NURS 8114 Assignment Exploring EBP Quality Improvement

Want create site? With Free visual composer you can do it easy.

NURS 8114 Assignment Exploring EBP Quality Improvement

NURS 8114 Assignment Exploring EBP Quality Improvement

 

For this Assignment you will explore key components of a quality improvement initiative, which will be
the focus of the DNP Project required for your doctoral program. This Assignment is designed to help
you begin investigating potential practice sites for your project, possible practice problems to address
based on your interests and the needs of specific sites, and how to identify and approach stakeholders
with whom to work and align in a health care setting.

Photo Credit: [Steve Hix/Fuse]/[None]/Getty Images
You will begin the Assignment this week and submit it by Day 7 of Week 6. The topic focus on the
science of translation and Learning Resources in Weeks 5 and 6 will further support development of this
Assignment.
Important Note: Your activities in this Module 3 Assignment are exploratory and hypothetical only. You

NURS 8114 Assignment Exploring EBP Quality Improvement

NURS 8114 Assignment Exploring EBP Quality Improvement

should not begin any formal contact with regard to your DNP Project. Consult the DNP Project Process
Guide in the Learning Resources for information, including on the project implementation schedule.
To prepare:
 Review the readings and media in the Week 4 Learning Resources. Pay particular attention to
how Quality Improvement (QI) is defined in the DNP Glossary and Chapter 8 of the White,
Dudley-Brown, and Terhaar text.
 Identify three potential sites within your community for a quality improvement project. These
might be a health care organization in which you practice and two other locations. For example,
you might practice in a large organization and consider a small clinic and a skilled care facility as
other potential settings for your project.
 Based on your practice experience, consider potential practice problems as the focus of an EBP
Quality Improvement initiative. Investigate the three practice sites you have identified for
specific needs, including by making informal contact with staff members you know. (Remember
the importance of confidentiality in any such discussions.)
 Note: You may continue to address the same practice issue that was the focus of your
Discussions in Weeks 2 and 3. You may also draw on the Week 4 blog to consider a broad focus
on EBP and then drill down on specific practice problems to address through application of EBP.
The PET model described in the video, An Evidence-Based Practice Model, also provides
examples for identifying practice issues to address.
 Research the literature for scholarly articles to support developing a quality improvement
project that applies evidence-based practice to address specific practice problems. Aim to
identify at least three scholarly articles to support this Assignment.

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS:NURS 8114 Assignment Exploring EBP Quality Improvement

 Based on the practice problems you are identifying, investigate your potential practice sites for
key stakeholders that would be involved in a quality improvement initiative. Using website and
other information available to you for each site, explore for:
o A department that leads quality improvement or, if one does not exist, who within the
organization would approve a quality improvement initiative;
o Stakeholder titles, from the highest level of required approval to health care associates
who would implement QI changes in the practice of patient care.

 From your research into potential sites and practice problems, choose one practice problem and
one site as your focus.Based on your target practice problem and selected site, identify an
implementation framework and consider the steps or process required for an EBP QI project
that would follow this framework/model. Note: Week 5 Learning Resources and Discussion will
provide strategic support.
 Outline how you would present the elements of your proposed QI project to stakeholders to
gain their approval. Reminder: Your purpose is to prepare for a future presentation to
stakeholders. Do not contact stakeholders for this Assignment.
 Use the College of Nursing PowerPoint Template, provided in the Learning Resources, for
developing a presentation to stakeholders. The template offers options in a cover slide and
format options for other slides, to enable you to customize your presentation. Also refer to the
handout, Preparing for an EBP QI Presentation to Stakeholders at a Practice Site, in the Learning
Resources for guidance.
The Assignment
Part 1: Key Project Elements
In a paper of 6–8 pages, plus cover page and references page, include the following:
 Describe the three health care settings that you explored as proposed sites for an EBP QI
project. For each health care setting, identify the following defining features: patient
population, mission, public or private entity, single institution or member of a corporation, and
others you identify as significant.
 Compare the settings for strengths and weaknesses as sites for an EBP QI project. Be specific
and provide examples.
 Explain the practice problems that you explored based on your interests and identified needs of
the health care settings you investigated.
 Explain why each problem is a potential focus for an EBP QI project. Be specific and provide
examples.
 For each health care setting, describe the stakeholders whose approval would be required to
initiate an EBP QI project and implement the results.
 Compare similarities and differences in stakeholder requirements across the settings.

