May 30, | nursing, med, NURS, Paper
Discussion 1: Scholarly Sources and the Walden Library
Discussion 1: Scholarly Sources and the Walden Library
The peer reviewed article I found by Garinger, Chow, & Luzzeri (2018) focused heavily on the relationships between stress, perfectionism, and burnout in athletes at the college level. The internet article I found by Gunter simultaneously discussed reasons for athlete stress and how to manage symptoms for it. I noticed in the peer review study that Garinger, Chow, and Luzzeri (2018) did not hold back on the perceived intellectual level of their readers. They defined specific tests and terminology that they wanted readers to be more familiar with, but clearly expected that their overall audience would be of a certain intellectual level. In contrast, Gunter’s article was posted on a website that is accessible to the public and their writing, while still informational, was much more defined and easily understandable to the general public Discussion 1: Scholarly Sources and the Walden Library. Garinger, Chow, and Luzzeri (2018) were writing and sharing the results they found during their research which resulted in definitive, research-based reasons behind athlete burnout and stress. Gunter approached the relationship more clinically by describing potential symptoms of stress and burnout in athletes and different methods people can use to combat the stress. Additionally, the peer reviewed article has a much more focused topic that is discussed throughout the entire article. The authors focus specifically on the relationships between stress, burnout, and perfection in college athletes. The internet article approaches stress and athletes on a much broader scale, including things like symptoms and management while also discussing a generalized group of athletes experiencing stress.
The peer reviewed article would help me to approach my writing more critically and intellectually. My writing would become more scholarly in the sense that it would not be easily understandable by the general public because I’m not writing for the general public. The internet article is written for the general public, and I feel like because of this the author leaves out crucial points and topics about the relationships between athletes and their burnout. The peer review article goes into great detail about the psychological understanding of stress and burnout that the internet article does and can not because it is meant for the public, not a specific audience Discussion 1: Scholarly Sources and the Walden Library.
As a professional, I would definitely use the peer reviewed article over the one from the internet. Peer review articles are put through massive changes and alterations by other professionals before it can be published. Articles found on the internet might not be reviewed at all, leading to misinformation and incorrect findings. Peer reviewed articles have a higher respect in any profession as opposed to internet articles.
Peer Reviewed Article –
Garinger, L., Chow, G., & Luzzeri, M. (2018). The effect of perceived stress and specialization on the relationship between perfectionism and burnout in collegiate athletes. Anxiety, Stress, and Coping, 31(6), 714-727. https://doi.org/10.1080/10615806.2018.1521514
Internet Article: Managing Stress in Sport — Gunter Psychological ServicesGunter Psychological Services (drkensagunter.com)
Discussion 1: Scholarly Sources and the Walden Library
Scholarly information comes from a wide variety of sources including academic books, encyclopedias, handbooks, and journals. “Scholarly” is a broad term for publications written by and for researchers and scholars. These publications are typically not found in your local bookstore or public library because they are written for a very specific audience. They are mostly available in university and specialized libraries, not freely available online. This is why it is essential to learn to navigate the Walden Library and use it often!
During your time at Walden, you will be focusing on peer reviewed journal articles, a specific type of scholarly publication that goes through a specialized review process. These types of articles may report on original research or review the work of other researchers.
As you use the Walden Library to search the peer reviewed literature to support your discussion posts and assignments, it is important to understand how the Library is organized. Most modern libraries make their materials available electronically through searchable databases. Here in the Walden Library, you have access to specialized academic databases, many of which are specific to psychology and the social and behavioral sciences Discussion 1: Scholarly Sources and the Walden Library.
As part of this week’s Discussion, you will explore the databases in the Walden Library and compare and contrast peer reviewed articles found in these databases to those found online.
To prepare for this Discussion:
Review Learning Resources for this week and familiarize yourself with navigating the Walden Library, searching Library databases, and limiting your searches to full text, peer review, and publication date.
Search the “APA PsycINFO database” in the Walden Library and locate a peer reviewed article on a psychology topic you would like to explore relevant to your area of specialization in your program.
Next, search the Internet and locate an article related to the same topic.
