NURS 8210 Assignment Health Information Technology Project

NURS 8210 Assignment Health Information Technology Project

Week 9 Assignment: Health Information Technology Project [Major Assessment 5]
In previous Discussions and Applications, you have explored various aspects of health
information technology systems: the historic development of HIT, how data flows across HIT
systems, and standards and interoperability requirements including specific terminologies used in
your practice setting. In this Application Assignment, you will have the opportunity to further
develop your analysis skills by closely examining the implementation of a health information
technology system. As a doctorally prepared nurse, you may find yourself in the position of
leading a HIT project team; to be an effective leader and move health information technology
projects forward in your organization, you must be able to logically and critically analyze the
many aspects and challenges of implementing such a system and then present your insights in a
succinct and professional manner. This exercise provides an opportunity to hone those skills.
Carefully review the project requirements below and plan your time accordingly. Be sure to refer
to the standards of nursing informatics practice as you develop this Application, which serves as
your Major Assessment for this course.
To prepare:
 Investigate a health information technology system or health information technology
application in your area of interest. The health information technology system/application
may be in any setting where health care information is developed or managed. You may
choose your system or application from any organization or virtual environment.
o Examples of health information technology systems or health information
technology applications that are acceptable include but are not limited to:
 Consumer health applications
 Clinical information systems
 Electronic medical record (EMR) systems in hospitals or provider offices
 Home health care applications
 School health applications
 Patient portal/personal health record
 Public health information systems
 Telehealth (i.e., from facility to home)
 Simulation laboratories
 Health care informatics research and development centers

 Discuss your proposed health information technology system/application with your
Instructor before proceeding with your final selection. You may visit a health care

organization in person or virtually in order to make your final choice about the health
information technology system or health information technology application of interest.
 Choose the best strategy to gain information about your selected information technology
system/application. Some ways to gather information include virtual visits; vendor
demonstrations; on-site visits; interviews via face-to-face, phone, or teleconference. You
must conduct at least one interview for this project.
 Complete a literature search to gather information about your selected information
technology system. You may also need to review related scholarly articles to help answer
the questions presented below.
NOTE: In your submitted report, do not share proprietary information, personal names, or
organization names without permission.
To complete:
Your deliverable is a 12- to 15-page scholarly report, not counting the title page or references. A
successful report should leave the reader with confidence in understanding the answers to all the
questions listed below. Graphics may be used to illustrate key points.
Organization Information
 Briefly describe the health information technology system/application and the
organization type (hospital, clinic, public health agency, health care software company,
government health information website, private virtual health information site, etc.).
 Is the health information technology system/application clinical, administrative,
educational, or research related?
 What were the key reasons for the development of this health information technology
system/application, i.e., what made the organization believe this system/application was
needed? How did this organization determine those needs? Did the organization use
specific tools to conduct needs assessments, staff opinions, or workflows?
 How did the organization determine that this specific system/application could fulfill its
predetermined needs?
 Who manages this health information technology system/application and where are they
located within the organization's administrative structure?
Information System Application Design and Development
 Many health care systems have multiple independent entities that work together toward
the common goal of providing high-quality care. How did—and do—the various
stakeholders make decisions related to this health information technology
system/application? Were the end users involved in the development of this health
information technology system/application?
 How are individuals trained to use the health information technology system/application?

