Signature Assignment: Improving Health Care Delivery – This assignment is worth 400 points, PLEASE FOLLOW DIRECTIONS CAREFULLY
Presentation:
Among various stakeholders, the registered nurse is an advocate for patients, their health and the care delivered to them. There is a need to evaluate the health status of vulnerable populations, to assess nursing’s role in health initiatives, and to find ways that we can help improve health. This presentation enables students to assess the role of organized efforts to influence health care delivery, and the contributions of medical technology, research findings, and societal values on our evolving health care delivery system.
This presentation will examine the role of the nurse as a health professional and leader.
• Choose a high-risk risk population
• Address a health care need for this population
• What resources are provided for this population?
• What are the economic priorities, challenges, and issues for this population?
• What are the major ethical, societal, professional, and legal system-level issues confronting providers, insurers, public policymakers, and organizations regarding the care for this population?
• How could nursing intervene or advocate to improve the health care delivery for this population?
This PowerPoint® (Microsoft Office) or Impress® (Open Office) presentation should be a minimum of 20 slides (maximum of 30 slides), including a title, introduction, conclusion and reference slide, with detailed speaker notes and recorded audio comments for all content slides. Use the audio recording feature with the presentation software. Use at least four scholarly sources and make certain to review the module’s Signature Assignment Rubric before starting your presentation. This presentation is worth 400 points for quality content and presentation.
723549
an hour ago
Criteria
Does Not Meet Expectations
Approaches Expectations
Meets Expectations
Exceeds Expectations
Criterion Score
Identification and Appraisal Weight: 30%
0 points
(0 – 83 pts)
Population and problem may not have been clearly identified. Fewer than 2 scholarly journal articles reviewed. No application made to population and problem. Current knowledge of population and problem not summarized.
84 points
(84 – 95 pts)
Population and problem identified. Minimum of 2 scholarly journal articles reviewed, but not clearly applied to population and problem. Missing summary of current knowledge of population and problem.
96 points
(96 – 107 pts)
Population and problem identified. Minimum of 4 scholarly journal articles reviewed and applied to population and problem. Current knowledge of population and problem summarized.
120 points
(108 – 120 pts)
Population and problem clearly identified in its context. Minimum of 6 scholarly journal articles reviewed and appraised for application to population and problem. Current knowledge of population and problem fully described.
Score of Identification and Appraisal Weight: 30%,/ 120Criterion score has been overridden
Strategic Analysis for priorities, challenges, and issues Weight: 40%
0 points
(0 – 111 pts)
Strategic analysis for priorities, challenges, and issues not clear. No discussion of obstacles to priorities, challenges, and issues. Ethical considerations missing. Evaluation methods missing, and internal evidence sources not fully identified.
112 points
(112 – 127 pts)
Strategic analysis for priorities, challenges, and issues partially outlined. Analysis for priorities, challenges, and issues is unclear or missing. Barriers and resources for priorities, challenges, and issues identified, but not explained fully. Ethical considerations may be missing. No sources of internal evidence identified. Evaluation methods may be missing.
128 points
(128 – 143 pts)
Strategic analysis for priorities, challenges, and issues clearly outlined with plan for operationalizing the change in the practice environment. Theoretical model for change identified. Barriers and resources for priorities, challenges, and issues identified and partially explained fully. Ethical considerations described. Evaluation methods of implementation outlined. Sources of internal evidence to demonstrate system-level issues.
160 points
(144 – 160 pts)
Strategic analysis for priorities, challenges, and issues based on research, clearly outlined with thorough plan for operationalizing the change in practice environment. Theoretical model identified and applied. Barriers and resources for priorities, challenges, and issues identified and fully explained. Ethical considerations described. Evaluation methods of implementation outcome clearly outlined. Sources of internal evidence identified as demonstration of improvement demonstrate to system-level issues.
Score of Strategic Analysis for priorities, challenges, and issues Weight: 40%,/ 160Criterion score has been overridden
Quality of Written and Verbal Communication Weight: 15%
0 points
(0 – 41 pts)
Style and voice inappropriate or do not address given audience, purpose, etc. Word choice is excessively redundant, clichéd, and unspecific. Inconsistent tone, inflection, volume, and pausing. For example, use of fillers (such as um and uh) are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning.
42 points
(42 – 47 pts)
Style and voice are somewhat appropriate to given audience and purpose. Tone, inflection, volume, and pausing detract from the presentation. Word choice is often unspecific, generic, redundant, and clichéd. Inconsistencies in language, sentence structure, and/or word choice are present. Use of fillers (such as um and uh) distract the audience from the presentation.
48 points
(48 – 53 pts)
Style and voice are appropriate to the given audience and purpose. Tone, inflection, volume, and pausing are appropriately placed and add meaning to the presentation. Fillers (such as um and uh) do not distract from the presentation. Word choice is specific and purposeful, and somewhat varied throughout. Minimal mechanical or typographical errors are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used.
60 points
(54 – 60 pts)
Style and voice are not only appropriate to the given audience and purpose, but also show originality and creativity. Tone and inflection emphasize material and add meaning to the presentation. Word choice is specific, purposeful, dynamic, and varied. No fillers (such as um or uh) used. Appropriate volume and pausing add interest. Speaker is clearly in command of standard, academic English.
Score of Quality of Written and Verbal Communication Weight: 15%,/ 60Criterion score has been overridden
Technical Weight: 15%
0 points
(0 – 41 pts)
Presentation not submitted in visual and audio presentation format. Does not include required multimedia, graphics, diagrams, and/or illustrations or they are irrelevant to topic or detract from slide content or presentation as a whole. APA format and style are not evident throughout the presentation.
42 points
(42 – 47 pts)
Presentation submitted in visual but no audio or presenter notes presentation format. Required multimedia, graphics, diagrams, and/or illustrations are generally relevant, but some may not appropriately support the slide content. There are missing APA elements, or some are incorrectly formatted throughout the presentation.
48 points
(48 – 53 pts)
Presentation submitted in visual but no audio presentation format. Required multimedia, graphics, diagrams, and/or illustrations are highly relevant and acceptably support the slide content; sized and positioned appropriately. Reference slide and other in-text citations are formatted mostly correct using APA elements.
60 points
(54 – 60 pts)
Presentation submitted in visual and audio presentation format. Required multimedia, graphics, diagrams, and/or illustrations add clarity and sophistication to the presentation content; they improve the effectiveness of the presentation. Reference slide and other in-text citations are formatted correctly using APA elements.
Score of Technical Weight: 15%,/ 60Criterion score has been overridden
Rubric Total ScoreTotal
Score of N502 Signature Assignment Rubric v1.1,/ 400Criterion score has been overridden
Last Completed Projects
| topic title | academic level | Writer | delivered |
|---|