Reflect on the sources of both articles, and evaluate each article using the evaluation methods listed in the Learning Resources.
With these thoughts in mind:
By Day 3
Post a brief description of the articles you found. Next, compare and contrast the articles and explain the differences you noticed between them. Further explain how the use of peer review articles will improve the arguments in your scholarly writing. As a professional in the field of psychology, which article would you use as evidence to support your ideas? Provide the article title and journal name for the article you find in the Library and the URL for the article you found online Discussion 1: Scholarly Sources and the Walden Library.
ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER NOW
Be sure to support your postings and responses with specific references to this week’s Learning Resources.
Read a selection of your colleagues’ postings.
By Day 5
Respond to two of your colleagues and continue the discussion through Day 7. When researching a topic, often leads to another. Choose one of your colleague’s posts and search the Walden Library databases to locate another peer reviewed article on the same topic as your colleague’s article. Describe the article you found and why it might be of interest to your colleague. Include the name of the database where you found it (i.e., APA PsycINFO, etc.) and further provide the citation to the article in APA format (author, publication, year, article title, journal title, and volume/issue/page numbers).
In recent years, I developed interest in mental health of the individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities. From the Walden University library’s PsycInfo database, I was able to find several peer-reviewed articles about this topic. One of them that particularly caught my attention is a research article named “Repeat Emergency Department Visits for Individuals with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities and Psychiatric Disorders” by Durbin et al. (2019), which found that individuals with dual diagnosis are more likely to repeat emergency department visit within 30 days from the initial discharge (p. 206). On the other hand, from internet search, I also found another article related to mental health of the individuals with intellectual disabilities: “Co-Occurring Mental Illness and Developmental Disabilities” written by Quintero and Flick (2010). In this article, the authors cautioned that mental health needs of those with dual diagnosis are not adequately met through the current mental health care system, and introduced a specific rehabilitation program consisting of a multidisciplinary team situated in Houston, Texas (paras, 12) Discussion 1: Scholarly Sources and the Walden Library.
In comparison, the authors of the two articles made similar arguments that the mental health needs of those with dual diagnosis are not adequately met through the current mental health care system. However, Quantero and Flicks (2010) did not cite any specific study to back up this claim. They only cited one article published in 1997 (Silka & Hauser, paras 7) to explain that overshadowing often occurs when clinicians mistakenly attribute psychiatric symptoms to one’s intellectual and developmental disabilities, and as a result leave those symptoms untreated. On the contrary, Durbin et al. (2019) attempted to find out how under-treated psychiatric disorders in individuals with dual diagnosis may impact the health care system by comparing and contrasting repeat emergency department visits by group identities (i.e., psychiatric disorder with or without IDD). They used population-base retrospective cohort study (Durbin et al., 2019, p. 207), stringent data collection, statistical methods, and specific variables to ascertain their findings. Furthermore, they also noted the limitations in their study in not being able to rule out other socioeconomic factors as potential extraneous variables, which may have impacted repeating emergency department visits (Drubin et al, 2019, p. 213).
Working towards becoming a professional in the field of psychology, it is my belief that we should emphasize facts over opinions by focusing our search in peer-reviewed scholarly journals to strengthen our arguments. According to Walden University library (2021), peer-reviewed journals “use a specific… process to try to ensure the accuracy and reliability of published articles (paras 2).” Although reading popular articles on the internet may help us understand the common beliefs and concerns shared by the general public, peer-reviewed scholarly articles should be what we focus on in our effort to further understand specific clinical issues and contribute to more understanding in the field in psychology Discussion 1: Scholarly Sources and the Walden Library.
References
Durbin, A., Balogh, R., Lin, E., Wilton, A. S., Selick, A., Dobranowski, K. M. & Lunsky, Y. (2019). Repeat Emergency Department Visits for Individuals with Intellectual and developmental Disabilities and Psychiatric Disorders. American Journal on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 124(3), 206-219.