 How are security issues addressed? How does this health information technology
system/application support a legally sound health care record?
 Where did initial funds for this health information technology system/application come
from?
 Who manages the budget for this health information technology system/application?
 Have organizational or political issues impacted the ongoing funding for this health
information technology system/application?
 What are the arrangements for planned or unplanned downtime?
 How are health information technology system/application upgrades scheduled or
planned?
 How has the health information technology system/application changed in response to
health care reform and related legislation?
 What suggestions could you make regarding changes needed to support health care
reform and related legislation?
Innovative Aspects of the System
 How does the health information technology system/application utilize technology
innovations?
 What technology innovations would you recommend for this organization? What
innovations presented in this course, or found through your own research, could this
organization benefit from?
 What innovations could further promote evidence-based practice and efficiency within
this organization?
End Product
Your report is a scholarly paper and needs to include a minimum of 10 citations from peer-
reviewed journals. Every statement made in a scholarly report must be supported by a reference.
Be very cautious when stating your opinion, or using terms suggesting absolute facts, or values,
as these must be supported by references. Note that textbooks, including the course texts, are
composed of information cited from other sources (see the reference section in the course
textbooks). With this in mind, there should be an adequate number of appropriate references (a
minimum of 10). Please note that primary sources are to be used. Peer-reviewed journal articles
should make up the bulk of your references (90%). If referring to a book, be sure to include all
information in APA style, including specific page numbers when necessary. Note that an article
referred to in a book is a secondary source. More on this topic is available in the APA
Publication Manual and in the Walden Writing Center. See also "Policies on Academic
Honesty" listed at the Walden website.

A superior paper demonstrates breadth and depth of knowledge, and critical thinking appropriate
for doctoral level scholarship. The report must follow APA Publication Manual guidelines (7th
edition) and be free of typographical, spelling, and grammatical errors. This Application is the
Major Assessment for this course. You will submit this document by Day 7 of Week 9.
By Day 7 of Week 9
Final Report: 12- to 15-page scholarly report is to be submitted.
Grading Criteria

Document: Week 9 Major Assessment 5 Rubric (Word document)

Health Information Technology Project Evaluation

Program LO: 3
3: Educator / Consultant

DNP Essential: 4
4: Information Systems/Technology and Patient Care Technology for the Improvement and
Transformation of Health Care

(Scroll down for table)
ASSIGNMENT
PROMPT

Target
5 points

Acceptable
3 points

Unacceptable
1 point

Score/
Level

Abbreviated
Research
Proposal Paper

Part 1:
Information on
Organization

(5 points)

Exemplary quality.
Content is of a
professional portfolio
quality; addresses every
major subsection in the
assignment description
of health information
technology
system/application and
the organization type; key
reasons for development
of this health information
technology
system/application;

Well-developed, good
quality work. Content is
of a professional
portfolio quality;
addresses at least 80%
of the major subsections
in the assignment using
adequate critical
thinking skills; includes
some summarizing or
paraphrasing of
literature review;
demonstrates content
mastery using examples

Superficially developed,
unacceptable quality.
Content needs
substantial revision for it
to be of a professional
portfolio quality;
addresses less than
50% of the major
subsections in the
assignment using weak
critical thinking skills;
consists primarily of a
summary of main ideas
from the literature
Program LO: 3

DNP Essential:
4

management and
administrative structure
of health information
technology
system/application using
advanced critical thinking
skills; does not
summarize or paraphrase
the content of the
literature review, rather
demonstrates content
mastery using examples
and/or personalized
reflections about the
content of the literature
review; demonstrates an
applied level of
understanding through
personalized reflections
about the content area.
Excels in meeting
expectations for graduate
level work.

Fully meets expectations
for LO 3

Fully meets expectations
for Essential 4

and/or personalized
reflections about the
content of the literature
review; demonstrates an
applied level of
understanding through
personalized reflections
about the content area.
Fully meets
expectations for
graduate level work.

Meets expectations for
LO3

Meets expectations for
Essential 4

review; does not
demonstrate an applied
level of understanding.
Lags behind
expectations for
graduate level work.

Insufficient to meet
expectations for LO 3

Insufficient to meet
expectations for
Essential 4

Part 2:
Information
System
Application:
Design

(5 points)

Exemplary quality.

Content is of a
professional portfolio
quality; addresses every
major subsection in the
assignment clearly and
succinctly addresses how
stakeholders worked
together to design and
fund the system
application including a
detailed description of
who manages the
budget, and any

Well-developed, good
quality work.
Content is of a
professional portfolio
quality; addresses at
least 80% of the major
subsections in the
assignment using
adequate critical
thinking skills;
addresses how
stakeholders worked
together to design and
fund the system
application including a

Program LO: 3

DNP Essential:
4

organizational or political
challenges that impacted
the initial or ongoing
funding of the
system/application and
how these challenges
were addressed using
advanced critical thinking
skills; does not
summarize or paraphrase
the content of the
literature that supports
this section, rather
demonstrates

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS:NURS 8210 Assignment Health Information Technology Project

content
mastery using examples
and/or personalized
reflections about the
content of the literature;
demonstrates an applied
level of understanding
through personalized
reflections about the
content area. Excels in
meeting expectations for
graduate level work.

