Assignment: Fierce Health Care

NOW F OR AN ORIGINAL PAPER ASSIGNMENT: Assignment: Fierce Health Care

· Develop an appreciation for informatics, basic skills and knowledge required in practice settings. Students will select a “hot” or popular topic of particular interest to their practice to discuss. The topic will be selected from the website using the link provided in the course Assignments section.

Requirements

Website Exploration:

Visit the following site http://www.fiercehealthcare.com/it (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site. (explore healthcare technology news on CPOE, EMRs, E-prescribing, HIE, PHRs, HIT stimulus, and other health IT news)

Visit the following site www.fierceemr.com (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site. (this site contains weekly newsletter on EMRs, meaningful use, ARRA and privacy. Select 1 of 5 Topics/Popular Content of the Week to use in the weekly discussions)

Students will login to FierceEMR and FierceHealthIT using the link provided in the reading assignment module for Week 5 and select a “current/popular” topic of the week that may impact their practice. Students, in a professionally developed paper, will discuss the rationale for choosing the topic, how it will impact practice in a positive or negative manner, citing pros and cons. Include a discussion of how informatics skills and knowledge were used in the process relevance to developing the assignment. In the conclusion, provide recommendations for the future. Submit completed Fierce Health IT Topic paper for Wk. 5 to dropbox by end of Week 5.
Preparing the paper

1. The FierceEMR and FierceHealthIT Current/Popular Topic of the Week assignment must be a professional, scholarly prepared paper. See the guidelines for writing a professional, scholarly paper in the Course Resources. The professional paper will have an introduction, body of paper to explain what you are doing, summary/conclusion, and at least three scholarly references.

2. Required texts may be used as references, but a minimum of three sources must be from outside of course readings.

3. All aspects of the paper must be in APA format as expressed in the 6th edition.

4. The paper (excluding the title page, introduction and reference page) is 4-6 pages in length.

5. Ideas and information from professional sources must be cited correctly.

6. Grammar, spelling, punctuation, and citations are consistent with formal academic writing.

Category

Points

Description

Introduction

11.4

Introduction presents a brief overview of the parts of the paper.

Selects relevant HealthIT Topic to discuss; provides rationale for selecting topic

Provides convincing rationale for topic selection

Convincing arguments of how topic will impact practice in a positive or negative manner citing pros and cons.

Convincing arguments of how topic impacts practice in a positive or negative manner; pros and cons are presented

Discussion of how informatics skills and knowledge were used in the process relevance to developing the assignment

Provides a discussion of how informatics skills and knowledge were used in the process to develop the assignment

Conclusion

11.4

Concluding statements summarize insights about the key elements of the paper gained during the assignment. Recommendations for the future are provided

APA Style

11.4

Text, title page, body of paper, summary and reference page(s) are completely consistent with APA format.

Citations

Ideas and information from sources are cited correctly. There are a minimum of three scholarly, current (5 years or less) references.

Writing Mechanics

4.5

Rules of grammar, spelling, word usage, and punctuation are consistent with formal written work,

Total

175

100%

A quality assignment will meet or exceed all of the above requirements.

C:\Users\D01030541\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\7T7OKQBI\Pre-licensure Header_Seal Only (3).jpg

Chamberlain College of Nursing NR512 Fundamentals of Nursing Informatics

Grading Rubric

Assignment Criteria

Exceptional

Outstanding or highest level of performance

Exceeds

Very good or high level of performance

Meets

Competent or satisfactory level of performance

Needs Improvement

Poor or failing level of performance

Developing

Unsatisfactory level of performance

Content Possible Points = 140 Points

Introduction

20 Points

18 Points

16 Points

14 Points

0 Points

Introduction presents a brief overview all parts of the paper.

Introduction presents one of the two required elements.

Introduction does not include either of the two required elements.

Minimal attempt at introduction.

No introduction is present.

