Summative Assessment
This summative assessment will build on your previous formative work by requiring you to synthesize interdisciplinary knowledge and its application within nursing practice. Mastering this competency is essential for fostering evidence-based care and promoting innovation in nursing.
Instructions:
In this assessment, you will create a comprehensive report that explores and integrates knowledge from nursing and other disciplines (e.g., public health, psychology, sociology, information technology) to advance nursing practice. You will analyze how this interdisciplinary knowledge can inform evidence-based solutions to current challenges in the nursing field.
- Requirement 1: Literature Review
- Conduct a literature review that includes at least five sources from nursing and at least three sources from other disciplines. This should encompass peer-reviewed journal articles, reputable textbooks, and relevant professional guidelines.
- Summarize the key findings from these sources and explain how they relate to your chosen nursing topic. The chosen topic must reflect a current challenge faced in nursing practice, such as patient safety, chronic disease management, or healthcare disparities.
- Requirement 2: Interdisciplinary Integration
- Analyze how the knowledge and findings from different disciplines can be synthesized to develop evidence-based strategies or interventions.
- Provide specific examples of how this interdisciplinary knowledge can improve patient outcomes, enhance care practices, or influence policy changes within your clinical setting.
- Requirement 3: Reflection and Application
- Reflect on your learning process throughout this assignment. Address how distinguishing knowledge from diverse sources has impacted your clinical judgment and decision-making skills.
- Discuss how you plan to apply this understanding in your future nursing practice and propose strategies for ongoing interdisciplinary collaboration in advancing nursing science.
Document Type/Template
- Word Document
C3: Summative Assessment Rubric
Criteria Ratings
Writing Mechanics
Sources
APA formatting
MASTERY Only minimal spelling, grammar, and/or punctation errors present (1-2 errors). The overall sentence structure is well developed throughout, and paragraphs are fully developed with consistent style and clear communication.
PROFICIENT Minor spelling, grammar, and/or punctuation errors present, and/or sentence structure lacks minor elements of professional writing, and/or paragraphs are consistently developed. (3- 4 errors)
DEVELOPING Minimal spelling, grammar, and/or punctuation errors present, and/or sentence structure lacks elements of professional writing, and/or paragraphs are not consistently developed. (5- 7 errors)
EMERGING Multiple spelling grammar and/or punctuation errors present and/or sentence structure does not meet professional writing standards, and/or paragraphs are minimally developed. (more than 7- 9 errors)
NOT EVIDENT Significant spelling, grammar, and/or punctuation errors present, and/or sentence structure does not meet professional writing standards, and/or paragraphs are poorly developed. (10 or more errors
MASTERY The use of sources was consistent throughout the document in all areas to support claims and/or statements in the artifact.
PROFICIENT In most areas, sources were consistently used throughout the submission to support claims and/or statements in the artifact.
DEVELOPING Sources were occasionally used to support some claims and/or statements in the artifact, but statements were not consistently supported with sources throughout.
EMERGING Minimal usage of sources present in the artifact, and/or the overall communication lacked appropriate research support.
NOT EVIDENT Sources were not used to support major statements and/or claims, where needed in the artifact
MASTERY Citations, references, and formatting follow APA style guide, with only one or two minor errors.
PROFICIENT Citations, references, and formatting follow APA style guide, with more than 2 errors, but they are minor.
DEVELOPING APA style is demonstrated with some consistency, but the majority of the citation, references, and/or
EMERGING Formatting, citations, and/or references, are attempted, but do not follow APA style
NOT EVIDENT Formatting, citations, and references are not included, or do not follow appropriate APA style guide.
Criteria Ratings
Supportive Rationale and Literature
Rationale behind your review
formatting is not correct.
guidelines consistently.
MASTERY The paper is well developed with detailed research and information related to UDL and adult learning theories.
PROFICIENT The paper is developed with detailed research and information related to UDL and adult learning theories.
DEVELOPING The paper is developed with general research and information related to UDL and adult learning theories.
EMERGING The paper is under developed with minimal research and information related to UDL and adult learning theories.
NOT EVIDENT The paper contains no research and information related to UDL and adult learning theories.
MASTERY Submission includes a strong rationale for the selection of multiple contextually appropriate sources and their clear connection to the identified teaching and learning issue. A description of the process used to analyze the sources’ relation to the learning theories and the development of the criteria used for evaluating their appropriateness is included as well.
PROFICIENT Submission includes a rationale for the selection of at least two contextually appropriate sources and their connection to the identified teaching and learning issue. A description of the process used to analyze the sources and evaluate their appropriateness is included as well.
DEVELOPING Submission includes a description of at least two contextually appropriate sources and a connection to the identified teaching and learning issue. A description of the process used to analyze the sources and evaluate their appropriateness is included as well.
EMERGING Submission includes a description of at least one contextually appropriate source and a connection to the identified teaching and learning issue. A description of the process used to analyze the source is included as well.
NOT EVIDENT Submission includes a description of at least one source and a description of the process used to select the source is included as well, but the contextual appropriateness of the source and/or the connection to the identified teaching and learning issue is not clear.
Criteria Ratings
Application MASTERY The reflective paper effectively explains the experience of collaborating with a Subject Matter Expert. The paper effectively highlights the application of ADA and accessibility considerations in the Digital Lesson design.
PROFICIENT The reflective paper explains the experience of collaborating with a Subject Matter Expert. The paper highlights the application of ADA and accessibility considerations in the Digital Lesson design.
DEVELOPING The reflective paper somewhat explains the experience of collaborating with a Subject Matter Expert. The paper somewhat highlights the application of ADA and accessibility considerations in the Digital Lesson design.
EMERGING The reflective paper minimally explains the experience of collaborating with a Subject Matter Expert. The paper minimally highlights the application of ADA and accessibility considerations in the Digital Lesson design.
NOT EVIDENT The reflective paper does not explain the experience of collaborating with a Subject Matter Expert. The paper excludes highlights on the application of ADA and accessibility considerations in the Digital Lesson design.
We can handle this paper for you
We Guarantee ZERO Plagiarism ZERO AI
Done by Professional writers from scratch
Leave a Reply