Field experience, c823 task 2
INTRODUCTION
The Field Experience course represents a significant milestone toward completion of your MSN degree. This assessment will be the final task of the MSN Field Experience. For this assessment, you will create an introduction and literature review, which will make up the first two chapters of your written capstone document. Upon successful completion of this task, you will move to the capstone course, where you will fully implement and complete your capstone project. Chapters one and two of your capstone project will not be evaluated again in the capstone course but must be included in the final capstone document.
REQUIREMENTS
You must use the rubric to direct the creation of your submission because it provides detailed criteria that will be used to evaluate your work. Each requirement below may be evaluated by more than one rubric aspect. The rubric aspect titles may contain hyperlinks to relevant portions of the course.
Chapter 1: Introduction
- Provide an introduction (suggested length of 4–6 pages) that explains the rationale for your project by doing the following:
- Explain the background of the problem.
- Provide your problem statement.
- Summarize the scope of the project by doing the following:
- Describe the practice change, quality improvement, or innovation.
- Provide a rationale for the practice change, quality improvement, or innovation.
Chapter 2: Literature Review
- Provide a thorough and well-organized literature review on your topic by doing the following:
- Review a minimum of 30 credible sources that were published within the last five years.
Note: In order to prove that you have reviewed 30 credible sources, you will need to provide a list, in APA format, of the sources you reviewed for part B1.
- Identify best practices for your topic based on the review of literature.
- Provide an evidence summary of the literature relevant to the topic you have chosen.
- Recommend a practice change, quality improvement, or innovation based on the findings of the literature review and evidence summary from parts A and B.
- When you use sources, include all in-text citations and references in APA format.
File Restrictions
File name may contain only letters, numbers, spaces, and these symbols: ! - _ . * ' ( )
File size limit: 200 MB
File types allowed: doc, docx, rtf, xls, xlsx, ppt, pptx, odt, pdf, txt, qt, mov, mpg, avi, mp3, wav, mp4, wma, flv, asf, mpeg, wmv, m4v, svg, tif, tiff, jpeg, jpg, gif, png, zip, rar, tar, 7z
RUBRIC
A1:BACKGROUND
| NOT EVIDENT
An explanation of the background of the problem is not provided. |
APPROACHING COMPETENCE
The explanation of the background of the problem is illogical or omits crucial information to provide context for the rationale of the project. |
COMPETENT
The explanation of the background of the problem is logical and corresponds with the rationale for the project. |
A2:PROBLEM STATEMENT
| NOT EVIDENT
A problem statement is not provided. |
APPROACHING COMPETENCE
A problem statement is provided, but it does not correspond with the rationale for the project. |
COMPETENT
A problem statement is provided that corresponds with the rationale for the project. |
A3A:PRACTICE CHANGE, QUALITY IMPROVEMENT, OR INNOVATION
| NOT EVIDENT
A description is not provided of the practice change, quality improvement, or innovation. |
APPROACHING COMPETENCE
A description is provided of the practice change, quality improvement, or innovation, but the description contains inaccuracies. |
COMPETENT
An accurate description is provided of the practice change, quality improvement, or innovation. |
A3B:RATIONALE
| NOT EVIDENT
A rationale for the practice change, quality improvement, or innovation is not provided. |
APPROACHING COMPETENCE
The rationale is not well supported, or the summary contains irrelevant details of why the practice change, quality improvement, or innovation is appropriate for the project. |
COMPETENT
The rationale is well supported and logically summarizes why the practice change, quality improvement, or innovation is appropriate for the project. |
B1:30 CREDIBLE SOURCES
| NOT EVIDENT
Fewer than 30 credible sources that were published within the last five years were reviewed. |
APPROACHING COMPETENCE
At least 30 credible sources that were published within the last five years were reviewed but not in the context of a thorough and well-organized literature review of the topic. |
COMPETENT
At least 30 credible sources that were published within the last five years were reviewed in the context of a thorough and well-organized literature review of the topic. |
B2:BEST PRACTICES
| NOT EVIDENT
Best practices are not identified. |
APPROACHING COMPETENCE
Best practices are identified, but they do not correspond with the topic based on the literature review. |
COMPETENT
Best practices are identified that relate to the topic based on the literature review. |
B3:EVIDENCE SUMMARY
| NOT EVIDENT
An evidence summary is not provided. |
APPROACHING COMPETENCE
The evidence summary is not well supported by literature, or the summary of literature contains irrelevant details to the chosen topic. |
COMPETENT
The evidence summary is well supported by literature and appropriately summarizes the literature relevant to the chosen topic. |
C:RECOMMENDATION
| NOT EVIDENT
A recommendation of a practice change, quality improvement, or innovation is not provided. |
APPROACHING COMPETENCE
The recommendation of a practice change, quality improvement, or innovation is not well supported or based on the findings of the literature review and evidence summary from parts B1, B2, and B3. |
COMPETENT
The recommendation of a practice change, quality improvement, or innovation is well-supported and based on the findings of the literature review and evidence summary from parts B1, B2, and B3. |
D: APA SOURCES
| NOT EVIDENT
The submission does not include in-text citations and references according to APA style for content that is quoted, paraphrased, or summarized. |
APPROACHING COMPETENCE
The submission includes in-text citations and references for content that is quoted, paraphrased, or summarized but does not demonstrate a consistent application of APA style. |
COMPETENT
The submission includes in-text citations and references for content that is quoted, paraphrased, or summarized and demonstrates a consistent application of APA style. |
PROFESSIONAL COMMUNICATION:
| NOT EVIDENT
Content is unstructured, is disjointed, or contains pervasive errors in mechanics, usage, or grammar. Vocabulary or tone is unprofessional or distracts from the topic. |
APPROACHING COMPETENCE
Content is poorly organized, is difficult to follow, or contains errors in mechanics, usage, or grammar that cause confusion. Terminology is misused or ineffective. |
COMPETENT
Content reflects attention to detail, is organized, and focuses on the main ideas as prescribed in the task or chosen by the candidate. Terminology is pertinent, is used correctly, and effectively conveys the intended meaning. Mechanics, usage, and grammar promote accurate interpretation and understanding. |