Selects relevant HealthIT Topic to discuss; provides rationale for selecting topic

30 Points

26 Points

24 Points

21 Points

0 Points

Successfully selects relevant HealthIT Topic to discuss; provides rationale for selecting topic

Selects relevant HealthIT Topic to discuss; provides minimal rationale for selecting topic

Selects HealthIT Topic to discuss; not related to practice; provides minimal rationale for selecting topic

Selects HealthIT Topic to discuss; not related to practice; provides no rationale for selecting topic

Does not complete assignment

Convincing arguments of how topic will impact practice in a positive or negative manner citing pros and cons.

40 Points

36 Points

32 Points

0 Points

Provides convincing arguments of how topic will impact practice in a positive or negative manner -pros and cons presented.

Some arguments of how topic will impact practice in a positive or negative manner -pros and cons presented, but are not convincing in nature.

Minimal arguments of how topic will impact practice in a positive or negative manner -pros and cons presented.

No discussion of positive or negative impact presented

30 points

26 points

24 points

0 Points

Discussion of how informatics skills and knowledge were used in the process relevance to developing the assignment

Discussion of how informatics skills and knowledge were used in the process relevance to developing the assignment is presented

Some discussion of how informatics skills and knowledge were used in the process relevance to developing the assignment.

Minimal discussion of how informatics skills and knowledge were used presented

No discussion of how informatics skills and knowledge were used

Conclusion

20 Points

18 Points

16 Points

14 Points

0 Points

Concluding statements summarize insights about the key elements of the paper gained during the assignment. Recommendations for the future are provided

Provides a summary of key points and a partial summary of insights gained during the assignment. Includes some recommendations for future related to topic.

Concluding statements are present but do not address insights and/or includes minimal recommendations for future related to topic

Minimal concluding statements present but no insight or recommendations for future are presented.

No conclusion.

Content Subtotal_____/140 Points

Minimal concluding statement.

Format Possible Points = 35 Points

APA Style

20 Points

18 Points

16 Points

14 Points

0 Points

0–1 APA format errors in text, title, body of paper, summary and reference page(s) are completely consistent with APA format.

2-3 APA format errors in text, title page, body of paper, summary and reference page(s) are completely consistent with APA format.

4-6 APA format errors in text, title page, in text, title page, body of paper, summary and reference page(s) are completely consistent with APA format.

7-9 APA format errors in text, title page, in text, title page, body of paper, summary and reference page(s) are completely consistent with APA format

10 or more APA format errors in text, title page, in text, title page, body of paper, summary and reference page(s) are completely consistent with APA format.

Citations

8 Points

7 Points

6 Points

4 Points

0 Points

0–1 errors in identifying ideas, and information from other sources are cited correctly. There are a minimum of three scholarly, current (5 years or less) references.

2-3 errors in identifying ideas, and information from other sources are cited.

4-6 errors in identifying ideas, and information from other sources are cited.

7-9 errors in identifying ideas, and information from other sources are cited.

10 or more errors in identifying ideas, and information from other sources are cited.

Writing Mechanics

7 Points

6 Points

5 Points

3 Points

0 Points

0–3 errors in grammar, spelling, word usage, punctuation, and other elements of formal academic writing

4–5 errors in grammar, spelling, word usage,

punctuation, and other elements of formal academic writing

6-7 errors in grammar, spelling, word usage, punctuation, and other elements of formal academic writing

8-9 errors in grammar, spelling, word usage, punctuation, and other elements of formal academic writing

10 or more errors in grammar, spelling,

word usage, punctuation, and other elements of formal academic writing.

Format Subtotal_____/35 Points

8–9 errors in grammar, spelling, word usage, punctuation, and other elements of formal academic writing

Total Points____/175 Points

Assignment: Fierce Health Care

Excellent	Good	Fair	Poor
RESPONSIVENESS TO DISCUSSION QUESTION Discussion 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*.	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*.	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*.	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*.
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.	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.	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.
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.	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.	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.	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.
Total Points: 30

Excellent

Good

Fair

Poor

RESPONSIVENESS TO DISCUSSION QUESTION

Discussion 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*.

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*.

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*.

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*.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Total Points: 30