Description
Assessment Description
The purpose of this assignment is to evaluate the factors that influence ethical decision-making and to explain why ethical decision-making in health care is important.
Health care professionals are faced with a wide range of contemporary ethical dilemmas. Examination of how one can deliver ethical, professional care, regardless of personal beliefs and values, can ensure professional ethics, standards, and policies are upheld.
Review the “Statement on the Integration of Faith and Work,” located in the topic Resources. Consider the tenets of the Christian worldview and how your personal values and beliefs relate. Consider situations where the standards and policies for ethical care might conflict with your personal values and beliefs.
In a 750- to 1,000-word personal narrative, address the following:
Explain an event or experience that caused you to examine the values, norms, and socially constructed rules of conduct that influence morality.
Explain the impact that differing cultures, traditions, and personal experiences have had in shaping your worldview. Include discussion of how you might incorporate the tenets of the Christian worldview perspective on human value, dignity, and ethical decision-making as a health care professional.
Describe how you distinguish between moral conflict and ethical dilemmas, and include specific examples.
Describe how you can assess spiritual needs and provide interventions for individuals, families, and groups that have different beliefs than your own.
Include at least one scholarly resource.
Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.
This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
.
Unformatted Attachment Preview
Collapse All
Personal Narrative – Rubric
Event or Experience
22.5 points
Criteria Description
5. Target
22.5 points
The explanation of event or experience that caused examination of values, norms,
and socially constructed rules of conduct that influence morality is thorough and
includes substantial relevant supporting details.
4. Acceptable
19.13 points
The explanation of event or experience that caused examination of values, norms,
and socially constructed rules of conduct that influence morality is complete and
includes relevant supporting details.
3. Approaching
16.88 points
The explanation of event or experience that caused examination of values, norms,
and socially constructed rules of conduct that influence morality is included but
lacks relevant supporting details.
2. Insufficient
14.63 points
The explanation of event or experience that caused examination of values, norms,
and socially constructed rules of conduct that influence morality is incomplete or
incorrect.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
The explanation of event or experience that caused examination of values, norms,
and socially constructed rules of conduct that influence morality is not included.
© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
Impact of Differing Cultures, Traditions, and Personal Experiences
Criteria Description
5. Target
30 points
The explanation of the impact of differing cultures, traditions, and personal
experiences have had in shaping the worldview is thorough and includes
substantial relevant supporting details. The discussion of how to incorporate the
tenets of the Christian worldview perspective related to human value, dignity, and
ethical decision-making as a health care professional is thorough and includes
substantial relevant supporting details.
4. Acceptable
25.5 points
The explanation of the impact of differing cultures, traditions, and personal
experiences have had in shaping the worldview is complete and includes relevant
supporting details. The discussion of how to incorporate the tenets of the Christian
worldview perspective related to human value, dignity, and ethical decision-making
as a health care professional is complete and includes relevant supporting details.
3. Approaching
22.5 points
The explanation of the impact of differing cultures, traditions, and personal
experiences have had in shaping the worldview is partially included. The discussion
of how to incorporate the tenets of the Christian worldview perspective related to
human value, dignity, and ethical decision-making as a health care professional is
included but lacks relevant supporting details.
2. Insufficient
19.5 points
The explanation of the impact of differing cultures, traditions, and personal
experiences have had in shaping the worldview is incomplete or incorrect. The
discussion of how to incorporate the tenets of the Christian worldview perspective
related to human value, dignity, and ethical decision-making as a health care
professional is incomplete or incorrect.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
The explanation of the impact of differing cultures, traditions, and personal
experiences have had in shaping the worldview is not included. The discussion of
how to incorporate the tenets of the Christian worldview perspective related to
human value, dignity, and ethical decision-making as a health care professional is
not included.
© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
30 points
Distinguishing Between Moral Conflict and Ethical Dilemmas
30 points
Criteria Description
5. Target
30 points
The description of how to distinguish between moral conflict and ethical dilemmas
is thorough and includes specific relevant examples.
4. Acceptable
25.5 points
The description of how to distinguish between moral conflict and ethical dilemmas
is complete and includes specific examples.
3. Approaching
22.5 points
The description of how to distinguish between moral conflict and ethical dilemmas
is included but lacks description and specific examples.
2. Insufficient
19.5 points
The description of how to distinguish between moral conflict and ethical dilemmas
is incomplete or incorrect.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
The description of how to distinguish between moral conflict and ethical dilemmas
is not included.
© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
Values and Influence
22.5 points
Criteria Description
5. Target
22.5 points
The description of how one can assess for the spiritual needs and provide
interventions for individuals, families, and groups that have different beliefs than
one’s own is thorough and includes substantial relevant supporting details.
4. Acceptable
19.13 points
The description of how one can assess for the spiritual needs and provide
interventions for individuals, families, and groups that have different beliefs than
one’s own is complete and includes relevant supporting details.
3. Approaching
16.88 points
The description of how one can assess for the spiritual needs and provide
interventions for individuals, families, and groups that have different beliefs than
one’s own is included but lacks relevant supporting details.
2. Insufficient
14.63 points
The description of how one can assess for the spiritual needs and provide
interventions for individuals, families, and groups that have different beliefs than
one’s own is incomplete or incorrect.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
The description of how one can assess for the spiritual needs and provide
interventions for individuals, families, and groups that have different beliefs than
one’s own is not included.
© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
Thesis, Position, or Purpose
10.5 points
Criteria Description
Communicates reason for writing and demonstrates awareness of audience.
5. Target
10.5 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is clearly communicated throughout and clearly
directed to a specific audience.
4. Acceptable
8.92 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is adequately presented. An awareness of the
appropriate audience is demonstrated.
3. Approaching
7.88 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is discernable in most aspects but is occasionally
weak or unclear. There is limited awareness of the appropriate audience.
2. Insufficient
6.83 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is unfocused or confused. There is very little
awareness of the intended audience.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is not discernible. No awareness of the appropriate
audience is evident.
© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
Development, Structure, and Conclusion
10.5 points
Criteria Description
Advances position or purpose throughout writing; conclusion aligns to and evolves
from development.
5. Target
10.5 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is logically advanced throughout. The progression
of ideas is coherent and unified. A clear and logical conclusion aligns to the
development of the purpose.
4. Acceptable
8.92 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is advanced in most aspects. Ideas clearly build on
each other. Conclusion aligns to the development of the purpose.
3. Approaching
7.88 points
Limited advancement of thesis, position, or purpose is discernable. There are
inconsistencies in organization or the relationship of ideas. Conclusion is simplistic
and not fully aligned to the development of the purpose.
2. Insufficient
6.83 points
Writing lacks logical progression of the thesis, position, or purpose. Some
organization is attempted, but ideas are disconnected. Conclusion is unclear and
not supported by the overall development of the purpose.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
No advancement of the thesis, position, or purpose is evident. Connections
between paragraphs are missing or inappropriate. No conclusion is offered.
© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
Evidence
9 points
Criteria Description
Selects and integrates evidence to support and advance position/purpose; considers
other perspectives.
5. Target
9 points
Specific and appropriate evidence is included. Relevant perspectives of others are
clearly considered.
4. Acceptable
7.65 points
Relevant evidence that includes other perspectives is used.
3. Approaching
6.75 points
Evidence is used but is insufficient or of limited relevance. Simplistic explanation or
integration of other perspectives is present.
2. Insufficient
5.85 points
Evidence is limited or irrelevant. The interpretation of other perspectives is
superficial or incorrect.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Evidence to support the thesis, position, or purpose is absent. The writing relies
entirely on the perspective of the writer.
© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
Mechanics of Writing
9 points
Criteria Description
Includes spelling, capitalization, punctuation, grammar, language use, sentence
structure, etc.
5. Target
9 points
No mechanical errors are present. Appropriate language choice and sentence
structure are used throughout.
4. Acceptable
7.65 points
Few mechanical errors are present. Suitable language choice and sentence
structure are used.
3. Approaching
6.75 points
Occasional mechanical errors are present. Language choice is generally
appropriate. Varied sentence structure is attempted.
2. Insufficient
5.85 points
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors are present. Inconsistencies in language
choice or sentence structure are recurrent.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Errors in grammar or syntax are pervasive and impede meaning. Incorrect language
choice or sentence structure errors are found throughout.
© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
Format/Documentation
6 points
Criteria Description
Uses appropriate style, such as APA, MLA, etc., for college, subject, and level;
documents sources using citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc.,
appropriate to assignment and discipline.
5. Target
6 points
No errors in formatting or documentation are present.
4. Acceptable
5.1 points
Appropriate format and documentation are used with only minor errors.
3. Approaching
4.5 points
Appropriate format and documentation are used, although there are some obvious
errors.
2. Insufficient
3.9 points
Appropriate format is attempted, but some elements are missing. Frequent errors
in documentation of sources are evident.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Appropriate format is not used. No documentation of sources is provided.
