Assignent Solutionnurs

his module will focus on the last two competencies: Engage in Scholarship and Function Within the Educational Environment. You will learn how to continue your lifelong learning and how to be socialized to the academic environment. Module Goals: Explore theories, research, and strategies relevant to faculty scholarship. Identify knowledge and skills needed to design and implement scholarly activities. Describe processes used to successfully develop and integrate scholarship activities into the faculty role. Recognize current and historical factors that influence nursing education and higher education. Identify personal and organizational attributes that enhance development of faculty, students, and the academic community. Identify processes and strategies used in political advocacy for nursing education. Explore the development and implementation of leadership roles in the academic community. Goals Alignment: University Mission Based Outcomes – 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Learning Materials Required Resources: Billings, ., & Halstead, ., (2020). Teaching in Nursing E-Book (6th ed.). Saunders. ISBN: 9780323570374. Review Chapter 27. Read Chapter 1 & 28. Christensen, L. S., & Simmons, L. E. (2020). The scope of practice for academic nurse educators and academic clinical nurse educators (3rd ed.). National League for Nursing. ISBN: 978-1975151928 Additional Resources: Accreditation Commission for Education in Nursing (ACEN) Commission on Collegiate Nursing Education (CCNE) After reviewing the information above, complete the discussion question for this module. PLEASE USE THE REQUIRED AND ADDITIONAL RESOURCES. You may use other resources of your choice after using the required and additional resources. Thanks so much. Discussion Question: One of the core competencies of the Academic Nurse Educator is to engage in scholarship (Competency VII). What does this entail and how do you plan to meet this competency? Scholarship is the competency of choice for this discussion. THANK YOU! Graduate Discussion Question Rubric v1 This table lists criteria and criteria group names in the first column. The first row lists level names and includes scores if the rubric uses a numeric scoring method. You can give feedback on each criterion by tabbing to the add feedback buttons in the table. Criteria Does Not Meet 0% Approaches 70% Meets 80% Exceeds 100% Criterion Score Content of Initial Thread/Post Weight: 40% 0 points Response contains little to none of the required aspects of the prompt; Content is off topic; references are not included. APA reference/citation format is not used. points Major required aspects of the prompt are not addressed or the response speaks in vague generalities. Information is too general; 1 reference is present, but it is non-scholarly (if required) and/or it does not appropriately reflect the topic. APA reference/citation format may be inaccurate in the response. points Response addresses prompt requirements. Content is relevant and germane to the intent of the prompt; 1 or more references are scholarly (if required) and/or appropriately reflect topic, and have few APA formatting errors. 8 points Content includes additional or novel points beyond the intent of the prompt. References are sufficient, scholarly in nature, and are formatted correctly in APA format. Score of Content of Initial Thread/Post Weight: 40%,/ 8 Critical Thinking of Thread/Post Weight: 10% 0 points Little analysis or insight is displayed; Little or no logical support or reasoning is present points Some illogical statements and poor reasoning displayed; argument is unclear or convoluted points Response indicates that thought, insight, and analysis has taken place; Argument is solid and logical 2 points Response is rich in critical thinking, and full of thought, insight, and analysis; Argument is clear and concise Score of Critical Thinking of Thread/Post Weight: 10%,/ 2 Quality of Written Communication in Initial Thread/Post Weight: 20% 0 points Style and voice inappropriate or do not address given audience, purpose, etc. Word choice is excessively redundant, clichéd, and unspecific. Inconsistent grammar, spelling, punctuation, and paragraphing. Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. points Style and voice are somewhat appropriate to given audience and purpose. Word choice is often unspecific, generic, redundant, and clichéd. Repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language, sentence structure, and/or word choice are present. points Style and voice are appropriate to the given audience and purpose. Word choice is specific and purposeful, and somewhat varied throughout. Minimal mechanical or typographical errors are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used. 4 points Style and voice are not only appropriate to the given audience and purpose, but also show originality and creativity. Word choice is specific, purposeful, dynamic and varied. Free of mechanical and typographical errors. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used. Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English. Score of Quality of Written Communication in Initial Thread/Post Weight: 20%,/ 4 Discussion Responses to Classmates’ Threads/Posts Weight: 30% 0 points Did not make an effort to participate in learning community as it develops; Displays lack of engagement with discussion forum; Did not make the minimum of 2 responses to classmates. points Occasionally makes meaningful reflection on group’s efforts; Marginal effort to become involved with group; Made one response to classmates points Frequently attempts to direct the discussion and present relevant viewpoints for consideration by group; Interacts freely; Met the minimum of 2 responses to classmates 6 points Shows astute awareness of needs of community; Frequently attempts to motivate the group discussion; Presents creative approaches to topic; Made at least 2 responses to classmates Score of Discussion Responses to Classmates’ Threads/Posts Weight: 30%,/ 6 Rubric Total Score Total Score of Graduate Discussion Question Rubric v1,/ 20Criterion score has been overridden Overall Score Overall Score Level 1 0 points minimum Level 2 14 points minimum Level 3 16 points minimum Level 4 20 points minimum