Fully meets expectations
for LO3

Fully meets expectations
for Essential 4

description of who
manages the budget,
and any organizational
or political challenges
that impacted the initial
or ongoing funding of
the system application
and how these
challenges were
addressed; includes
some summarizing or
paraphrasing of
literature that supports
this section;
demonstrates content
mastery using examples
and/or personalized
reflections about the
content of the literature;
demonstrates an
applied level of
understanding through
personalized reflections
about the content area.
Fully meets
expectations for
graduate level work.

Meets expectations for
LO 3

Meets expectations for
Essential 4

an applied level of
understanding. Lags
behind expectations for
graduate level work.

Insufficient to meet
expectations for LO 3

Insufficient to meet
expectations for
Essential 4

Part 3:
Information
System
Application:
Implementation

Exemplary quality.

Content is of a
professional portfolio
quality; addresses every
major subsection in the
assignment; identifies
key security issues and

Well-developed, good
quality work.
Content is of a
professional portfolio
quality; addresses at
least 80% of the major
subsections in the
assignment using
adequate critical

Superficially developed,
unacceptable quality.
Content needs
substantial revision for it
to be of a professional
portfolio quality;
addresses less than
50% of the major
subsections in the

(5 points)

provides a detailed
description on how the
issues have been
addressed; provides an
in-depth portrayal of
management of health
information technology
system, including quality
of health care records,
training of users, and
planning for downtime
and scheduled updates;
includes a thoughtful
analysis of system
changes in response to
health care
reform/legislation and
well-reasoned
recommendation of
additional changes
needed using advanced
critical thinking skills;
does not summarize or
paraphrase the content of
the literature review,
rather demonstrates
content mastery using
examples and/or
personalized reflections
about the content of the
literature review;
demonstrates an applied
level of understanding
through personalized
reflections about the
content area. Excels in
meeting expectations for
graduate level work.

Fully meets expectations
for LO 3

Fully meets expectations
for Essential 4

thinking skills; identified
security issues and
described how they
have been addressed;
provides an overview of
management of health
information technology
system, including quality
of health care records,
training of users, and
planning for downtime
and scheduled updates;
describes system
changes in response to
health care
reform/legislation and
recommendation of
additional changes
needed; includes some
summarizing or
paraphrasing of
literature review;
demonstrates content
mastery using examples
and/or personalized
reflections about the
content of the literature
review; demonstrates an
applied level of
understanding through
personalized reflections
about the content area.
Fully meets
expectations for
graduate level work.

Meets expectations for
LO 3

Meets expectations for
Essential 4

assignment using weak
critical thinking skills;
consists primarily of a
summary of main ideas
from the literature
review; does not
demonstrate an applied
level of understanding.
Lags behind
expectations for
graduate level work.

Insufficient to meet
expectations for LO 3

Program LOs: 3

DNP Essential:
4

Insufficient to meet
expectations for
Essential 4

Part 4:
Innovative
Aspects of the
System
(5 points)

Program LO: 3
DNP Essential:
4

Exemplary quality.

Content is of a
professional portfolio
quality; addresses every
major subsection in the
assignment; provides a
succinct description of
the role of innovation in
the health information
technology
system/application and
thoughtful
recommendations for
additional use of
innovations using
advanced critical thinking
skills; does not
summarize or paraphrase
the content of the
literature review, rather
demonstrates content
mastery using examples
and/or personalized
reflections about the
content of the literature
review; demonstrates an
applied level of
understanding through
personalized reflections
about the content area.
Excels in meeting
expectations for graduate
level work.

