To Prepare:
· Review the Walden and the School of Nursing (SON) mission and vision statements, Walden’s goals and University Outcomes, and the MSN Program Learning Outcomes presented in this week’s Learning Resources.
· Reflect on your professional and academic goals as they relate to your program/specialization.
· Consider how the information in these resources fit with your own goals and to your becoming a scholar-practitioner.
· Also consider academic and professional individuals and teams that you may collaborate with in support of your efforts as a student at the University and as a professional within your organization and career.
-Post a brief post introducing yourself to your colleagues. Include an explanation for how Walden’s vision, mission, goals, and social change initiatives relate to your professional and academic goals and to your becoming a scholar-practitioner. Also include an explanation for how the Walden MSN program outcomes and perspectives relate to your professional and academic goals and to your becoming a scholar-practitioner.
-Then, post a draft of Part 1 of your Academic Success and Professional Development Plan Template indicating at least two academic and at least two professional individuals or teams that you would like to collaborate with to be successful in your MSN program and as a practicing nurse along with an explanation for your selections.
Rubrics
| Outstanding | Excellent | Good | Fair | Poor | |
| Main Posting | 50 (50%) – 50 (50%)
Answers all parts of the discussion question(s) expectations with reflective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and synthesizes additional current credible sources. Supported by three or more current, credible sources. Written clearly and concisely with no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA Manual writing rules and style. |
45 (45%) – 49 (49%)
Answers all parts of the discussion question(s) expectations with reflective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources. Supported by at least three current, credible sources. Written clearly and concisely with no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA Manual writing rules and style. |
40 (40%) – 44 (44%)
Responds to the discussion question(s) and is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. At least 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth. Supported by at least three credible sources. Written clearly and concisely with one or no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA Manual writing rules and style. |
35 (35%) – 39 (39%)
Responds to some of the discussion question(s). One to two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed. Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis. Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. Post is cited with two credible sources. Written somewhat concisely, may contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors. Contains some APA formatting errors. |
0 (0%) – 34 (34%)
Does not respond to the discussion question(s) adequately. Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria. Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis. Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. Contains only one or no credible sources. Not written clearly or concisely. Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors. Does not adhere to current APA Manual writing rules and style. |
| First Response | 18 (18%) – 18 (18%)
Response exhibits a synthesis of critical thinking and application to practice settings. Provides clear concise opinions and ideas that are support by two or more scholarly sources. Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives. Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Response to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed. Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. |
17 (17%) – 17 (17%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings. Provides clear concise opinions and ideas that are support by at least two scholarly sources. Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives. Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Response to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed. Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. |
15 (15%) – 16 (16%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings. Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Response to faculty questions are answered, if posed. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported at least one scholarly source. Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. |
12 (12%) – 14 (14%)
Response is on topic, may have some depth. Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication. Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed. Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas and a few or no credible sources are cited. |
0 (0%) – 11 (11%)
Response may not be on topic, lacks depth. Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication. Response to faculty questions are missing. No credible sources are cited. |
| Second Response | 18 (18%) – 18 (18%)
Response exhibits a synthesis of critical thinking and application to practice settings. Provides clear concise opinions and ideas that are support by two or more scholarly sources. Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives. Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Response to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed. Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. |
17 (17%) – 17 (17%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings. Provides clear concise opinions and ideas that are support by at least two scholarly sources. Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives. Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Response to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed. Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. |
15 (15%) – 16 (16%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings. Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Response to faculty questions are answered, if posed. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least one scholarly source. Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. |
12 (12%) – 14 (14%)
Response is on topic, may have some depth. Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication. Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed. Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas and a few or no credible sources are cited. |
0 (0%) – 11 (11%)
Response may not be on topic, lacks depth. Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication. Response to faculty questions are missing. No credible sources are cited. |
| Main Posting: Timely and full participation | 14 (14%) – 14 (14%)
Posts main discussion by due date. Meets requirements for full and active participation. Posts on more than 3 different days. |
13 (13%) – 13 (13%)
Posts main discussion by due date. Meets requirements for full participation. Posts on 3 different days. |
10 (10%) – 10 (10%)
Posts main discussion by due date. Posts on 2 different days. |
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Does not post main discussion by due date. Posts on 2 different days. |
0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not meet requirements for full participation. Does not post main discussion board by due date. Posts on 1 day |