Quantero, M. & Flick, S. (2010). Co-occurring mental illness and developmental disabilities. Social Work Today, 10(5), 6. https://www.socialworktoday.com/archive/092310p6.shtml
Silka, V. R., & Hauser, M, J. (1997). Psychiatric assessment of the person with mental retardation. Psychiatric Annals, 27(3). http://www.pipatl.org/bibliography/hauser/assessment.html
Walden University (2010). Evaluating resources: Peer review. Retrieved October 19, 2021, retrieved from https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/library/evaluating/peer-review Discussion 1: Scholarly Sources and the Walden Library
May 30, | nursing, med, NURS, Paper
Policy Analysis Paper
NURS 8100 Week 4 Assignment 3: Policy Analysis Paper [Major Assessment 2]
Policy Analysis Paper [Major Assessment 2]
In previous Discussions and Assignments, you have examined various aspects of the policy process: exploring the unintended consequences of policies, agenda setting, and analyzing policy recommendations. In this Assignment, you will have the opportunity to further develop your analysis skills by working through the policy analysis process. To be an effective agent for social change, you must be able to logically and critically analyze policy from multiple perspectives and contexts and then present your insights in a succinct and professional manner Policy Analysis Paper. This exercise will afford such an experience.
ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE
For this Assignment, you will examine a particular policy of interest to you (perhaps the one you selected for this week’s Discussion), and apply a policy analysis framework to understand the impact associated with the implementation of the policy. You will then develop a policy analysis paper, which is due the end of Week 11. This paper will also serve as your Major Assessment for this course.
To prepare for Policy Analysis Paper [Major Assessment 2]:
Select a health care policy and a policy analysis framework to utilize for this Assignment. You may use the policy and framework you identified in this week’s Discussion or change your selection. Policy Analysis Paper [Major Assessment 2]
To complete for Policy Analysis Paper [Major Assessment 2]:
Write an 8- to 10-page analysis paper (including references) in which you succinctly address the following:
Part 1: Define the policy issue.
How is the issue affecting the policy arena?
What are the current politics of the issue?
At what level in the policy making process is the issue?
Part 2: Apply a policy analysis framework to explore the issue using the following contexts:
Social
Ethical
Legal
Historical
Financial/economic
Theoretical underpinnings of the policy
Policy Analysis Paper
Include in this section:
Who are the stakeholders of interest?
Is there a nursing policy/position statement on this health care issue? If so, who developed it?
Part 3: Policy options/solutions
What are the policy options/solutions for addressing the issue? Include at least three levels of options/solutions: no change; partial change; radical change or maximum change.
What are the theoretical underpinnings of the policy options/solutions?
What are the health advocacy aspects and leadership requirements of each option?
How does each option/solution provide an opportunity or need for inter-professional collaboration?
What are the pros and cons of each suggested change?Policy Analysis Paper Include the cost benefits, effectiveness, and efficiency of each option along with the utility and feasibility of each option.
Part 4: Building Consensus
Outline a plan for building consensus around your recommended option/solution for solving the policy issue.
Part 5: References
Limit your references so this section is no more than 2 pages.
Your written assignments must follow APA guidelines. Be sure to support your work with specific citations from appropriate Learning Resources and additional scholarly sources as appropriate. Refer to the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association to ensure that your in- text citations and reference list are correct. Policy Analysis Paper [Major Assessment 2]
By Day 7 of Week 11 of Policy Analysis Paper [Major Assessment 2]
This Assignment is due.
NURS 8100 Week 4 Assignment 1: Issues in Health Care Reform (Interview)
Continue to work on this Assignment, assigned in Week 2 and due in Week 9.
By Day 7 of Week 9
Submit this Assignment.
NURS 8100 Week 4 Assignment 2: Health Policy Proposal Analysis (Policy Brief)
Continue to work on this Assignment, assigned in Week 3 and due in Week 7.
By Day 7 of Week 7
Submit this Assignment.
NURS 8100 Week 4: Policy Analysis Frameworks
Consider the social contract between the nursing profession and consumers of health care. This social contract has long been demonstrated by nurses. For example, recall the nursing pioneer Lillian Wald who in the late 1800s worked to improve the health and welfare of the immigrant population in New York. How does engaging in the policy process assist nurses with fulfilling this social contract today? To better influence health and nursing policy, which seeks to improve health and quality outcomes, nurses need to develop their policy acumen. Utilizing a policy analysis framework can assist in this process.
