Description
Human Needs Theory Interactive Case StudyLinks to an external site.
Complete the Human Needs Theory Interactive Case Study following the readings and presentation for this week. Associate what you have learned about the theories to this case study, and then see the instructions below to complete a journal entry about your experience.
During weeks 2 & 4, you will complete interactive case studies and be asked to associate what you have learned about theory in comparison to the case study and reflect on it.
Each time you have completed a case study, submit your reflection. Each reflection should include the following:
A comparison of what you have learned from the case study to related theories you have studied. Make sure to cite these theories in APA format.
A comparison of the case study to your nursing practice, giving one or two examples from your nursing experience in which you might have applied a particular theory covered.
Your reflection should be a minimum of five to six paragraphs.
Rubric
NURS_500_DE – Case Study Rubric
NURS_500_DE – Case Study Rubric
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCritical Analysis
20 to >16.4 pts
Meets Expectations
Presents an exemplary articulation and insightful analysis of significant concepts and/or theories presented in the case. Offers detailed and specific examples for all questions. Makes keen observations, making note of essential information provided in the case. Ideas are professionally sound and creative; they are supported by scientific evidence that is credible and timely. Draws insightful and comprehensive conclusions and solutions.
16.4 to >15.0 pts
Approaches Expectations
Presents an accurate analysis of significant concepts and/or theories presented in the case. Offers some detail and some examples for most questions. Makes occasional note of essential information provided in the case. Ideas are mostly supported by scientific evidence that is credible and timely. Makes some attempt to draw conclusions and solutions.
15 to >11.8 pts
Falls Below Expectations
Provides insufficient explanations of significant concepts. Offers little or insignificant detail and no examples for most questions. Fails to address essential information provided in the case. Ideas are generally unsupported by scientific evidence, but some attempt has been made. Fails to draw conclusion.
11.8 to >0 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
Does not, or incorrectly, answers with insufficient explanations. Information is not scientifically sound.
20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeContent
20 to >16.4 pts
Meets Expectations
Makes insightful, clear and accurate connections to key concepts and relevant theories. Response indicates a comprehensive, high-level understanding of the concepts presented in the case.
16.4 to >15.0 pts
Approaches Expectations
Makes mostly accurate connections to key concepts and relevant theories. Response indicates a general understanding of the concepts presented in the case.
15 to >11.8 pts
Falls Below Expectations
Provides several insufficient or inaccurate explanations, although attempts are made to address some key concepts. Response indicates an introductory understanding of the concepts presented in the case.
11.8 to >0 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
Information is inaccurate or inadequate. Response indicates little or no understanding of the concepts presented in the case.
20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMechanics
7.5 to >6.15 pts
Meets Expectations
Answers are well written throughout. Information is well organized and clearly communicated. Assignment is free of spelling and grammatical errors.
6.15 to >5.63 pts
Approaches Expectations
Answers are well written throughout and the information is reasonably organized and communicated. Assignment is mostly free of spelling and grammatical errors.
5.63 to >4.43 pts
Falls Below Expectations
Answers are somewhat organized and lacks some clarity. Contains some spelling and grammatical errors.
4.43 to >0 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
Answers are not well written and lack clarity. Information is poorly organized. Assignment contains many spelling and grammatical errors.
7.5 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAPA Format
2.5 to >2.05 pts
Meets Expectations
Follows all the requirements related to format, length, source citations, and layout.
2.05 to >1.88 pts
Approaches Expectations
Follows length requirement and most of the requirements related to format, source citations, and layout.
1.88 to >1.48 pts
Falls Below Expectations
Follows most of the requirements related to format, length, source citations, and layout.
1.48 to >0 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
Does not follow format, length, source citations, and layout requirements.
2.5 pts
Total Points: 50
PreviousNextHuman Needs Theory Interactive Case StudyLinks to an external site.
Complete the Human Needs Theory Interactive Case Study following the readings and presentation for this week. Associate what you have learned about the theories to this case study, and then see the instructions below to complete a journal entry about your experience.
During weeks 2 & 4, you will complete interactive case studies and be asked to associate what you have learned about theory in comparison to the case study and reflect on it.
Each time you have completed a case study, submit your reflection. Each reflection should include the following:
A comparison of what you have learned from the case study to related theories you have studied. Make sure to cite these theories in APA format.
A comparison of the case study to your nursing practice, giving one or two examples from your nursing experience in which you might have applied a particular theory covered.
Your reflection should be a minimum of five to six paragraphs.
Rubric
NURS_500_DE – Case Study Rubric
NURS_500_DE – Case Study Rubric
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCritical Analysis
20 to >16.4 pts
Meets Expectations
Presents an exemplary articulation and insightful analysis of significant concepts and/or theories presented in the case. Offers detailed and specific examples for all questions. Makes keen observations, making note of essential information provided in the case. Ideas are professionally sound and creative; they are supported by scientific evidence that is credible and timely. Draws insightful and comprehensive conclusions and solutions.
16.4 to >15.0 pts
Approaches Expectations
Presents an accurate analysis of significant concepts and/or theories presented in the case. Offers some detail and some examples for most questions. Makes occasional note of essential information provided in the case. Ideas are mostly supported by scientific evidence that is credible and timely. Makes some attempt to draw conclusions and solutions.
15 to >11.8 pts
Falls Below Expectations
Provides insufficient explanations of significant concepts. Offers little or insignificant detail and no examples for most questions. Fails to address essential information provided in the case. Ideas are generally unsupported by scientific evidence, but some attempt has been made. Fails to draw conclusion.
11.8 to >0 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
Does not, or incorrectly, answers with insufficient explanations. Information is not scientifically sound.
20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeContent
20 to >16.4 pts
Meets Expectations
Makes insightful, clear and accurate connections to key concepts and relevant theories. Response indicates a comprehensive, high-level understanding of the concepts presented in the case.
16.4 to >15.0 pts
Approaches Expectations
Makes mostly accurate connections to key concepts and relevant theories. Response indicates a general understanding of the concepts presented in the case.
15 to >11.8 pts
Falls Below Expectations
Provides several insufficient or inaccurate explanations, although attempts are made to address some key concepts. Response indicates an introductory understanding of the concepts presented in the case.
11.8 to >0 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
Information is inaccurate or inadequate. Response indicates little or no understanding of the concepts presented in the case.
20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMechanics
7.5 to >6.15 pts
Meets Expectations
Answers are well written throughout. Information is well organized and clearly communicated. Assignment is free of spelling and grammatical errors.
6.15 to >5.63 pts
Approaches Expectations
Answers are well written throughout and the information is reasonably organized and communicated. Assignment is mostly free of spelling and grammatical errors.
5.63 to >4.43 pts
Falls Below Expectations
Answers are somewhat organized and lacks some clarity. Contains some spelling and grammatical errors.
4.43 to >0 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
Answers are not well written and lack clarity. Information is poorly organized. Assignment contains many spelling and grammatical errors.
7.5 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAPA Format
2.5 to >2.05 pts
Meets Expectations
Follows all the requirements related to format, length, source citations, and layout.
2.05 to >1.88 pts
Approaches Expectations
Follows length requirement and most of the requirements related to format, source citations, and layout.
1.88 to >1.48 pts
Falls Below Expectations
Follows most of the requirements related to format, length, source citations, and layout.
1.48 to >0 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
Does not follow format, length, source citations, and layout requirements.
2.5 pts
Total Points: 50
PreviousNext
