Discussion LEADERSHIP SKILLS AND PLANNING wk.6.Discussion LEADERSHIP SKILLS AND PLANNING According to the American Nurses Association, a nurse

  

Discussion

LEADERSHIP SKILLS AND PLANNING

wk.6.Discussion

LEADERSHIP SKILLS AND PLANNING

According to the American Nurses Association, a nurse leader is “a nurse interested in excelling in a career path, a leader within a healthcare organization who represents the interests of the nursing profession, a seasoned nurse or healthcare administrator interested in refining skills to differentiate them from the competition or to advance to the next level of leadership.”

Leadership can take many forms. Perhaps leadership takes the form of scheduling charge nurses for the month; perhaps leadership is providing guidelines for protocols at your organization, and perhaps leadership is simply determining the best approach to implement change.

For this Discussion, you will explore the connection between project management strategies and leadership styles. Reflect on the role of leadership in project planning and implementation and consider how your leadership style and skill will impact your plan.

Reference: American Nurses Association. (n.d.). 
Leadership and excellence

to an external site.

RESOURCES

Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.
Click the weekly resources link to access the resources. 


WEEKLY RESOURCES

LEARNING RESOURCES


Required Readings

· Hickey, J. V., & Giardino, E. R. (Eds.). (2021). 
Evaluation of quality in health care for DNPs (3rd ed.). Springer Publishing.

· Chapter 8, “Planning a Program or Project Evaluation” (pp. 189–214)

· Chapter 13, “Evaluation of Populations and Population Health” (pp. 329–350)

· Sipes, C. (2024). 
Project management for the advanced practice nurse (3rd ed.). Springer Publishing Company.

· Chapter 3, “Design/Initiation: Project Management—Phase I” (pp. 55–84)

· Chapter 4, “Planning: Project Management—Phase 2” (pp. 85–130)

· White, K. M., Dudley-Brown, S., & Terhaar, M. F. (Eds.). (2021). 
Translation of evidence into nursing and healthcare (3rd ed.). Springer Publishing Company.

· Chapter 9, “Project Management for Translation” (pp. 199–228)

· Aycock, D. M., Clark, P. C., Thomas-Seaton, L., Lee, S.-Y., & Moloney, M. (2017). 

Simple tools to facilitate project management of a nursing research projectLinks to an external site.

Western Journal of Nursing Research
39(3), 430–443.

· Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2015). 


Develop SMART objectives—evaluate a CoPLinks to an external site.


TO PREPARE

· Review the Learning Resources covering leadership skills and project planning.

· Explore project management techniques and strategies to be used for your problem.

· Consider the connection between project management strategies and leadership styles. 

Post a description of your identified design approach for your practice problem. Identify the focus and setting of your problem, as well as the leadership styles most appropriate for the proposed practice change. Identify potential facilitators and barriers to making a proposed practice change. Be specific. How might your leadership style and skills match with the identified facilitators and barriers? Gather evidence to justify your selection and consider whether the approach addresses the practice gap. In your post, be sure to cite the specific evidence found. 

Assignment Rubric Details

Close

Rubric

NURS_8502_Week7-8_Discussion_Rubric

NURS_8502_Week7-8_Discussion_Rubric

Criteria

Ratings

Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeRESPONSIVENESS TO DISCUSSION QUESTION (20 possible points) Discussion post minimum requirements: The original posting must be completed by Day 3 at 10:59 pm CT. Two response postings to two different peer original posts, on two different days, are required by Day 6 at 10:59 pm CT. Faculty member inquiries require responses, which are not included in the peer posts. Your Discussion Board postings should be written in Standard Academic English and follow APA 7 style for format and grammar as closely as possible given the constraints of the online platform. Be sure to support the postings with specific citations from this week’s learning resources as well as resources available through the Walden University library and other credible online resources (guidelines, expert opinions etc.)

20 to >19.0 pts

Excellent

• Discussion postings and responses are responsive to and exceed the requirements of the Discussion instructions. • The student responds to the question/s being asked or the prompt/s provided. Goes beyond what is required in some meaningful way (e.g., the post contributes a new dimension, unearths something unanticipated) • Demonstrates that the student has read, viewed, and considered a variety of learning resources, as well as resources available through the Walden University library and other credible online resources (guidelines, expert opinions etc.) • Exceeds the minimum requirements for discussion posts.