This week continues the examination of the policy process addressed in Week 3. You will examine how frameworks from nursing and other disciplines can work together to inform policy analysis.
Learning Objectives
Students will:
Propose a policy analysis framework for a specific policy issue
Conduct a comprehensive policy analysis critically analyzing a health policy from multiple contexts
Photo Credit: [alphaspirit]/[iStock / Getty Images Plus]/Getty Images
Learning Resources
Note: To access this week’s required library resources, please click on the link to the Course Readings List, found in the Course Materials section of your Syllabus.
Required Readings
Blackman, V. S. (2005). Putting policy theory to work: Tobacco control in California. Policy, Politics, & Nursing Practice, 6(2), 148–155. doi: 10.1177/1527154405276289
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
In this article, the author applies Kingdon’s multiple streams theory to agenda setting and the public policy issue of tobacco use. In addition, the author points out two limitations of Kingdon’s model—the need to build alliances and the varying power levels among stakeholders.
Craig, R. L., Felix, H. C., Walker, J. F., & Philips, M. M. (2010). Public health professionals as policy entrepreneurs: Arkansas’s childhood obesity policy experience. American Journal of Public Health, 100(11), 2047–2052.
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
Fawcett, J., & Russell, G. (2001). A conceptual model of nursing and health policy. Policy, Politics, & Nursing, 2(2), 108–116. doi: 10.1177/152715440100200205
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
Fawcett and Russell provide a five-level conceptual model of nursing and health policy, and diagram the relationship between the model and new health policies. Guidelines for health policy analysis and evaluation are also provided.
Hewison, A. (2007). Policy analysis: A framework for nurse managers. Journal of Nursing Management, 15(7), 693–6 99. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2934.2006.00731.x
Initially, this article presents a broad analysis of policy making and then provides a specific framework of policy analysis for nurse managers. The author focuses on the necessity for nurses to become involved in health care policy making
Policy analysis: A framework for nurse managers. Journal of Nursing Management, 15(7) by Hewison, A. Copyright 2007 by BLACKWELL PUBLISHING – JOURNALS. Reprinted by permission of BLACKWELL PUBLISHING – JOURNALS via the Copyright Clearance Center.
Howie, W. O. (2009). Mandatory reporting of medical errors: Crafting policy and integrating it into practice. Journal for Nurse Practitioners, 5(9), 649–654. doi:10.1016/j.nurpra.2009.07.012
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
John, P. (2003). Is there life after policy streams, advocacy coalitions, and punctuations: Using evolutionary theory to explain policy change? Policy Studies Journal, 31(4), 481–4 98. doi: 10.1111/1541-0072.00039
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
This article advances the use of evolutionary theory as policy theory. The author proposes that aspects of evolutionary theory such as randomness, competition, and selection be applied to policy theory but cautions that more research regarding its applicability is needed.
Rawat, P., & Morris, J. C. (2016). Kingdon’s “Streams” model at thirty: Still relevant in the 21st century? Politics & Policy, 44(4), 608-638. doi: 10.1111/polp.12168
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
Russell, G., & Fawcett, J. (2005). The conceptual model for nursing and health policy revisited. Policy, Politics, & Nursing, 6(4), 108–116. doi: 10.1177/1527154405283304
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
In this article, Russell and Fawcett revise their 2001 conceptual model of nursing and health policy and provide guidelines for nursing-specific research.
Optional Resources
Bardach, E. (2004). Presidential address—The extrapolation problem: How can we learn from the experience of others? Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 23(2), 205. doi: 613545361
NURS 8100 Week 4 Discussion: Selecting a Policy Analysis Framework
Selecting a Policy Analysis Framework
The goal of policy analysis is to provide in-depth, relevant, and evaluative information about a policy. Using a framework as a guideline for the analysis provides scaffolding for logically and carefully considering the policy issue. To select a framework, one should consider the focus of the policy being analyzed and whether the policy is intended to be predictive or prescriptive. For this Discussion, you will choose a policy issue that is important to you and after evaluating the frameworks described in the Learning Resources, select the framework most appropriate for analyzing the issue.