 Identify the one proposed health care setting/practice site and one proposed practice problem
you have selected as the focus of a hypothetical presentation to stakeholders, and explain your
choices.
Part 2: Implementation Science Presentation
Develop a PowerPoint presentation of 3–5 slides, plus cover and reference slides, to inform a set of
potential stakeholders at the practice site you have identified for a proposed EBP QI project. Although
you will not make your presentation, it should be authentic to the purpose and include the following:
 Introduce the framework or model you have selected for the EBP QI project and your reasoning.
(1–2 slides)
 Present a draft of the proposed practice problem. Include notes for each slide describing points
you would make to the assembled stakeholders to obtain their approval or buy-in for the EBP QI
project. (2–3 slides)
There is no submission this week.
Module 3 Assignment is due by Day 7 of Week 6.
Reminder: The College of Nursing requires that all papers submitted include a title page, introduction,
summary, and references. The Sample Paper provided at the Walden Writing Center provides an
example of those required elements (available
at https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/templates/general#s-lg-box-20293632). All
papers submitted must use this formatting.

What’s Coming Up in Week 5?

Photo Credit: [BrianAJackson]/[iStock / Getty Images Plus]/Getty Images
Next week you will begin an introduction to translation science as a component of evidence-based
practice and quality improvement projects. Remember to access the interactive DNP Glossary in the
Learning Resources for needed clarity on this and other key terms as you move through the course.
Week 5: Module 3 Assignment Activities
Continue to develop the Module 3 Assignment, including investigating three health care settings within
your community or region as potential sites for an EBP QI project. Keep in mind your work in this
Assignment is hypothetical and intended to help prepare for, not execute, your DNP Project. Although
you may make informal contacts at your focus sites, do not make any formal inquiries about a site
hosting a possible project.
Plan your time accordingly in researching and preparing both Parts 1 and 2 of the Assignment. You are
encouraged to complete the gathering of required information for the Part 1 written paper this week.

Next Week

To go to the next week:
Week 5

Week 4: Evidence-Based Practice, Quality Improvement, and Implementation Science:
Interrelationships
From your experience as a registered nurse or APRN, how does change occur in a health care setting?
How do outdated protocols get updated or the actual root cause of a persistent problem get uncovered
and resolved?
You may have answers that speak to the commitment of health care organizations to continually
improve. You may also have examples that demonstrate the inherent challenges in any change initiative.
If only change were as clear and quick as striking a key. Rather, it requires a whole series of figurative
keystrokes and, depending on the setting, may seem as though the whole world needs to be onboard.
This week you will explore a particular set of keys to quality improvement in health care. It involves
reliance on science for evidence to inform nursing practice and implementation that makes sense to
practitioners and patients. Your getting-started activities will include observing for and blogging about
evidence-based practice, and looking for health care settings in your locale for investigating needs and
acceptance of practice change.
Learning Objectives
Students will:
 Evaluate application of evidence-based practice in health care organizations
 Analyze approaches to advocacy of evidence-based practice in health care organizations
 Compare health care settings for quality improvement projects
 Justify practice problems for quality improvement
 Analyze site and stakeholder requirements for quality improvement projects in nursing practice
settings
 Compare stakeholder requirements for quality improvement projects across nursing practice
settings
 Apply implementation science frameworks/models for evidence-based practice quality
improvement projects

Learning Resources

Required Readings (click to expand/reduce)

McEwen, M., & Wills, E. M. (2019). Theoretical basis for nursing (5th ed.). Wolters Kluwer.
 Chapter 12, “Evidence-Based Practice and Nursing Theory” (pp. 253–272 [PDF]
Theoretical Basis for Nursing, 5th Edition by McEwen, M.; Wills, E. Copyright 2019 by Wolters
Kluwer. Reprinted by permission of Wolters Kluwer via the Copyright Clearance Center. Licensed
in 2020.