19 to >15.0 pts

Good

• Discussion postings and responses are responsive to and meet the requirements of the Discussion instructions. • The student responds to the question/s being asked or the prompt/s provided. • Demonstrates that the student has read, viewed, and considered a variety of learning resources, as well as resources available through the Walden University library and other credible online resources (guidelines, expert opinions etc.) • Meets the minimum requirements for discussion posts.

15 to >12.0 pts

Fair

• Discussion postings and responses are somewhat responsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. • The student may not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question/s or prompt/s. • Minimally demonstrates that the student has read, viewed, and considered a variety of learning resources, as well as resources available through the Walden University library and other credible online resources (guidelines, expert opinions etc.) • Does not meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts; has not posted by the due date at least in part.

12 to >0 pts

Poor

• Discussion postings and responses are unresponsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. • Does not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question/s or prompt/s. • Does not demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered a variety of learning resources, as well as resources available through the Walden University library and other credible online resources (guidelines, expert opinions etc.) • Does not meet the requirements for discussion posts; has not posted by the due date and did not discuss late post timing with faculty.

20 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCONTENT REFLECTION and MASTERY: Initial Post (30 possible points)

30 to >29.0 pts

Excellent

Initial Discussion posting: • Post demonstrates mastery and thoughtful/accurate application of content and/or strategies presented in the course. • Posts are substantive and reflective, with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence. • Initial post is supported by 3 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings.

29 to >23.0 pts

Good

Initial Discussion posting: • Posts demonstrate some mastery and application of content, applicable skills, or strategies presented in the course. • Posts are substantive and reflective, with analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence. • Initial post is supported by 3 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings.

23 to >18.0 pts

Fair

Initial Discussion posting: • Post may lack in depth, reflection, analysis, or synthesis but rely more on anecdotal than scholarly evidence. • Posts demonstrate minimal understanding of concepts and issues presented in the course, and, although generally accurate, display some omissions and/or errors. • There is a lack of support from relevant scholarly research/evidence.

18 to >0 pts

Poor

Initial Discussion posting: • Post lacks in substance, reflection, analysis, or synthesis. • Posts do not generalize, extend thinking or evaluate concepts and issues within the topic or context of the discussion. • Relevant examples and scholarly resources are not provided.

30 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCONTRIBUTION TO THE DISCUSSION: First Response (20 possible points)

20 to >19.0 pts

Excellent

Discussion response: • Significantly contributes to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning. • Provides rich and relevant examples and thought-provoking ideas that demonstrates new perspectives, and synthesis of ideas supported by the literature. • Scholarly sources are correctly cited and formatted. • First response is supported by 2 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings. • Responds to questions posed by faculty.

19 to >15.0 pts

Good

Discussion response: • Contributes to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Provides relevant examples and/or thought-provoking ideas • Scholarly sources are correctly cited and formatted. • First response is supported by 2 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings. • Responds to questions posed by faculty.

15 to >12.0 pts

Fair

Discussion response: • Minimally contributes to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Provides few examples to support thoughts. • Information provided lacks evidence of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas. • There is a lack of support from relevant scholarly research/evidence. • No response to questions posed by faculty.

12 to >0 pts

Poor

Discussion response: • Does not contribute to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Lacks relevant examples or ideas. • There is a lack of support from relevant scholarly research/evidence. • No response to questions posed by faculty.

20 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCONTRIBUTION TO THE DISCUSSION: Second Response (20 possible points)

20 to >19.0 pts

Excellent

Discussion response: • Significantly contributes to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning. • Provides relevant examples and thought-provoking ideas that demonstrates new perspectives, and extensive synthesis of ideas supported by the literature. • Second response is supported by 2 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings. • Scholarly sources are correctly cited and formatted. • Responds to questions posed by faculty.

19 to >15.0 pts

Good

Discussion response: • Contributes to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Provides relevant examples and/or thought-provoking ideas • Second response is supported by 2 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings. • Scholarly sources are correctly cited and formatted. • Responds to questions posed by faculty.