To prepare for Selecting a Policy Analysis Framework:
Reflect on your understanding of the policy process: how policy is formulated, adopted, implemented, and evaluated.
Review the various frameworks presented in this week’s Learning Resources and consider how they are applied to nursing and health policies. How do they assist you in understanding and shaping policy Policy Analysis Paper?
Brainstorm a list of the issues that are most important to your practice (these can be issues at the institutional, local, state, national, or international level). Then identify a specific nursing or health care policy related to one key issue, and consider which of the frameworks you would use to examine the issue.
Note: You may not select the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act for this analysis.
By Day 3 of Selecting a Policy Analysis Framework
Post a cohesive response that addresses the following:
Identify the policy you have selected.
Describe the framework that you would use for this particular issue, and provide your rationale.
At what other stages in the policy process might an analysis framework provide guidance?
Policy Analysis Paper
Read a selection of your colleagues’ postings.
By Day 6 of Selecting a Policy Analysis Framework
Respond to at least two of your colleagues selecting postings for which you have an alternative framework suggestion and explain how that framework might affect the analysis.
Note: Please see the Syllabus and Discussion Rubric for formal Discussion question posting and response evaluation criteria.
Return to this Discussion in a few days to read the responses to your initial posting. Note what you learned and/or any insights you gained as a result of the comments made by your colleagues.
Be sure to support your work with specific citations from this week’s Learning Resources and any additional sources. Selecting a Policy Analysis Framework
Rubric Detail : NURS 8100 Week 4 Discussion: Selecting a Policy Analysis Framework
Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.
Name: NURS_8100_Week4_Discussion_Rubric
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
RESPONSIVENESS TO DISCUSSION QUESTIONDiscussion post minimum requirements:
*The original posting must be completed by Wednesday, Day 3, at 11:59pm MST. Two response postings to two different peer original posts, on two different days, are required by Saturday, Day 6, at 11:59pm MST. Faculty member inquiries require responses, which are not included in the minimum number of posts. Your Discussion Board postings should be written in standard edited English and follow APA style for format and grammar as closely as possible given the constraints of the online platform. Be sure to support the postings with specific citations from this week’s Learning Resources as well as resources available through the Walden University online databases. Refer to the Essential Guide to APA Style for Walden Students to ensure your in-text citations and reference list are correct.
8 (26.67%) – 8 (26.67%)
Discussion postings and responses exceed the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: Respond to the question being asked or the prompt provided; – Go beyond what is required in some meaningful way (e.g., the post contributes a new dimension, unearths something unanticipated); -Are substantive, reflective, with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence. – Demonstrate significant ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning -Resources as well as additional resources and has read, viewed, or considered a sampling of colleagues’ postings; -Exceed the minimum requirements for discussion posts*. NURS 8100 Week 4 Discussion: Selecting a Policy Analysis Framework
7 (23.33%) – 7 (23.33%)
Discussion postings and responses meet the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: -Respond to the question being asked or the prompt provided; -Are substantive, reflective, with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence.re -Demonstrate ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning Resources and has read, viewed, or considered a sampling of colleagues’ postings -Meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.
