lacking analysis and accuracy in the explanation. Provides a general justification for subject selection and sampling procedure. Only briefly describes potential limitations to data collection and control.

 

5.25 to >4.13 pts

Falls Below Expectations

 

Identifies few if any obstacles and proposes few if any solutions or interventions based on the literature review Minimal to no comparison to other views on the problem and solutions. Only suggests implications of the change project and its significance to the nursing profession or draws unreasonable conclusions. Identifies some methods of data collection to be used but may fail to explain how data will be used. Data collection methods are unsound, or unjustified for the change project. Justification for subject selection and sampling procedure may be missing or is unsound. Fails to describe potential limitations to data collection and control.

 

4.13 to >0 pts

Does Not Meet Expectations

 

No obstacles, opposing views, or comparisons are made to support the project. Data collection methods are not explained, analyzed, or discussed.

 

7 pts

 

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeRecommendations and Conclusion

 

10.5 to >8.61 pts

Meets Expectations

 

Provides an insightful and thorough summary of the project, main points, and details the significance of the project to the advanced practice nursing profession. Provides detailed and creative recommendations for future research and implications for clinical practice. Discusses limitations of the study in detail. Suggests specific directions for future research. Insightfully considers changes in theoretical construct and provides reasonable and creative suggestions for public policy and/or changes in educational practice. Expertly ties the theoretical framework to the overall product.

 

8.61 to >7.88 pts

Approaches Expectations

 

Provides some summary of the project, main points, and the significance of the project to the advanced practice nursing profession. Provides some basic recommendations for future research and implications for clinical practice. Discusses limitations of the study in general terms. Suggests vague directions for future research. Considers some changes in theoretical constructs. Provides vague or generic suggestions for public policy and/or changes in educational practice. Somewhat ties the theoretical framework to the overall product.

 

7.88 to >6.19 pts

Falls Below Expectations

 

Provides minimal summary of the project, main points, and the significance of the project to the advanced practice nursing profession. Provides vague or unclear recommendations for future research and implications for clinical practice.

 

6.19 to >0 pts

Does Not Meet Expectations

 

Provides little or no summary of the project, main points, and the significance of the project to the advanced practice nursing profession.

 

10.5 pts

 

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeRough Draft

 

17.5 to >14.35 pts

Meets Expectations

 

Submission shows a concerted effort to present a high-quality draft requiring minimal adjustments to content and mechanics. All parts of the research paper are submitted and efforts to integrate feedback are highly apparent. Significant and substantive improvements have been made to each section of the paper.

 

14.35 to >13.13 pts

Approaches Expectations

 

Submission shows adequate effort to present a quality draft requiring a few substantial adjustments to content and mechanics. All parts of the research paper are submitted in the draft, but efforts to integrate feedback are only somewhat apparent. Improvements have been made to most sections of the paper, but several more improvements are needed.

 

13.13 to >10.33 pts

Falls Below Expectations

 

Submission shows little effort to present a quality, complete draft. Feedback regarding mechanics may be the only changes made. Many improvements are needed. Parts of the research paper may be missing, and/or many adjustments to content and mechanics are needed.

 

10.33 to >0 pts

Does Not Meet Expectations

 

Submission shows no effort to present a quality, complete draft. Recommendations and feedback for improvement are not apparent. Parts of the research paper may be missing, and/or major adjustments to content and mechanics are needed.

 

17.5 pts

 

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMechanics and APA

 

10.5 to >8.61 pts

Meets Expectations

 

Writing is clear, concise, formal, and organized. Information is well organized and clearly communicated. The assignment is free of spelling and grammatical errors. All the requirements related to format, length, source citations, and layout are followed. A complete reference page is included and formatted using correct APA format. If applicable, appendices and tables are complete and appropriate.

 

8.61 to >7.88 pts

Approaches Expectations

 

Writing is generally clear and organized but is not concise or formal in language. Information is reasonably organized and communicated. The assignment is mostly free of spelling and grammatical errors. The length requirement and most of the requirements related to format, source citations, and layout are followed. A reference page is included, but may be missing a reference that was cited within the paper. It is formatted using correct APA format. Applicable appendices may be slightly incomplete; some appropriate tables may be missing.

 

7.88 to >6.19 pts

Falls Below Expectations

 

Writing is unclear or there are some organization problems. The assignment contains some spelling and grammatical errors. Some of the requirements related to format, length, source citations, and layout are followed. A reference page is included, but several references cited within the paper may be missing or formatted incorrectly according to APA requirements. Applicable appendices are severely incomplete; some appropriate tables are missing.

 

6.19 to >0 pts

Does Not Meet Expectations

 

Writing is generally unclear and unorganized. Information is poorly organized. The assignment contains many spelling and grammatical errors. Does not follow format, length, source citations, and layout requirements. A reference page is missing. Applicable appendices are missing or inaccurate.

 

10.5 pts

 

Total Points: 70