Category: Solved Questions

NU 601 Week 4 Discussion 1: Grand Theory Group Presentation Reflections

Initial Post

Please respond to the following prompts:

  • One student in each group should post their Grand Theory Presentation website/URL by Day 3.
  • Describe your thoughts on the grand theory about which your group presented.
  • What were the challenges that you faced in understanding the theory?
  • How did you attempt to resolve those challenges?

Your initial post should contain two to three paragraphs of three to four sentences per paragraph. The post should integrate a minimum of three readings and/or other evidence-based research articles no more than three years old and use APA formatting for citations and references.

Reply Posts

After watching the Grand Theory Group Presentations posted, please respond to the following:

  • Discuss the similarities and differences in how each nursing theorist (your group’s theorist compared to two other groups’ theorists clearly identifying the group) defined metaparadigm concepts (that is, patient, health, environment, and nursing). Ensure you clearly identify to which group’s presentations you are discussing.

Use a minimum of two scholarly references in APA style to support your replies.

NU 601 Week 4 Assignment 1/2: Grand Theory Group Presentation

Instructions 1

Select one member of your group to post your Grand Theory Group Presentation website/URL.

Please refer to the Grading Rubric for details on how this activity will be graded.

 

Instructions 2

Submit a thorough Self and Group Evaluation (Word) for the Grand Theory Group Presentation. Note that your grade could be negatively impacted (reduced) if more than one peer rates your participation unsatisfactorily.

Please refer to this Grading Rubric for details on how this activity will be graded.

NU 601 Week 3: Introduction to Application to Pragmatic Adequacy Group Assignment

Groups: Numerical 1–5

This reminder is to alert students to upcoming work in one of the following weeks. You should already be working in small groups for the Application to Pragmatic Adequacy assignment. Use whatever method your group has chosen to collaborate on the assignment.

Instructions

For the Week 7 Group Assignment 1: Application to Pragmatic Adequacy, you will work in a small group to complete the assignment. Use whatever method your group agrees upon to collaborate on this assignment.

As a group, select a practice theory or model using the Week 3: Application to Pragmatic Adequacy Group Discussion—Select a Practice Theory or Model. Then using Fawcett’s framework for theory evaluation (as discussed in Peterson & Bredow, 2016, p. 43), discuss to what extent your selected practice theory or model meets the criterion of pragmatic adequacy (that is, how well the theory or model can be utilized in real-life situations, particularly clinical practice) by addressing the following:

  1. State the theory or model your group chose and the reason(s) for your choice.
  2. Describe the practice theory or model and define the main concepts of this theory.
  3. Evaluate the practice theory or model.
    1. Describe the special education and/or skill training recommended for nurses so that the theory or model can be used in their clinical practice.
    2. Is it possible to derive clinical protocols from the theory or model? If yes, briefly explain. If no, explain why not?
    3. How often has the theory or model been used for nursing research? If it has been used for research, provide a full APA citation for one study example that used this theory or model. If it hasn’t been used, please explain why it hasn’t been used.
    4. Discuss at least two favorable outcomes that result from using this theory or model as a basis for nursing practice.
  4. Connect this theory or model to clinical practice.
    1. View the Healthy People 2020 Topics and Objectives and choose an objective/topic to review.
    2. Identify the objective/topic.
    3. Discuss how you would apply your chosen Healthy People 2020 objective to the selected theory or model, focusing on the following two areas:
      1. Outlining client outcomes
      2. Designing nursing interventions
  5. Your paper should be two-to-three pages long (not including the references list) and use APA formatting for all components.

Please refer to the Grading Rubric for details on how this activity will be graded.

Please note: No submission is required this week for this checkpoint; this is simply a notification to begin preparing the assignment for later submission.

NU 601 Week 3 Blog Post 1: Autonomy and You

Instructions

As a CNS, Dr. Matteis had to assert to a psychiatrist that a psychiatric patient needed to be hospitalized. Was there a time when your autonomy as a nurse was important? Why might autonomy be of interest to you in your current work? Please explain in a blog post that is three-to-five sentences long.

Please refer to this Grading Rubric for details on how this activity will be graded.

NU 601 Week 3 Discussion 1: Borderline Case: Ethics of Patient Care

Initial Post

Please respond to the following prompts:

  • Review Wilkinson’s (1997) defining attributes and describe how the NPR podcast, If You Have Dementia, Can you Hasten Death As You Wished? case story meets the definition of a borderline case.
  • Describe the ethical issues the case raises.
  • If it were changed to meet criteria for a model case, what ethical issues would come to the forefront?

Your initial post should contain two to three paragraphs with three to four sentences per paragraph. The post should integrate a minimum of three readings and/or other evidence-based research articles no more than three years old and use APA formatting for citations and references.

Replies

Compare and contrast your ethical viewpoint, using a minimum of two scholarly sources using APA style, with two of your colleagues.

Please refer to the Grading Rubric for details on how this activity will be graded. The described expectations meet the passing level of 80 percent. Students are directed to review the Discussion Grading Rubric for criteria that exceeds expectations.