Policy Analysis Paper
6 (20%) – 6 (20%)
Discussion postings and responses are minimally responsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: – do not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question or prompt; and/or -May (lack) lack in depth, reflection, analysis, or synthesis but rely more on anecdotal than scholarly evidence; and/or -Do not adequately demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning -Resources and/or a sampling of colleagues’ postings; and/or has posted by the due date at least in part. – Lack ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Do not meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*. NURS 8100 Week 4 Discussion: Selecting a Policy Analysis Framework
0 (0%) – 5 (16.67%)
Discussion postings and responses are unresponsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: – do not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question or prompt; and/or – Lack in substance, reflection, analysis, or synthesis but rely more on anecdotal than scholarly evidence. – Lack ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Do not demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning Resources and/or a sampling of colleagues’ postings; and/or does not meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*. NURS 8100 Week 4 Discussion: Selecting a Policy Analysis Framework
CONTENT KNOWLEDGE
8 (26.67%) – 8 (26.67%)
Discussion postings and responses: -demonstrate in-depth understanding and application of concepts and issues presented in the course (e.g., insightful interpretations including analysis, synthesis and/or evaluation of topic; – are well supported by pertinent research/evidence from a variety of and multiple peer- reviewed books and journals, where appropriate; -Demonstrate significant mastery and thoughtful/accurate application of content, applicable skills or strategies presented in the course. NURS 8100 Week 4 Discussion: Selecting a Policy Analysis Framework
7 (23.33%) – 7 (23.33%)
Discussion postings and responses: -demonstrate understanding and application of the concepts and issues presented in the course, presented with some understanding and application of concepts and issues presented in the course (e.g., insightful interpretations including analysis, synthesis and/or evaluation of topic; -are supported by research/evidence from peer-reviewed books and journals, where appropriate; and · demonstrate some mastery and application of content, applicable skills, or strategies presented in the course. NURS 8100 Week 4 Discussion: Selecting a Policy Analysis Framework
6 (20%) – 6 (20%)
Discussion postings and responses: – demonstrate minimal understanding of concepts and issues presented in the course, and, although generally accurate, display some omissions and/or errors; –lack support by research/evidence and/or the research/evidence is inappropriate or marginal in quality; and/or lack of analysis, synthesis or evaluation of topic – demonstrate minimal content, skills or strategies presented in the course. ——-Contain numerous errors when using the skills or strategies presented in the course
0 (0%) – 5 (16.67%)
Discussion postings and responses demonstrate: -A lack of understanding of the concepts and issues presented in the course; and/or are inaccurate, contain many omissions and/or errors; and/or are not supported by research/evidence; and/or lack of analysis, synthesis or evaluation of topic -Many critical errors when discussing content, applicable skills or strategies presented in the course.
Policy Analysis Paper
CONTRIBUTION TO THE DISCUSSION
8 (26.67%) – 8 (26.67%)
Discussion postings and responses significantly contribute to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by: -providing Rich and relevant examples; discerning and thought-provoking ideas; and stimulating thoughts and probes; – -demonstrating original thinking, new perspectives, and extensive synthesis of ideas supported by the literature. NURS 8100 Week 4 Discussion: Selecting a Policy Analysis Framework
7 (23.33%) – 7 (23.33%)
Discussion postings and responses contribute to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by -providing relevant examples; thought-provoking ideas – Demonstrating synthesis of ideas supported by the literature
6 (20%) – 6 (20%)
Discussion postings and responses minimally contribute to the quality of discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by: – providing few and/or irrelevant examples; and/or – providing few if any thought- provoking ideas; and/or -. Information that is restated from the literature with no/little demonstration of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas.
Policy Analysis Paper
0 (0%) – 5 (16.67%)
Discussion postings and responses do not contribute to the quality of interaction/discussion and thinking and learning as they do not: -Provide examples (or examples are irrelevant); and/or -Include interesting thoughts or ideas; and/or – Demonstrate of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas
QUALITY OF WRITING
6 (20%) – 6 (20%)
Discussion postings and responses exceed doctoral -level writing expectations. They: · Use grammar and syntax that is clear, concise, and appropriate to doctoral level writing; · Make few if any errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · Use original language and refrain from directly quoting original source materials; -provide correct APA · Are positive, courteous, and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints. NURS 8100 Week 4 Discussion: Selecting a Policy Analysis Framework
5 (16.67%) – 5 (16.67%)
Discussion postings and responses meet doctoral -level writing expectations. They: ·Use grammar and syntax that is clear and appropriate to doctoral level writing; ; · Make a few errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · paraphrase but refrain from directly quoting original source materials; Provide correct APA format · Are courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints;.
4 (13.33%) – 4 (13.33%)
Discussion postings and responses are minimally below doctoral-level writing expectations. They: · Make more than occasional errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · Directly quote from original source materials and/or paraphrase rather than use original language; lack correct APA format; and/or · Are less than courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.
0 (0%) – 3 (10%)
Discussion postings and responses are well below doctoral -level writing expectations. They: · Use grammar and syntax that is that is unclear · Make many errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; and –use incorrect APA format · Are discourteous and disrespectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.
Policy Analysis Paper