White, K. M., Dudley-Brown, S., & Terhaar, M. F. (Eds.). (2019). Translation of evidence into nursing and
healthcare (3rd ed.). Springer.
 Chapter 1, “Evidence-Based Practice” (pp. 3–25); for reading about the PET model, focus on
pp.14–16
 Chapter 2, “The Science of Translation and Major Frameworks” (pp. 27–58)
 Chapter 8, “Methods for Translation” (pp. 185–187 Quality Improvement and RCPI)
 Chapter 9, “Project Management for Translation” (pp. 199–228)
Dang, D., & Dearholt, S. L. (Eds.). (2018). Johns Hopkins nursing evidence-based             practice: Model
and guidelines (3rd ed.). Sigma Theta Tau International.
 Chapter 5, “Searching for Evidence” (pp. 79–96)

Boehm, L. M., Stolldorf, D. P., & Jeffery, A. D. (2020). Implementation science training and resources for
nurses and nurse scientists. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 52(1), 47–54.
https://doi.org/10.1111/jnu.12510

Dunagan, P. B. (2017). The quality improvement attitude survey: Development and      preliminary
psychometric characteristics. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 26(23–24), 5113–5120.
https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.14054

Note: The survey findings can be used to explore relationships between nursing attitudes concerning QI
and other organizational characteristics such as QI environment.

Hammersla, M., Belcher, A., Ruccio, L. R., Martin, J., & Bingham, D. (2021). Practice and quality
improvement leaders survey of expectations of DNP graduates’ quality improvement expertise. Nurse
Educator [Epub ahead of print]. https://doi.org/10.1097/NNE.0000000000001009

Jones-Schenk, J., & Bleich, M. R. (2019). Implementation science as a leadership and doctor of nursing
practice competency. The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 50(11), 491–492.
https://doi.org/10.3928/00220124-20191015-03

Powell, B. J., Waltz, T. J., Chinman, M. J., Damschroder, L. J., Smith, J. L., Matthieu, M. M., Proctor, E. K.,
& Kirchner, J. E. (2015). A refined compilation of implementation strategies: Results from the Expert
Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) project. Implementation Science, 10:21.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-015-0209-1

Rew, L., Cauvin, S., Cengiz, A., Pretorius, K., & Johnson, K. (2020). Application of project management
tools and techniques to support nursing intervention research. Nursing Outlook, 68(4), 396–405.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.outlook.2020.01.007

Shea, C. M., Jacobs, S. R., Esserman, D. A., Bruce, K., & Weiner, B. J. (2014).                Organizational
readiness for implementing change: A psychometric assessment of a new measure. Implementation
Science, 9(7), 1–15.

Walden University Academic Skills Center. (n.d.). How do I create a strong PowerPoint presentation?
https://academicanswers.waldenu.edu/faq/72804

Walden University Academic Skills Center. (n.d.). MS PowerPoint resources: Getting started.
https://academicanswers.waldenu.edu/faq/330533

Document: College of Nursing PowerPoint Template (PPT document)

Document: DNP Project Process Guide (Word document)

Document: Handout: Preparing for an EBP QI Presentation to Stakeholders at a Practice Site (Word
document)

Required Media (click to expand/reduce)

Walden University. (2011). An evidence-based practice model [Video]. Author.
Translation text lead author Kathleen White discusses the PET model.
Accessible player

Walden University. (2021). DNP glossary [Interactive media]. Walden University
Blackboard. https://class.waldenu.edu

Optional Resources (click to expand/reduce)

Walden University Writing Center. (n.d.). Webinars: Scholarly writing.
https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/webinars/scholarlywriting#s-lg-box-9094031

Walden University Writing Center. (n.d.). Writing as a process.
https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/doctoral/capstone/preproposal/writingasaprocess

Rubric Detail

A rubric lists grading criteria that instructors use to evaluate student work. Your instructor
linked a rubric to this item and made it available to you. Select Grid View or List View to
change the rubric's layout.
Content
Name: NURS_8114_Module3_Assignment_Rubric

Exit

 Grid View
 List View

 

Excellent
90%–100%

Good
80%–89%

Fair
70%–79%

Poor
0%–69%

The Assignment:
Part 1: Key
Project Elements

In a paper of 6–8
pages, plus cover
page and
references page,
include the
following:

• Describe the
three health care
settings that you
explored as
proposed sites for
an EBP QI project.
For each health
care setting,
identify the
following defining
features: patient
population,
mission, public or

Points
Range:9 (4.50%) –
10 (5.00%)
The response
provides a clear,
accurate, and
detailed description
of three health care
settings that you
explored as
proposed sites for
an EBP QI project,
with a clear,
accurate, and
detailed
identification of all
defining features
and others you
identify as
significant.

