NRSG 370 Clinical Speciality Elective 代写

  • 100%原创包过,高质代写&免费提供Turnitin报告--24小时客服QQ&微信：120591129

    • Supplementary Assessment: NRSG 370 Clinical Speciality Elective
    Please write a 1000 word essay discussing and analysing the professional
    attributes and scope of practice that differentiates the specialty nurse in your
    elective. The purpose of the essay is to identify the additional education and
    training required to move from novice to expert in a particular field. You may
    use the NMBA competency standards for Registered nurses or the speciality
    nursing competency related to your elective to frame your answer.
    Please construct your essay with an introduction, body and conclusion. You are
    required to consult nursing literature and reference your work using APA style
    referencing. A marking rubric is attached to guide your writing.
    • Due: 2 weeks post notification of eligibility for supplementary
    assessment. DUE DATE IS IN THE EMAIL TO YOU OFFERING YOU
    SUPPLEMENTARY ASSESSMENT
    • Submission via Turnitin dropbox on LEO Clinical Speciality Elective site-
    Assessment block.
    Please be advised that if you pass the supplementary assessment, the highest
    grade you can achieve is ‘Pass’ (PA). You may choose to decline your
    supplementary assessment if you wish, but please note that as you are only
    allowed one eligible NF grade in your course, you will not be allowed any
    subsequent opportunities at supplementary assessments.
    If you are unable to complete your scheduled supplementary assessment due
    to exceptional circumstances (which will require documentary evidence), you
    must contact the course advisor/Coordinator on your campus as soon as
    possible to see if you qualify for Special Consideration.
    Marking rubric for supplementary assessment NRSG 370
    Criteria for marking
    High Distinction
    (85-100%)
    Distinction
    (75-84%)
    Credit
    (65-74%)
    Pass
    (50-64%)
    Unsatisfactory
    (0-49%)
    Total mark
    Discussion
    Cohesive and logical
    discussion.
    Comprehensive and
    insightful analysis.
    Cohesive and logical
    discussion.
    Well-developed analysis
    Cohesive and logical
    discussion.
    Some attempt at analysis
    A logical discussion is
    presented with limited
    analysis.
    Little/no cohesion to flow
    of discussions.
    Broad generalisations are
    made.
    Discussions consist largely
    of personal opinion.
    50%
    Evidence to support the
    Analysis
    Relevant, high quality
    literature utilised with
    sophisticated
    interpretation and
    analysis.
    Relevant, quality literature
    utilised with consistent
    appropriate interpretation
    & application.
    Relevant literature used
    with erratic but
    appropriate
    interpretation &
    application.
    Some relevant literature
    used with some attempt
    to interpret & apply the
    literature.
    No use of the literature
    30%
    Organisation,
    Presentation and
    Referencing
    Flawless presentation.
    High standard of written
    communication with few
    errors of spelling and
    grammar.
    Mostly accurate
    referencing using APA
    format.
    Effective written
    communication with few
    errors of spelling and
    grammar
    Mostly accurate
    referencing using APA
    format.
    Effective written
    communication although
    a number of spelling and
    grammatical errors.
    Mostly accurate
    referencing using APA
    format.
    Poor, written
    presentation and
    referencing, not at an
    academic/professional
    standard.
    20%
    Total
    100%