NRSG375 Clinical Leadership
Assessment Task 3: Written assignment (45%)
Discuss and analyse in more detail 2 of the discussion posts that you submitted for assessment task (AT) 2 and use contemporary literature for support. For the 2 posts that you choose, you are to discuss and analyse professional leadership in nursing in further detail. Building on your engagement from the online forum posts you will re-write and expand your responses through the application of sound written and analytical communication skills, to analyse in greater depth the major theoretical foundations of leadership and their application to nursing practice. This is to demonstrate your understanding of the contribution of sound leadership that enhances service delivery to improve health care outcomes. You must read and research widely and use further contemporary literature to support your stance. You must also include again as you did in AT2, screen shot evidence of your original entire posts and response posts in a single (1) collated word document via the Turnitin assignment drop boxes in the campus tile of the NRSG375 LEO site. This AT has a word limit of 1200 words +/- 10%.
Topics:
Post 1 – Modules 1 & 2.
Clinical leadership is not an important consideration to a graduate RN. It is more important to increase my confidence and improve my clinical skills to be a competent clinician. Critically reflect and discuss in your first online post (ensure you support your point of view with contemporary literature) Modules 1 & 2. (LO2) Post 2 – Modules 3 & 4.
Autonomy and accountability are inherent to nursing as a profession. How do these professional expectations related to leadership qualities enable the RNs practice? Critically reflect and discuss this for your second online post (ensure you support your point of view with contemporary literature) Modules 3 & 4. (LO4).
Post 3 – Modules 5 & 6
What elements enable and enhance positive change and innovation in the health care environment, should I be contributing to as a graduate RN? Critically reflect and discuss this for your third online post (ensure you support your point of view with contemporary literature) Modules 5 & 6. (LO5).
You are expected to approach this assessment task as an opportunity to showcase your written analytical skills in the format of an academic paper. You may find the following link to the academic skill unit page on academic writing of assistance with this. https://leo.acu.edu.au/mod/book/view.php?id=1888062&chapterid=116929
The expectation is that you build on the use of the contemporary literature to support your view in responding to the topics/questions from your online posts in assignment 2 in this next assessment task. The following link may assist you to do that. https://leo.acu.edu.au/mod/book/view.php?id=1888100
Referencing is integral to academic writing, in the Faculty of Health Sciences, the prescribed referencing convention is the APA referencing style. You may wish to revisit these requirements at the following link.
https://leo.acu.edu.au/mod/book/view.php?id=1888106&chapterid=116998
Please refer to the rubric for this assessment task below as a further guide to assessment expectations.
You are required to submit evidence (screen shot) of your x6 online posts from Assessment Task 2 as a part of this Assessment Task 3. Please submit these as part of the document submitted for assessment task 3 in a single document.
Criterion Referenced Rubric: Assessment 3 – Written Assignment (45%)
Criteria
(marks)
Expected High Distinction
(HD)
Standard Expected Distinction (D)
Standard Expected Credit (CR)
Standard Expected Pass (PA)
Standard Fail (NN)
Standard Fail (NN)
(No attempt made)
Introduction
10 marks There is a comprehensive introduction that outlines the topic of each discussion post
Contextualises the scope, content and the sequence
of each of the two discussion posts. There is a thorough introduction that outlines the topic of each discussion post
Profiles the scope, content and the sequence of each of the two discussion posts. There is a clear introduction that outlines some of the topic of each discussion post,
Profiles some content and sequencing is apparent in most of the two discussion posts. There is an obvious introduction that outlines the topic of discussion posts.
Some content and sequencing is discernible in most of the two discussion posts. There is an introductory sentence that outlines the topic of discussion posts.
Some parts of the content and sequencing are unclear and or absent. There is no introduction.
Discussion is not clear and no evidence of
sequencing.
Content and
Discussion
35 marks Student has highlighted all the relevant factors.
Comprehensively explained, analysed and applied the concepts/ issues and their significance.
Referred to relevant theory to comprehensively support their stance. Student has highlighted all the relevant factors.
Explained, analysed and applied the concepts/ issues and their importance.
Referred to relevant theory on most occasions to support discussion of
their stance.
Student has highlighted most of the relevant factors.
Explained, analysed and applied most of the concepts/ issues and their relevance on nearly all occasions.
Referred to relevant theory to support discussion of their stance on most occasions. Some content is relevant to the topic of each discussion post.
Basic explanation and analysis of some concepts/
issues and their applicability on most occasions.
Referred to relevant theory to support discussion of their stance on few occasions. There is insufficient content of each discussion post, that is relevant to the topic,
Unsatisfactory explanation with no analysis or application of the concepts.
Did not refer to relevant theory to support discussion of their stance. The content discussion are not appropriate.
Did not refer to theory to support discussion of
their stance.
Critical Thinking &
Evidence Based Reasoning
30 marks Links between examples and high levels of evidence/literature provided on all occasions.
An argument is presented and well supported with relevant evidence. Links between examples and high levels of evidence/literature provided on most occasions.
An argument is presented with supported appropriate evidence. Links between examples and evidence/ literature provided on some occasions.
An argument is presented with varying quality of evidence.
Links between examples and evidence from literature provided on few occasions.
An argument is presented with minimal support of evidence.
No links to evidence and/or literature provided.
Arguments made are not supported by evidence.
No links to evidence and/or
literature provided.
There is no clear argument presented.
Sequencing & Accuracy
15 marks The content succinctly matches the outline presented in the introduction.
Writing is organised in a logical manner so that content flows, and there
are clear linking sentences.
There is a rational and comprehensive conclusion. The content matches the outline presented in the introduction.
Most writing is organised in a logical manner.
There is a rational and thorough conclusion. The content mostly matches the outline of introduction.
Writing is not always logically sequenced. There is a clear conclusion.
The content follows the introduction
Writing is logically
sequenced on some occasions.
There is a conclusion. There is not a clear introduction, body or conclusion.
The writing is not clearly organised. There is no linking of content to the introduction or conclusion.
Writing is not discernible.
Sources &
Referencing
Evidence of online discussion forum posts attached
10 marks Accurate use of APA referencing with consistent use of credible in-text citations and ref list.
All screen shots of entire posts (from AT2) provided.
Accurate use of APA referencing with regular use of credible in-text citations and ref list.
All screen shots of entire posts provided.
Satisfactory use of APA referencing with mostly credible in-text citations and ref list. All screen shots of entire posts provided.
Adequate use of APA referencing with occasional use of credible in-text citations and ref list.
Some screen shots of entire posts provided.
Many inaccuracies with the APA referencing style.
Minimal number screen shots of entire posts provided.
No evidence of use of APA refencing.
No screen shots of entire posts provided.