Description
Discussion
PURPOSE
The purpose of this debriefing is to re-examine the experience completing the Week 3 iHuman Cardiovascular Assessment assignment while engaging in dialogue with faculty and peers. In the debriefings, students:
Reflect on the simulation activity
Share what went well and consider alternative actions
Engage in meaningful dialogue with classmates
Express opinions clearly and logically, in a professional manner
COURSE OUTCOMES
This assignment enables the student to meet the following course outcomes:
CO 2: Differentiate between normal and abnormal health assessment findings. (PO 4)
CO 3: Describe physical, psychosocial, cultural, and spiritual influences on an individual’s health status. (PO 1)
CO 4: Demonstrate effective communication skills during health assessment and documentation. (PO 3)
DUE DATE
During the assigned week (Sunday the start of the assigned week through Sunday the end of the assigned week):
Posts in the discussion at least two times, and
Posts in the discussion on two different days
TOTAL POINTS POSSIBLE
50 points
DIRECTIONS
Debriefing is an activity that involves thinking critically about your own experiences related to the virtual simulation you completed. In debriefings students:
Demonstrate understanding of concepts for the week
Engage in meaningful dialogue with classmates and/or instructor
Express opinions clearly and logically, in a professional manner
Use the rubric on this page as you compose your answers.
Scholarly sources are NOT required for this debriefing
Best Practices include:
Participation early in the week is encouraged to stimulate meaningful discussion among classmates and instructor.
Enter the debriefing often during the week to read and learn from posts.
Select different classmates for your reply each week.
DEBRIEFING
Use the following format to reflect on the Week 3 iHuman Cardiovascular Assessment. This was the Michael Granger case.
Paragraph One: What went well for you in the simulation? Provide examples of when you felt knowledgeable and confident in your skills. Do you feel the scenario was realistic? Why or why not?
Paragraph Two: What would you do differently next time if you were caring for a patient similar to Mr. Granger? Describe at least one area you identified where improvements could be made, specific to Mr. Granger’s assessment. Were you surprised by any of the feedback you were provided by iHuman? If yes, please explain.
Paragraph Three: What did you learn from this simulation that you could apply to nursing practice? Or, what did this simulation reinforce that you found valuable? Do you have any questions related to the scenario?
GRADING
To view the grading criteria/rubric, please click on the 3 dots in the box at the end of the solid gray bar above the discussion board title and then Show Rubric. See Syllabus for Grading Rubric Definitions.
Unformatted Attachment Preview
Assignment Rubric Details
This is a graded discussion: 50 points possible
due Feb 4
RNBSN_50_Point_Debriefing_Discussion_Rubric_1_21
1
Criteria
Answer Post
Ratings
Week 4
Pts
28 pts
25 pts
22 pts
80% Fair
11 pts
38% Poor
0 pts
0% Missing
question in a detailed manner,
•Reflects on the correct scenario,
Meets all criteria •Answers each required debriefing question in a detailed manner,
•Reflects on the correct scenario, and •Provides examples from student’s own
Includes all three criteria but
answer is not detailed.
Meets two of
three criteria
Meets one of
three criteria
Does not answer the
discussion question(s).
and
•Provides examples from student’s
own perspective
perspective
Reply Post
•Replies to a classmate’s and/or
14 pts
100% Excellent
12 pts
88% Good
11 pts
80% Fair
5 pts
38% Poor
0 pts
0% Missing
instructor’s post,
•Reply post provides additional
Replies to a classmate’s and/or
instructor’s post by providing additional
Replies to a classmate’s and/or
instructor’s post by providing
Replies to a classmate’s and/or
instructor’s post. Limited information
Replies to a classmate’s and/or
instructor’s post. Reply does not provide
No reply post to
classmates or
or clarification provided. Brief reply
post adds fair depth to the discussion.
additional information or clarification. Brief
reply post does not add depth to the
discussion.
instructor.
•Answers each required debriefing
Purpose
Debriefing
of Week 3 iHuman Cardiovascular Assessment 88%
(Graded)
100% Excellent
Good
Discussion
The purpose of this debriefing is to re-examine the experience completing the Week 3 iHuman Cardiovascular Assessment assignment while
28 pts
information or clarification, and
information or clarification. Reply post
additional information or clarification.
engaging
in dialogue
with faculty and peers. In the debriefings, students:
•Reply
post adds
excellent depth
adds excellent depth to the discussion.
Reply post adds good depth to the
to the discussion.
discussion.
Reflect on the simulation activity
Share what went well and consider alternative actions
Communicates
EngageProfessionally
in meaningful dialogue
8 pts with classmates
7 pts
All posts:
100%
Excellent
Express opinions clearly and
logically,
in a professional manner 88% Good
6 pts
80% Fair
3 pts
38% Poor
0 pts
0% Missing
•are clear and concise,
•are respectful, civil, and caring,
All posts are clear, concise, respectful,
civil, and caring. Posts contain excellent
All posts are clear, concise, respectful,
civil, and caring but contain good
All posts are respectful, civil, and caring
but are not clear or concise. Posts contain
All posts are not clear and
concise, AND contain poor
All posts are not
respectful, civil,
and
C o uexcellent
r s e OEnglish
utcomes
•contain
grammar, spelling, and
English grammar, spelling, and/or
punctuation.
English grammar, spelling, and/or
punctuation.
fair English grammar, spelling, and/or
punctuation.
English grammar, spelling, and/or
punctuation.
and caring.
14 pts
8 pts
punctuation.
This assignment enables the student to meet the following course outcomes:
CO 2: Differentiate between normal and abnormal health assessment findings. (PO 4)
0 pts
0 pts
CO 3: Describe physical, psychosocial, cultural, and spiritual influences on an individual’s health status. (PO 1)
During the assigned week
No Points Deducted
Points Deducted (-5 Points)
CO
Demonstrate
effective communication skills during health assessment and documentation. (PO 3)
(Sunday
the4:start
of the assigned
Participation
week through Sunday the end of
the assigned week):
•Posts in the discussion at least
Due Date
two times, and
During the assigned week (Sunday the start of the assigned week through Sunday the
end of the assigned week): •Posts in the discussion at least two times, and •Posts in the
During the assigned week (Sunday the start of the assigned week through Sunday the end of the
assigned week): •Does NOT post in the discussion at least two times AND/OR •Does NOT post in
discussion on two different days
the discussion on two different days
0 pts
•Posts in the discussion on two
different days
During the assigned week (Sunday the start of the assigned week through Sunday the end of the assigned week):
Posts in the discussion at least two times, and
Posts in the discussion on
Toptwo different days
To t a l P o i n t s P o s s i b l e
Total Points: 50
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