15 to >12.0 pts

Fair

Discussion response: • Minimally contributes to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Provides few examples to support thoughts. • Information provided lacks evidence of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas. • Minimal scholarly sources provided to support post. • Does not respond to questions posed by faculty.

12 to >0 pts

Poor

Discussion response: • Does not contribute to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Lacks relevant examples or ideas. • No sources provided. • Does not respond to questions posed by faculty.

20 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeQUALITY OF WRITING (10 possible points)

10 to >9.0 pts

Excellent

Discussion postings and responses exceed doctoral level writing expectations: • Use Standard Academic English that is clear, concise, and appropriate to doctoral level writing. • Make few if any errors in spelling, grammar, that does not affect clear communication. • Uses correct APA 7 format as closely as possible given the constraints of the online platform. • Are positive, courteous, and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

9 to >8.0 pts

Good

Discussion postings and responses meet doctoral level writing expectations: • Use Standard Academic English that is clear and appropriate to doctoral level writing • Makes a few errors in spelling, grammar, that does not affect clear communication. • Uses correct APA 7 format as closely as possible given the constraints of the online platform. • Are courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

8 to >6.0 pts

Fair

Discussion postings and responses are somewhat below doctoral level writing expectations: • Posts contains multiple spelling, grammar, and/or punctuation deviations from Standard Academic English that affect clear communication. • Numerous errors in APA 7 format • May be less than courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

6 to >0 pts

Poor

Discussion postings and responses are well below doctoral level writing expectations: • Posts contains multiple spelling, grammar, and/or punctuation deviations from Standard Academic English that affect clear communication. • Uses incorrect APA 7 format • Are discourteous and disrespectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

10 pts

Total Points: 100

image1.jpeg

Share This Post

Email
WhatsApp
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Pinterest
Reddit

Order a Similar Paper and get 15% Discount on your First Order

Related Questions

Professional Roles NU350 STEP (RNtoBSN) Program PEEP Assignment

Professional Roles NU350 STEP (RNtoBSN) Program PEEP Assignment Learning Objectives Review the Learning Objectives you developed for your PEEP Project specific to quality and safety initiatives in healthcare ( not the JSU Nursing Learning Outcomes). State the Quality/Safety problem you are addressing: Importance of annual wellness exams for women What

I-HUMAN PATIENTS CASE STUDY: ASSESSING THE CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEM This course requires you to complete a series of case studies using the i-Human

I-HUMAN PATIENTS CASE STUDY: ASSESSING THE CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEM This course requires you to complete a series of case studies using the i-Human Patients software application. The i-Human Patients (IHP) Case Player enables you to interact with virtual patients for the purpose of learning patient-assessment and diagnostic-reasoning skills. With IHP, you

Go to Module 4 Assignment: Cultural Assessment for detailed instructions. Create an outline for your comprehensive assessment of how your selected

Go to Module 4 Assignment: Cultural Assessment for detailed instructions. Create an outline for your comprehensive assessment of how your selected cultural group’s beliefs and practices might impact healthcare decision-making, treatment adherence, your communication, your interventions, and your education to align with the patient’s cultural values and preferences.  Use Outline

20 American Nurse Today Volume 10, Number 11

20 American Nurse Today Volume 10, Number 11 www.AmericanNurseToday.com You can use the inventory below to help determine the health of your workplace. To complete it, carefully read the 20 statements below. Using a scale of 1 to 5, check the response that most accurately represents your perception of your

MCH TERMINOLOGY EDC/EDD Gravid

MCH TERMINOLOGY EDC/EDD Gravid Parity Striae Braxton Hicks Linea Nigra Chadwick’s sign Amenorrhea STI’S Hyperemesis Gravidarum Leopold’s maneuver Colostrum Quickening Lightening Doppler Fetoscope Amniocentesis Maternal Serum Alpha Fetal Protein(MSAFP) hCG LMP Menarche Nagle’s rule Fundal Height Bishop’s Score Freidman’s Curve Cervical dilatation Effacement Station Pap smear C/SECTION Progesterone Amniotic fluid