NSG1NMA-nursing management and assessment

Task 1 a: Analytical Review of a Contemporary Transitional Factor: Written Essay Weight: 25 % Word Count: 20 00 words (+/ - 10%) In this task, students are required to demonstrate development of central arguments for the critical review presentation. The analytical essay requires students to demonstrate critical analysis of factors that influence student transition to beginning level professional nursing practise. Students may choose from one (1) of the following contemporary transitional factors that impacts/influences newly registered nurses: 1. Independent decision making 2. Impact of shift work 3. Horizontal bullying 4. Increased independent workloads 5. Psychological burn -out Note that the choices will be capped across each campus so that there is an even spread of topics covered. Students must indicate their choice via the allocation submission portal in moodle during weeks 0 -3. The system works on a first -in basis, therefore the longer you leave it to submit your topic choice, you may be limited in o ptions. The assessment is designed to demonstrate an understanding of the subject matter, literature search and review skills, academic writing and critical analy sis abilities. In the essay, students MUST address the following points related to the contemp orary transitional factor in this paper using current literature and nursing Standards, Codes and guidelines as evidence: • INTRODUCTION - Describe the contemporary transitional factor that can impact new graduate nurse s; • ANALYSIS - Discuss and analyse why th e contemporary transitional factor occurs in relation to new graduate nurses; • RE COMMENDATIONS - Discuss and analyse how and why the factor should be addressed (by both nursing as a profession and healthcare organisations ) - include in your response the impact this factor has on the quality of nursing and delivery of patient care. Prior to preparing your assessment, p lease take note of the following information : • This assessment task is to be completed as a literature review. For information about the req uirements of a literature review and how to set it out , please access the following University help sheets : literature -review_basic_2020 literature -review_detailed_2020 literature -review_planning_2020 literature -review_structure_2020 • Headings and subheadings are to be used to guide the reader through the contents of your review. • You do not need to identify how you conducted your literature search . • Two (2) themes should be discussed within your analysis of why the contemporary transitional factor occurs . • Two (2) strategies should be provided within your response to how and why the factor should be addressed . • Students should refer to relevant nursing Standard s, Codes and guidelines within their recommendations . These should be included in your reference list, but these will not be counted toward the minimum references required. • Students need to cite at least eight (8) academic references (i.e. current peer rev iewed literature ). • Referencing is to be according to APA 7 th edition guidelines . This assessment task relates to the following outcomes/attributes as per the course descriptor: Learning Outcomes: K1 ; K2 ; K3 ; S2 ; S4 ; A3 Graduate Attributes: GA1 Thinkers; GA2 Innovators; GA4 Communicators; GA5 Leaders Marking Rubric The minimum possible score for this rubric is 0 points and the maximum score is 85 points (Content 55 , Readability 15, Referencing 10, and Academic Requirements 5) which will be conv erted to a mark out of 25 to represent the 25 % weighting applied to the task. Intermediate scores will be converted respectively and rounded to the nearest available grade. Late submission penalties apply as per the Course Descriptor . 0 points 1 point 2 points 3 points 4 points 5 points CONTENT Introduction Background information about the transitional factor selected is not articulated. Relevance to graduate nursing is omitted . Purpose statement is not included. Main discussion themes are not identified in the purpose statement. Background info rmation about the transitional factor selected is not clearly articulated. Relevance to graduate nursing is unclear. Purpose statement is unidentifiable. Main discussion themes are poorly identified in the purpose statement. Background information about the transitional factor selected is at times unclear. Relevance to graduate nursing is weakly articulated. Purpose statement could be stated more clearly and concisely. Main discussion themes are unclear. Background information about the transitional factor selected lacks clear linkage to topic. Relevance to graduate nursing could be more clearly articulated. Purpose statement could be stronger. Main discussion themes lack clarity. Background information about the transitional factor selected is engaging and leads to an underdeveloped purpose statement. Relevance to graduate nursing is articulated and purpose statement is clear. Main discussion themes identified. Background information about the transitional fac tor selected is engaging and leads to a clear purpose statement. Relevance to graduate nursing is articulated and purpose statement is clear and concise. Main discussion themes clearly identified. ANALYSIS: THEME 1 Critical Analysis Review – Comparison No comparison or contrast of findings . Poor or little comparison and/or contrast of findings . Minimal comparison and contrast of findings. Moderate comparison and contrast of findings . Substantial comparison and contrast of findings . Comprehensive comparison and contrast of findings . ANALYSIS: THEME 1 Critical Analysis Review – Limitations & Gaps Limitations are omitted. Gaps and controversies that exist in the literature are not stated or discussed. Limitations are poorly expressed. Gaps and controversies that exist in the literature are not clearly stated. Limitations are only stated and not explored in any detail. Gaps and controversies in the literature are stated, but with minimal depth. Limitatio ns are discussed, but connections to differences in findings are not clearly identified. Gaps and controversies are discussed, but need clarity. Limitations are discussed, but require stronger connections to differences in findings. Gaps and controversies in the literature are explored with depth. Limitations that might have led to different findings are discussed. Gaps and controversies that exist in the literature are clearly discussed. ANALYSIS: THEME 2 Critical Analysis Review – Comparison No comparison or contrast of findings. Poor or little comparison and/or contrast of findings. Minimal comparison and contrast of findings. Moderate comparison and contrast of findings. Substantial comparison and contrast of findings. Comprehensive comparison and contrast of findings. ANALYSIS: THEME 2 Critical Analysis Review – Limitations & Gaps Limitations are omitted. Gaps and controversies that exist in the literature are not stated or discussed. Limitations are poorly expressed. Gaps and controversies that exist in the literature are not clearly stated. Limitations are only stated and not explored in any detail. Gaps and controversies in the literature are stated, but with minimal depth. Limitations are discussed, but connections to differences in findings are not clearly identified. Gaps and controversies are discussed, but need clarity. Limitations are discussed, but require stronger connections to differences in findings. Gaps and contr oversies in the literature are explored with depth. Limitations that might have led to different findings are discussed. Gaps and controversies that exist in the literature are clearly discussed. RECOMMEND - ATION 1 Nil recommendation made. Poor recommendation that takes does not take into consideration professional issues or needs and/or does not consider organisational factors . Limited recommendation that does not fully take into consideration the professional issues or needs and/or does not consider organisational factors . Moderate recommendation that takes into consideration the professional issues or needs and/or considers organisational factors . Substantial recommendation that takes into consideration the professional issues and needs al ong with organisational factors . Excellent realistic recommendation that takes into consideration the professional issues and needs along with organisational factors . RECOMMEND - ATION 1 Evidence No evidence provided to support recommendation. Recommendation requires substantially more support from the use of evidence from the literature . Recommendation requires further support from the use of evidence from the literature. Recommendation is moderately supported with the use of so me evidence from the literature. Recommendation is supported well with the use of evidence from the literature. Recommendation is supported strongly with the use of extensive evidence from the literature. RECOMMEND - ATION 2 Nil recommendation made. Poor recommendation that takes does not take into consideration professional issues or needs and/or does not consider organisational factors. Limited recommendation that does not fully take into consideration the professional issues or needs and/or does not consider organisational factors. Moderate recommendation that takes into consideration the professional issues or needs and/or considers organisational factors. Substantial recommendation that takes into consideration the professional issues and needs al ong with organisational factors. Excellent realistic recommendation that takes into consideration the professional issues and needs along with organisational factors. RECOMMEND - ATION 2 Evidence No evidence provided to support recommendation. Recommendation requires substantially more support from the use of evidence from the literature . Recommendation requires further support from the use of evidence from the literature. Recommendation is moderately supported with the use of so me evidence from the literature. Recommendation is supported well with the use of evidence from the literature. Recommendation is supported strongly with the use of extensive evidence from the literature. 