Total 150 points
© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
1
Typing Template for APA Papers: A Sample of Proper Formatting for APA Style
Student A. Sample
College Name, Grand Canyon University
Course Number: Course Title
Instructor’s Name
Assignment Due Date
2
Typing Template for APA Papers: A Sample of Proper Formatting for APA Style
This is an electronic template for papers written according to the style of the American
Psychological Association (APA, 2020) as outlined in the seventh edition of the Publication
Manual of the American Psychological Association. The purpose of the template is to help
students set the margins and spacing. Margins are set at 1 inch for top, bottom, left, and right.
The text is left-justified only; that means the left margin is straight, but the right margin is
ragged. Each paragraph is indented 0.5 inch. It is best to use the tab key to indent, or set a firstline indent in the paragraph settings. The line spacing is double throughout the paper, even on the
reference page. One space is used after punctuation at the end of sentences. The font style used
in this template is Times New Roman and the font size is 12 point. This font and size is required
for GCU papers.
The Section Heading
The heading above would be used if you want to have your paper divided into sections
based on content. This is a Level 1 heading, and it is centered and bolded, and the initial word
and each word of four or more letters is capitalized. The heading should be a short descriptor of
the section. Note that not all papers will have headings or subheadings in them. Papers for
beginning undergraduate courses (100 or 200 level) will generally not need headings beyond
Level 1. The paper title serves as the heading for the first paragraph of the paper, so
“Introduction” is not used as a heading.
Subsection Heading
The subheading above would be used if there are several sections within the topic labeled
in a first level heading. This is a Level 2 heading, and it is flush left and bolded, and the initial
word and each word of four or more letters is capitalized.
3
Subsection Heading
APA dictates that you should avoid having only one subsection heading and subsection
within a section. In other words, use at least two subheadings under a main heading, or do not
use any at all. Headings are used in order, so a paper must use Level 1 before using Level 2. Do
not adjust spacing to change where on the page a heading falls, even if it would be the last line
on a page.
The Title Page
When you are ready to write, and after having read these instructions completely, you can
delete these directions and start typing. The formatting should stay the same. You will also need
to change the items on the title page. Fill in your own title, name, course, college, instructor, and
date. List the college to which the course belongs, such as College of Theology, College of
Business, or College of Humanities and Social Sciences. GCU uses three letters and numbers
with a hyphen for course numbers, such as CWV-101 or UNV-104. The date should be written
as Month Day, Year. Spell out the month name.
Formatting References and Citations
APA Style includes rules for citing resources. The Publication Manual (APA, 2020) also
discusses the desired tone of writing, grammar, punctuation, formatting for numbers, and a
variety of other important topics. Although APA Style rules are used in this template, the
purpose of the template is only to demonstrate spacing and the general parts of the paper. GCU
has prepared an APA Style Guide available in the Student Success Center and on the GCU
Library’s Citing Sources in APA guide (https://libguides.gcu.edu/APA) for help in correctly
formatting according to APA Style.
4
The reference list should appear at the end of a paper. It provides the information
necessary for a reader to locate and retrieve any source you cite in the body of the paper. Each
source you cite in the paper must appear in your reference list; likewise, each entry in the
reference list must be cited in your text. A sample reference page is included below. This page
includes examples of how to format different reference types. The first reference is to a webpage
without a clear date, which is common with organizational websites (American Nurses
Association, n.d.). Next is the Publication Manual referred to throughout this template (APA,
2020). Notice that the manual reference includes the DOI number, even though this is a print
book, as the DOI was listed on book, and does not include a publisher name since the publisher
is also the author. A journal article reference will also often include a DOI, and as this article has
four authors, only the first would appear in the in-text citation (Copeland et al., 2013).
Government publications like the Treatment Improvement Protocol series documents from the
Center for Substance Abuse Treatment (2014) are another common source found online. A book
without a DOI is the last example (Holland & Forrest, 2017).
5
References
American Nurses Association. (n.d.). Scope of practice. https://www.nursingworld.org/practicepolicy/scope-of-practice/
American Psychological Association. (2020). Publication manual of the American Psychological
Association (7th ed.). https://doi.org/10.1037/0000165-000
Center for Substance Abuse Treatment. (2014). Improving cultural competence (HHS
Publication No. 14-4849). U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Substance
Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK248428/
Copeland, T., Henderson, B., Mayer, B., & Nicholson, S. (2013). Three different paths for
tabletop gaming in school libraries. Library Trends, 61(4), 825–835.
https://doi.org/10.1353/lib.2013.0018
Holland, R. A., & Forrest, B. K. (2017). Good arguments: Making your case in writing and
public speaking. Baker Academic.
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
