articlewritingcafe.com –
ASSIGNMENT 1
Community Teaching Plan: Teaching Experience Paper
Assessment Description
The RN to BSN program at Grand Canyon University meets the requirements for clinical competencies as defined by the Commission on Collegiate Nursing Education (CCNE) and the American Association of Colleges of Nursing (AACN), using nontraditional experiences for practicing nurses. These experiences come in the form of direct and indirect care experiences in which licensed nursing students engage in learning within the context of their hospital organization, specific care discipline, and local communities.
Note: This is an individual assignment. In 1,500-2,000 words, describe the teaching experience and discuss your observations. The written portion of this assignment should include:
1. Summary of teaching plan
2. Epidemiological rationale for topic
3. Evaluation of teaching experience
4. Community response to teaching
5. Areas of strengths and areas of improvement
You are required to cite a minimum of three sources to complete this assignment. Sources must be published within the last 5 years, appropriate for the assignment criteria, and relevant to nursing practice.
Prepare this assignment according to the APA guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.
This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. A link to the LopesWrite technical support articles is located in Course Resources if you need assistance.
SEE RUBRIC BELOW:
Community Teaching Plan: Teaching Experience Paper – Rubric
Collapse All Community Teaching Plan: Teaching Experience Paper – Rubric
Comprehensive Summary of Teaching Plan
15 points
Criteria Description
Comprehensive Summary of Teaching Plan
5. Excellent
15 points
Focus of community teaching is clear, consistent with community teaching plan, detailed, and well supported. The presentation demonstrates an ability to create effective teaching plans relative to a population.
4. Good
12.75 points
Community teaching plan is clear with a detailed summary of each component. Minor rationale is needed for clarity or support.
3. Satisfactory
11.25 points
Summary of community teaching plan is offered, but some elements are vague. Some rationale or evidence is needed for clarity and support.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
9.75 points
Summary of community teaching plan is incomplete. Overall, the teaching plan is unclear.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Summary of community teaching plan is omitted.
Epidemiological Rationale for Topic
15 points
Criteria Description
Epidemiological Rationale for Topic
5. Excellent
15 points
Strong epidemiological rationale is provided and demonstrates support for the topic presented.
4. Good
12.75 points
Epidemiological rationale is provided and provides general support for the topic. Some detail is needed for clarity.
3. Satisfactory
11.25 points
Epidemiological rationale is summarized and provides some support for the topic. More information or evidence is needed for support.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
9.75 points
Epidemiological rationale is unclear or incorrect.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Epidemiological rationale for the topic is omitted.
Evaluation of Teaching Experience
20 points
Criteria Description
Evaluation of Teaching Experience
5. Excellent
20 points
A comprehensive evaluation of teaching experience is presented. Insight into self-appraisal in regard to teaching is demonstrated.
4. Good
17 points
Evaluation of the teaching experience is generally presented. Some detail is needed for clarity.
3. Satisfactory
15 points
Evaluation of teaching experience is summarized. Some aspects are vague. More detail is needed to fully illustrate an assessment of the experience.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
13 points
Evaluation of teaching experience is unclear or underdeveloped. The narrative is not written in a manner that evaluates the experience.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Evaluation of teaching experience is omitted or incomplete.
Community Response to Teaching Provided
15 points
Criteria Description
Community Response to Teaching Provided
5. Excellent
15 points
A detailed description of community response to teaching is presented.
4. Good
12.75 points
A description of community response to teaching is generally presented. Some information is needed for support or clarity.
3. Satisfactory
11.25 points
A summary of the community response to teaching is presented. Some areas are unclear. More information is needed for support or clarity.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
9.75 points
Community response to teaching is partially summarized. More information is needed.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Community response to teaching is omitted.
Areas of Strength and Improvement
15 points
Criteria Description
Areas of Strength and Improvement
5. Excellent
15 points
Areas of strength and improvement are thoroughly discussed. The author demonstrates insight into personal strengths and areas where improvement would be beneficial.
4. Good
12.75 points
Areas of strength and improvement are discussed.
3. Satisfactory
11.25 points
Areas of strength and improvement are generally discussed.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
9.75 points
Areas of strength and improvement are partially discussed.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Areas of strength and improvement are omitted.
Thesis Development and Purpose
5 points
Criteria Description
Thesis Development and Purpose
5. Excellent
5 points
Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.
4. Good
4.25 points
Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.
3. Satisfactory
3.75 points
Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
3.25 points
Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.
Argument Logic and Construction
5 points
Criteria Description
Argument Logic and Construction
5. Excellent
5 points
Clear and convincing argument presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.
4. Good
4.25 points
Argument shows logical progression. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.
3. Satisfactory
3.75 points
Argument is orderly but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
3.25 points
Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)
5 points
Criteria Description
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)
5. Excellent
5 points
Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
4. Good
4.25 points
Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.
3. Satisfactory
3.75 points
Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
3.25 points
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.
Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)
2 points
Criteria Description
Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)
5. Excellent
2 points
All format elements are correct.
4. Good
1.7 points
Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style.
3. Satisfactory
1.5 points
Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
1.3 points
Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Template is not used appropriately, or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.
Documentation of Sources
3 points
Criteria Description
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)
5. Excellent
3 points
Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.
4. Good
2.55 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.
3. Satisfactory
2.25 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
1.95 points
Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Sources are not documented.
The post articlewritingcafe.com – assignment1.docx appeared first on Articlewritingcafe.