Points
Range:8 (4.00%) –
8 (4.00%)
The response
provides a clear
and accurate
description of three
health care settings
that you explored
as proposed sites
for an EBP QI
project, with clear
and accurate
identification of all
defining features;
there may not be
others identified as
significant.

Points
Range:7 (3.50%) –
7 (3.50%)
The response
provides a vague
and/or inaccurate
description of three
health care settings
that you explored
as proposed sites
for an EBP QI
project, with vague
and/or inaccurate
identification of
defining features
and no others
identified as
significant.

Points
Range:0 (0.00%) –
6 (3.00%)
The response
provides a vague
and inaccurate
description of three
or fewer health
care settings that
you explored as
proposed sites for
an EBP QI project,
with vague and
inaccurate or
missing
identification of
defining features
and no others
identified as
significant.

private entity,
single institution
or member of a
corporation, and
others you
identify as
significant.
• Compare the
settings for
strengths and
weaknesses as
sites for an EBP
QI project. Be
specific and
provide examples.

Points
Range:14 (7.00%) –
15 (7.50%)
The response
provides a clear,
accurate, and
detailed
comparison of the
settings for
strengths and
weaknesses as
sites for an EBP QI
project.
The response fully
synthesizes
and integrates at
least three
scholarly resources
that fully support
the comparison
provided.

Points
Range:12 (6.00%) –
13 (6.50%)
The response
provides a clear
and accurate
comparison of the
settings for
strengths and
weaknesses as
sites for an EBP QI
project.
The response
synthesizes
and integrates at
least two scholarly
resources that
support the
comparison
provided.

Points
Range:11 (5.50%) –
11 (5.50%)
The response
provides a vague
and/or inaccurate
comparison of the
settings for
strengths and
weaknesses as
sites for an EBP QI
project.
The response
somewhat
synthesizes
and integrates two
scholarly resources
that may support
the comparison
provided.

Points
Range:0 (0.00%) –
10 (5.00%)
The response
provides a vague,
inaccurate, or
missing
comparison of the
settings for
strengths and
weaknesses as
sites for an EBP QI
project.
The response
minimally and/or
inaccurately
synthesizes and
integrates one or
two scholarly
resources or is
missing resources.

• Explain the
practice problems
that you explored
based on your
interests and
identified needs
of the health care
settings you
investigated.

Points
Range:9 (4.50%) –
10 (5.00%)
The response
provides a clear,
accurate, and
detailed
explanation of the
practice problems
that you explored
based on your
interests, and
identified needs of
the health care
settings you
investigated.

Points
Range:8 (4.00%) –
8 (4.00%)
The response
provides a clear
and accurate
explanation of the
practice problems
that you explored
based on your
interests, and
identified needs of
the health care
settings you
investigated.

Points
Range:7 (3.50%) –
7 (3.50%)
The response
provides a vague
and/or inaccurate
explanation of the
practice problems
that you explored
based on your
interests, and
identified needs of
the health care
settings you
investigated.

Points
Range:0 (0.00%) –
6 (3.00%)
The response
provides a vague,
inaccurate, or
missing
explanation of the
practice problems
that you explored
based on your
interests, and
identified needs of
the health care
settings you
investigated.

• Explain why
each problem is a
potential focus for
an EBP QI project.
Be specific and
provide examples.

Points
Range:14 (7.00%) –
15 (7.50%)
The response
provides a clear,
accurate, and
detailed

explanation of why
each problem is a
potential focus for
an EBP QI project.
The response fully
synthesizes
and integrates at
least three
scholarly resources
that fully support
the explanation
provided.

Points
Range:12 (6.00%) –
13 (6.50%)
The response
provides a clear
and accurate
explanation of why
each problem is a
potential focus for
an EBP QI project.
The response
synthesizes
and integrates at
least two scholarly
resources that
support the
explanation
provided.

Points
Range:11 (5.50%) –
11 (5.50%)
The response
provides a vague
and/or inaccurate
explanation of why
each problem is a
potential focus for
an EBP QI project.
The response
somewhat
synthesizes
and integrates two
scholarly resources
that may support
the explanation
provided.

Points
Range:0 (0.00%) –
10 (5.00%)
The response
provides a vague,
inaccurate, or
missing
explanation of why
each problem is a
potential focus for
an EBP QI project.
The response
minimally and/or
inaccurately
synthesizes and
integrates one or
two scholarly
resources or is
missing resources.