0 points 1 point 2 points 3 points 4 points 5 points CONTENT Overall Argument and Evidence Lacks clear thought/analysis/ reference to theory. Lacks clear critical thought/analysis/ reference to theory. Minimal demonstration of the application of theory through analysis of the topic area. Demonstrates beginning of application of theory through analysis and thought in some parts of the paper Clearly demonstrates application of critical analysis integrated throughout most parts of the paper. Consistently demonstrates application of critical analysis well integrated throughout the paper. CONTENT Conclusio n A summary of the main points is not presented. Implications for nursing practice are absent, and/or new information has been included. A summary of the main points is not clearly presented. Implications for nursing practice are, illogical, irrelevant or unclear, and/or new information has been included. A summary of the main points is simply presented and implications for nursing practice are included but lack demonstration of logic, relevance or clarity. A summary of the main points is pres ented, with some discussion. Implications for nursing practice are included but with minimal logic, relevance or clarity. A summary of the main points is presented and implications for nursing practice are provided with some demonstration of logic, relevan ce and clarity. A summary of the main points is clearly articulated and implications for nursing practice are logical, relevant and clear READABILITY Structural Elements Structure displays no planning or structure, jumping from one topic to the next with no linking dialogue. Structure lacks evidence of a sequenced plan. Minimal linking dialogue between topics of discussion. Structure lacks evidence of a sequenced plan. More attention required to link topics of discussion. Structure requires a more st ructured and sequenced plan, and/or has some elements missing. Moderate structure that includes all elements and mostly follows a logical sequence and linking dialogue. Excellent structure that includes all elements and follows a logical sequence with li nking dialogue. READABILITY Professional Prose Inconsistent levels of articulation and expression, numerous spelling and grammatical errors and/or lack of sentence or paragraph structure Poor level of articulation and expression, with considerable sentence or paragraph structure unclear, and/or numerous spelling or grammatical errors. Minimal level of articulation and expression, with some sentence or paragraph structure unclear, and/or a number of spelling or grammatical errors. Moderate level of articulation and expression, requiring sentence and paragraph structure to be more concise, and/or a number of spelling or grammatical errors. Substantial level of articulation and expression, with clear and concise sentence and paragraph structure, and minimal spelling or grammatical errors. Excellent level of articulation and expression, with clear and concise sentence and paragraph structure, and no spelling or grammatical errors. READABILITY Fluency The arrangement of content is illog ical. Sentence and/or paragraph structure is often undefined, lack structure, or are too long or too short. The arrangement of content is haphazard and difficult to follow. Sentence and/or paragraph structure is sometimes undefined or lacks clarity through not providing introductory or linking sentences. Some paragraphs are too long/short. Moderate sentence and paragraph structure requiring more clarity with introductory and linking sentences. Some paragraphs are too long/short. Sentence and paragraph structure is mostly well -defined and clear with introductory and linking sentences. Sentence and paragraph structure is well -defined and clear with introductory and linking dialogue. Key definitions are addressed. REFERENCES Minimum Number No references provided. Less than minimum academic references used to support presentation material or offer direction for further information. Minimum of eight (8) academic references used to support presentation material or offer direction for further infor mation. More than ten (10) academic references used to support presentation material and offer direction for further information. REFERENCES Selection and Credibility No references reputable, current, extensive or credible, and/or t he connection between the articles and the purpose is missing. Many references are NOT reputable, current, extensive or relevant, and/or the connection between the articles and the purpose is poorly demonstrated. Some references are reputable, current, extensive and relevant, and/or the connection between some of the articles and the purpose is unclear. Most references are reputable, current, extensive and relevant, and/or the connection between some of the article s and the purpose is developing. All references are reputable, current, extensive and relevant. All articles are relevant to the purpose. REFERENCES APA Style Incorrect APA referencing style for in-text citations quotes and/or references. Numerous errors noted in APA referencing of in - text citations, quotes or references. A couple of errors noted in APA referencing of in -text citations, quotes or references. All in -text citations, quotes and references are in APA style. ACADEMIC REQUIREMENTS Nil submission. Paper does not conform to any presentation requirements as set out in Course Descriptor. Significant numbers of areas of paper do not conform to requirements as set out in Course Descriptor. A number of areas of paper do not conform to requirements as set out in Course Descriptor. Paper mostly conforms to presentation requirements as set out in Course Descriptor. Paper conforms to all presentation requirements as set out in Course Descriptor.