Fully meets expectations
for LO 3

Fully meets expectations
for Essential 4

Well-developed, good
quality work.
Content is of a
professional portfolio
quality; addresses at
least 80% of the major
subsections in the
assignment; provides a
description of the role of
innovation in the health
information technology
system/application and
recommendations for
additional use of
innovations using
adequate critical
thinking skills; includes
some summarizing or
paraphrasing of the
literature review;
demonstrates content
mastery using examples
and/or personalized
reflections about the
content of the literature
review; demonstrates an
applied level of
understanding through
personalized reflections
about the content area.
Fully meets
expectations for
graduate level work.

Meets expectations for
LO 3

Meets expectations for
Essential 4

Superficially developed,
unacceptable quality.
Needs substantial
revision to be worthy of
a professional portfolio;
addresses less than half
the major subsections in
the assignment using
weak critical thinking
skills; consists primarily
of a summary of main
ideas from the literature
review; does not
demonstrate an applied
level of understanding.
Lags behind
expectations for
graduate level work.

Insufficient to meet
expectations for LO 3

Insufficient to meet
expectations for
Essential 4

Part 5: End
Product
(5 points)

The majority of
references are from
scholarly journals,
support the topic well,
and are current. All
sources are peer
reviewed. Minimum of 7
citations used. Paper
stays within page
requirements. APA
format is used correctly
throughout.

Report leaves the reader
with confidence in
understanding the
informatics system;
graphics are used to
illustrate key points.

Excels in meeting
expectations for graduate
level work.

Most references are
from scholarly journals
and support the topic.
Most references are
fairly current. All
sources are peer
reviewed. Minimum of 7
citations used. The
paper stays within page
requirements. APA
format is used with
minimal errors.

Report leaves the
reader with confidence
in understanding the
informatics system;
graphics are used to
illustrate key points.

Meets expectations for
graduate level work.

References are not
sufficient or are mostly
from the lay literature or
out of date. Sources
identified are a
combination of peer
reviewed and nonpeer
reviewed. Fewer than 7
citations used. The
paper is either too long
or too short. Weak
writing quality and/or
little evidence of
correctness of APA
format.
Report does not leave
the reader with
confidence in
understanding the
informatics system;
graphics are minimally
used or not used to
illustrate key points.

Work lags behind
expectations for
graduate level work.

Health Information Technology Project Assignment:
Write a 12- to 15-page (plus references) paper that includes the following:

Organization Information (5 points)
 Briefly describe the health information technology system/application and the organization type
(hospital, clinic, public health agency, software company, government health information website,
private virtual health information site, etc.).
 Is the health information technology system/application clinical, administrative, educational, or
research related?
 What were the key reasons for development of this health information technology system/application?
 Who manages this health information technology system/application and where are they located
within the organization’s administrative structure?
Information System Application: Design (5 points)

 Many health systems have multiple independent entities that work together toward a common goal of
providing health care. How did the various stakeholders work together to make decisions related to
this health information technology system/application? Were the end users involved in the
development of this health information technology system/application
 How was this health information system/application initially funded?
 Have organizational or political issues impacted the ongoing funding for this health information
technology system/application?
 Who manages the budget for this health information technology system/application?
Information System Application: Implementation (5 points)
 How are security issues addressed; how does this health information technology system/application
support a legally sound health care record?
 How are individuals trained to use the health information technology system/application?
 What are the plans for planned or unplanned downtime?
 How are health information technology system/application upgrades scheduled or planned?
 How has the health information technology system/application changed in response to health care
reform and related legislation?
 What suggestions could you make regarding changes needed to support health care reform and
related legislation?
Innovative Aspects of the System (5 points)
 How are technology innovations being used in the health information technology system/application?
 What technology innovations could you recommend for this organization?
End Product (5 points)
 The paper is 12- to 15-page report.
 The report leaves the reader with confidence in understanding the informatics system.
 Graphics are used to illustrate key points.
 The report is a scholarly paper and includes a minimum of 7 citations from peer-reviewed journals.
 Appropriate APA format is used.
*Note: Up to 5 points (20%) may be deducted for grammar and APA style errors.

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