THE ARTICLE AND THE ACTIVITY SCREENSHOTS ARE ATTACHED
This week, read the journal article and complete the activity below
After completing the activity, discuss your role as a nurse in disaster preparedness and response. Describe your current patient population (either in your clinical rotation, your employment, or a field of nursing you hope to work in) and discuss the challenges you might face in carrying out your responsibilities in a disaster with that patient population.
How could you gain more hands-on training to supplement your academic study of disaster management? How could you feel more prepared? Discuss different training options that you could participate in (e.g. CERT training, be specific).
Support your answer with evidence from scholarly sources (reference and cite your sources).
NURS 431_Discussion Board Rubric
NURS 431_Discussion Board Rubric
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeInitial ResponsesInitial Discussion Board posts:
When writing your initial scholarly post (the one that answers the discussion prompt question) you must discuss the question and support your information with the text and/or an outside scholarly resource and include in-text citations. Post a well-developed, scholarly response to Initial Discussion Board Prompts “Craft comprehensive academic thoughts on the academic topic that are at least 25 words.” (WCU Attendance Policy – Online Courses, Asynchronous Learning, 2021). Be sure to cite the information you use with in-text citations and post the resource in APA format.
Due: Wednesday, 11:59pm Pacific Time
15 to >13.0 pts
Proficient
The initial post applies course content sufficiently by expanding on the main points of the prompt; responses exhibit critical thinking and analysis. Each post IS supported by the course text or outside scholarly resource.
13 to >11.0 pts
Acceptable
Content knowledge is exhibited by identification of the main topics; there is some evidence of critical thinking and analysis, but responses may be insufficient or lacking in detail. Each post IS supported by the course text or outside scholarly resource.
11 to >9.0 pts
Needs Improvement
Understanding of content knowledge is poorly exhibited and insufficient in critical thinking, analysis, and detail. Some main discussion topics are not covered or significantly digress from the topic at hand. Each post IS NOT supported by the course text or outside scholarly resource.
9 to >0.0 pts
Unsatisfactory
Initial response is missing or provides no indication of understanding. Main topics are not covered. Each post IS NOT supported by the course text or outside scholarly resource.
0 pts
Missing
Missing. No reply to classmates or instructor.
15 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePeer Response #1Substantive Peer/Instructor responses:
You must write scholarly responses to at least two student or instructor posts, on two separate days, each week (after you post your Initial Prompt response) for full participation credit. You may respond to a fellow classmate, or you may answer a question your instructor posts. They will both be counted as your required responses. When posting your peer responses, posts that are “Good job” or “Good post, I learned so much” type of response postings will not be accepted as substantial postings. To receive full credit, you need to have a substantial response post (at least 25 words) that includes references and in-text citations. You need to either add additional information to another’s post, clarify information, or provide examples which will prove the point. Do not ask another student a question as a response post. If you have a question, look up the information and share it with the class. Remember, any information you post as fact must be supported by evidence.
Due: Sunday, 11:59pm Pacific Time
7 to >6.0 pts
Proficient
Replies to peers and instructors are well developed and insightful and provide an opportunity for response. Responses promote a discussion either by sharing prior knowledge and experiences, making meaningful connections with course content, asking meaningful questions, or challenging viewpoints. Each post IS supported by the course text or outside scholarly resource.
6 to >5.0 pts
Acceptable
Replies to peers and instructors are mostly developed and provide an opportunity for response. Responses contribute to the discussion either by sharing prior knowledge and experiences, making connections with course content, or asking questions. Each post IS supported by the course text or outside scholarly resource.
5 to >4.0 pts
Needs Improvement
Some replies to peers and instructors are missing or poorly developed and provide little or no opportunity for response. Responses do little to contribute to the discussion. Each post IS NOT supported by the course text or outside scholarly resource.
4 to >0.0 pts
Unsatisfactory
No responses to peers or instructors are presented AND/OR one-word responses are provided. Each post IS NOT supported by the course text or outside scholarly resource.
0 pts
and insightful and provide an opportunity for response. Responses promote a discussion either by sharing prior knowledge and experiences, making meaningful connections with course content, asking meaningful questions, or challenging viewpoints. Each post IS supported by the course text or outside scholarly resource.
6 to >5.0 pts
Acceptable
Replies to peers and instructors are mostly developed and provide an opportunity for response. Responses contribute to the discussion either by sharing prior knowledge and experiences, making connections with course content, or asking questions. Each post IS supported by the course text or outside scholarly resource
5 to >4.0 pts
Last Completed Projects
| topic title | academic level | Writer | delivered |
|---|