NUR 665E Collaborate With Preceptor/Mentor
Collaboration is a tool that improves thinking processes and the end work product.
What is the importance of collaboration in your future role as a nurse educator in your chosen practice environment? Who are potential stakeholders involved in your future interprofessional collaborations and define their roles?
Reflect deeply about your experiences thus far. Have you collaborated well with your preceptor and other important stakeholders? How has the collaboration helped/hindered your lesson planning?
Look to the evidence beyond the readings as you reflect on this DQ!!
Remember to write a detailed response, supported with the evidence to earn full credit. Remember the requirements for substantive responses to earn full credit. Include sources beyond the readings in all of your posts!
The assignment due week 10 focuses on collaboration. The instructions are as follows with my comments in red:
The effective nurse educator collaborates with partners and the community during the curriculum design process. The purpose of this assignment is to collaborate with your preceptor to refine and enhance your lesson plan.
You may have already delivered your lesson. If so, think back about the process you went through to develop it. Talk further with your preceptor to discuss the plan!
Meet with your preceptor to review your lesson plan. Discuss your lesson plan and possible barriers to successful implementation. Using the comments for refinement from your preceptor, reflect on your collaboration. In 200-350 words, provide a short answer to address the following.
A description of identified areas of reinforcement. Reinforcement: the action or process of reinforcing or strengthening. What areas need to be reinforced? Any additional information you would include? Any strategies that could be improved? Look to the evidence as you reflect!
A description of identified areas of refinement. Refinement: The improvement or clarification of something by the making of small changes. What would you focus on for your refinements? Look to the evidence as you reflect!
Explanation of changes made to the lesson plan with rationale. Describe the changes you will make. Be sure to support them with the evidence.
Explanation of the importance of interprofessional collaboration with involved stakeholders on your lesson plan changes for future implementation. How does collaboration fit within your planning process?
APA style is not required, but solid academic writing is expected.
This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
You are not required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite.
Rubic_Print_Format
Course Code
Class Code
Assignment Title
Total Points
NUR-665E
NUR-665E-O500
Collaborate with Preceptor/Mentor
25.0
Criteria
Percentage
1: Unsatisfactory (0.00%)
2: Less Than Satisfactory (80.00%)
3: Satisfactory (88.00%)
4: Good (92.00%)
5: Excellent (100.00%)
Comments
Points Earned
Content
100.0%
Areas of Reinforcement
18.0%
A description of identified areas of reinforcement is not present.
A description of identified areas of reinforcement is incomplete or incorrect.
A description of identified areas of reinforcement is included but lacks supporting details.
A description of identified areas of reinforcement is complete and includes supporting details.
A description of identified areas of reinforcement is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Areas of Refinement
18.0%
A description of identified areas of refinement is not present.
A description of identified areas of refinement is incomplete or incorrect.
A description of identified areas of refinement is included but lacks supporting details.
A description of identified areas of refinement is complete and includes supporting details.
A description of identified areas of refinement is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Changes to Lesson Plan
21.0%
An explanation of changes made to the lesson plan, with rationale, is not present.
An explanation of changes made to the lesson plan, with rationale, is incomplete or incorrect.
An explanation of changes made to the lesson plan, with rationale, is included but lacks supporting details.
An explanation of changes made to the lesson plan, with rationale, is complete and includes supporting details.
An explanation of changes made to the lesson plan, with rationale, is extremely thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
Interprofessional Collaboration with Involved Stakeholders
13.0%
An explanation of the importance of interprofessional collaboration with involved stakeholders on lesson plan changes for future implementation is not present.
An explanation of the importance of interprofessional collaboration with involved stakeholders on lesson plan changes for future implementation is present, but lacks detail or is incomplete.
An explanation of the importance of interprofessional collaboration with involved stakeholders on lesson plan changes for future implementation is present.
An explanation of the importance of interprofessional collaboration with involved stakeholders on lesson plan changes for future implementation is detailed.
An explanation of the importance of interprofessional collaboration with involved stakeholders on lesson plan changes for future implementation is thorough.
Thesis Development and Purpose
7.0%
Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.
Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.
Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.
Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.
Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.
Argument Logic and Construction
8.0%
Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.
Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.
Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.
Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.
Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)
5.0%
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.
Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.
Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.
Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)
5.0%
Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.
Template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent.
Template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.
Template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style.
All format elements are correct.
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)
5.0%
Sources are not documented.
Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.
Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.
Total Weightage
100%
The post NUR 665E Collaborate With Preceptor/Mentor appeared first on Essay Shredder.