• For each health
care setting,
describe the
stakeholders
whose approval
would be required
to initiate an EBP
QI project and
implement the
results.

Points
Range:9 (4.50%) –
10 (5.00%)
The response
provides a clear,
accurate, and
detailed description
of the stakeholders
whose approval
would be required
to initiate an EBP
QI project and
implement the
results.

Points
Range:8 (4.00%) –
8 (4.00%)
The response
provides a clear
and accurate
description of the
stakeholders
whose approval
would be required
to initiate an EBP
QI project and
implement the
results.

Points
Range:7 (3.50%) –
7 (3.50%)
The response
provides a vague
and/or inaccurate
description of the
stakeholders
whose approval
would be required
to initiate an EBP
QI project and
implement the
results.

Points
Range:0 (0.00%) –
6 (3.00%)
The response
provides a vague
and inaccurate
and/or missing
descriptions of the
stakeholders
whose approval
would be required
to initiate an EBP
QI project and
implement the
results.

• Compare
similarities and
differences in
stakeholder
requirements
across the
settings.

Points
Range:14 (7.00%) –
15 (7.50%)
The response
provides a clear,
accurate, and
detailed
comparison of
similarities and

Points
Range:12 (6.00%) –
13 (6.50%)
The response
provides a clear
and accurate
comparison of
similarities and
differences in

Points
Range:11 (5.50%) –
11 (5.50%)
The response
provides a vague
and/or inaccurate
comparison of
similarities and
differences in

Points
Range:0 (0.00%) –
10 (5.00%)
The response
provides a vague
and inaccurate, or
missing,
comparison of
similarities and

differences in
stakeholder
requirements
across the settings.

stakeholder
requirements
across the settings.

stakeholder
requirements
across the settings.

differences in
stakeholder
requirements
across the settings.

• Identify the one
proposed health
care
setting/practice
site and one
proposed practice
problem you have
selected as the
focus of a
hypothetical
presentation to
stakeholders, and
explain your
choices.

Points
Range:9 (4.50%) –
10 (5.00%)
The response
provides a clear,
accurate, and
detailed
identification of one
proposed health
care
setting/practice site
and one proposed
practice problem as
the focus of a
hypothetical
presentation to
stakeholders; and a
clear, accurate,
and detailed
explanation of
those choices.

Points
Range:8 (4.00%) –
8 (4.00%)
The response
provides a clear
and accurate
identification of one
proposed health
care
setting/practice site
and one proposed
practice problem as
the focus of a
hypothetical
presentation to
stakeholders; and a
clear and accurate
explanation of
those choices.

Points
Range:7 (3.50%) –
7 (3.50%)
The response
provides a vague
and/or inaccurate
identification of one
proposed health
care
setting/practice site
and one proposed
practice problem as
the focus of a
hypothetical
presentation to
stakeholders; and a
vague and/or
inaccurate
explanation of one
or both choices.

Points
Range:0 (0.00%) –
6 (3.00%)
The response
provides a vague
and inaccurate,
and/or missing
identification of one
proposed health
care
setting/practice site
and/or one
proposed practice
problem as the
focus of a
hypothetical
presentation to
stakeholders; and a
vague and
inaccurate and/or
missing
explanation of one
or both choices.

The Assignment:
Part 2:
Implementation
Science
Presentation

In a PowerPoint
presentation of
3–5 slides, plus
cover and
references slides,
include the
following:

Points
Range:45 (22.50%)
– 50 (25.00%)
The response
provides a clear,
accurate, and
detailed
introduction of the
framework or
model you selected
for the EBP QI
project and clear,
accurate, and
detailed reasoning.

Points
Range:40 (20.00%)
– 44 (22.00%)
The response
provides a clear
and accurate
introduction of the
framework or
model you selected
for the EBP QI
project and clear
and accurate
reasoning.

Points
Range:35 (17.50%)
– 39 (19.50%)
The response
provides a vague
or inaccurate
introduction of the
framework or
model you selected
for the EBP QI
project and vague
or inaccurate
reasoning.

Points
Range:0 (0.00%) –
34 (17.00%)
The response
provides a vague
and inaccurate or
missing
introduction of the
framework or
model you selected
for the EBP QI
project and vague,
inaccurate, or
missing reasoning.

• Introduce the
framework or
model you have
selected for the
EBP QI project
and your
reasoning.
(1–2 slides)
• Present a draft
of the proposed
practice problem.
Include notes for
each slide
describing points
you would make
to the assembled
stakeholders to
obtain their
approval or buy-in
for the EBP QI
project.
(2–3 slides)

Points
Range:45 (22.50%)
– 50 (25.00%)
The response
provides a clear,
accurate, and
detailed
presentation of a
draft of the
proposed practice
problem, including
clear, accurate,
and detailed notes
for each slide
describing points to
make to the
assembled
stakeholders to
obtain their
approval or buy-in
for the EBP QI
project.

Points
Range:40 (20.00%)
– 44 (22.00%)
The response
provides a clear
and accurate
presentation of a
draft of the
proposed practice
problem, including
mostly clear and
accurate notes for
each slide
describing points to
make to the
assembled
stakeholders to
obtain their
approval or buy-in
for the EBP QI
project.

Points
Range:35 (17.50%)
– 39 (19.50%)
The response
provides a vague
or inaccurate
presentation of a
draft of the
proposed practice
problem, including
some vague or
inaccurate notes
for each slide
describing points to
make to the
assembled
stakeholders to
obtain their
approval or buy-in
for the EBP QI
project.

Points
Range:0 (0.00%) –
34 (17.00%)
The response
provides a vague
and inaccurate
presentation of a
draft of the
proposed practice
problem, with
vague and
inaccurate and/or
mostly or
completely missing
notes for each slide
describing points to
make to the
assembled
stakeholders to
obtain their
approval or buy-in
for the EBP QI
project.

Written
Expression and
Formatting:
Paragraph/
Sentence
Structure
Paragraphs make
clear points that
support well-
developed ideas,
flow logically, and
demonstrate
continuity of

Points
Range:5 (2.50%) –
5 (2.50%)
Paragraphs and
sentences follow
writing standards
for structure, flow,
continuity, and
clarity.

Points
Range:4 (2.00%) –
4 (2.00%)
Paragraphs and
sentences follow
writing standards
for structure, flow,
continuity, and
clarity 80% of the
time.

Points
Range:3 (1.50%) –
3 (1.50%)
Paragraphs and
sentences follow
writing standards
for structure, flow,
continuity, and
clarity 60%–79% of
the time.

Points
Range:0 (0.00%) –
2 (1.00%)
Paragraphs and
sentences follow
writing standards
for structure, flow,
continuity, and
clarity < 60% of the
time.

ideas. Sentences
are clearly
structured and
carefully
focused—neither
long and rambling
nor short and
lacking
substance.
Written
Expression and
Formatting:
English writing
standards:
Correct grammar,
mechanics, and
proper
punctuation.

Points
Range:5 (2.50%) –
5 (2.50%)
Uses correct
grammar, spelling,
and punctuation
with no errors.

Points
Range:4 (2.00%) –
4 (2.00%)
Contains a few
(1–2) grammar,
spelling, and
punctuation errors.

Points
Range:3.5 (1.75%) –
3.5 (1.75%)
Contains several
(3–4) grammar,
spelling, and
punctuation errors.

Points
Range:0 (0.00%) –
3 (1.50%)
Contains many (≥
5) grammar,
spelling, and
punctuation errors.

Written
Expression and
Formatting: The
assignment
contains
parenthetical/in-
text citations, and
at least three
evidence-based
references are
listed.

Points
Range:5 (2.50%) –
5 (2.50%)
Contains
parenthetical/in-text
citations and at
least three
evidence-based
references are
listed.

Points
Range:4 (2.00%) –
4 (2.00%)
Contains
parenthetical/in-text
citations and at
least two evidence-
based references
are listed.

Points
Range:3.5 (1.75%) –
3.5 (1.75%)
Contains
parenthetical/in-text
citations and at
least one evidence-
based references
are listed.

Points
Range:0 (0.00%) –
3 (1.50%)
Contains one or no
parenthetical/in-text
citations and no
evidence-based
references are
listed.

The rubric total value of 0.00 has been overridden with a value of 200.00 out of
200.
Name:NURS_8114_Module3_Assignment_Rubric

Did you find apk for android? You can find new Free Android Games and apps.