Professional accountability | Nursing homework help

Professional Accountability Reflection – Rubric

Post Engagement 27.5 points

Criteria Description

Describe posts that have been engaged with or viewed that might be considered

inappropriate based on the professional standards of nursing.

5. Target 27.5 points

A description of posts that have been engaged with or viewed that might be

considered inappropriate based on the professional standards of nursing is

thorough.

4. Acceptable 24.48 points

A description of posts that have been engaged with or viewed that might be

considered inappropriate based on the professional standards of nursing is

detailed.

3. Approaching 21.73 points

A description of posts that have been engaged with or viewed that might be

considered inappropriate based on the professional standards of nursing is present

but lacks detail.

2. Insufficient 20.63 points

A description of posts that have been engaged with or viewed that might be

considered inappropriate based on the professional standards of nursing is

incomplete or incorrect.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

A description of posts that have been engaged with or viewed that might be

considered inappropriate based on the professional standards of nursing is not

present.

Collapse All

© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

Standard of Conduct 33 points

Criteria Description

Discuss a nurse’s responsibility to uphold a standard of conduct consistent with

regulatory requirements and workplace policies in both work and personal lives,

including how personal conduct can violate HIPAA or be considered unethical or

unprofessional.

5. Target 33 points

A discussion of a nurse’s responsibility to uphold a standard of conduct consistent

with regulatory requirements and workplace policies in both work and personal

lives, including how personal conduct can violate HIPAA or be considered unethical

or unprofessional, is thorough and includes substantial supporting detail and

examples.

4. Acceptable 29.37 points

A discussion of a nurse’s responsibility to uphold a standard of conduct consistent

with regulatory requirements and workplace policies in both work and personal

lives, including how personal conduct can violate HIPAA or be considered unethical

or unprofessional, is detailed and includes examples.

3. Approaching 26.07 points

A discussion of a nurse’s responsibility to uphold a standard of conduct consistent

with regulatory requirements and workplace policies in both work and personal

lives, including how personal conduct can violate HIPAA or be considered unethical

or unprofessional, is present but lacks detail or examples.

2. Insufficient 24.75 points

A discussion of a nurse’s responsibility to uphold a standard of conduct consistent

with regulatory requirements and workplace policies in both work and personal

lives, including how personal conduct can violate HIPAA or be considered unethical

or unprofessional, is incomplete or incorrect.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

A discussion of a nurse’s responsibility to uphold a standard of conduct consistent

with regulatory requirements and workplace policies in both work and personal

lives, including how personal conduct can violate HIPAA or be considered unethical

or unprofessional, is not present.

© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

Christian Values and Social Media 16.5 points

Criteria Description

Discuss areas of social media activity that reflect Christian values and areas that could

be improved.

5. Target 16.5 points

A discussion of the areas of social media activity that reflect Christian values as they

relate to human value and dignity for all individuals and areas that could be

improved is thorough.

4. Acceptable 14.69 points

A discussion of the areas of social media activity that reflect Christian values as they

relate to human value and dignity for all individuals and areas that could be

improved is detailed.

3. Approaching 13.04 points

A discussion of the areas of social media activity that reflect Christian values as they

relate to human value and dignity for all individuals and areas that could be

improved is present but lacks detail.

2. Insufficient 12.38 points

A discussion of the areas of social media activity that reflect Christian values as they

relate to human value and dignity for all individuals and areas that could be

improved is incomplete or incorrect.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

A discussion of the areas of social media activity that reflect Christian values as they

relate to human value and dignity for all individuals and areas that could be

improved is not present.

© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

Thesis, Position, or Purpose 7.7 points

Criteria Description

Communicates reason for writing and demonstrates awareness of audience.

5. Target 7.7 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is clearly communicated throughout and clearly

directed to a specific audience.

4. Acceptable 6.85 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is adequately presented. An awareness of the

appropriate audience is demonstrated.

3. Approaching 6.08 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 5.78 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.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

Development, Structure, and Conclusion 7.7 points

Criteria Description

Advances position or purpose throughout writing; conclusion aligns to and evolves

from development.

5. Target 7.7 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 6.85 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 6.08 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 5.78 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.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

Evidence 6.6 points

Criteria Description

Selects and integrates evidence to support and advance position/purpose; considers

other perspectives.

5. Target 6.6 points

Specific and appropriate evidence is included. Relevant perspectives of others are

clearly considered.

4. Acceptable 5.87 points

Relevant evidence that includes other perspectives is used.

3. Approaching 5.21 points

Evidence is used but is insufficient or of limited relevance. Simplistic explanation or

integration of other perspectives is present.

2. Insufficient 4.95 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.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

Mechanics of Writing 6.6 points

Criteria Description

Includes spelling, capitalization, punctuation, grammar, language use, sentence

structure, etc.

5. Target 6.6 points

No mechanical errors are present. Appropriate language choice and sentence

structure are used throughout.

4. Acceptable 5.87 points

Few mechanical errors are present. Suitable language choice and sentence

structure are used.

3. Approaching 5.21 points

Occasional mechanical errors are present. Language choice is generally

appropriate. Varied sentence structure is attempted.

2. Insufficient 4.95 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.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

Format/Documentation 4.4 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 4.4 points

No errors in formatting or documentation are present.

4. Acceptable 3.92 points

Appropriate format and documentation are used with only minor errors.

3. Approaching 3.48 points

Appropriate format and documentation are used, although there are some obvious

errors.

2. Insufficient 3.3 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 110 points

© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

Place your order
(550 words)

Approximate price: $22

Calculate the price of your order

550 words
We'll send you the first draft for approval by September 11, 2018 at 10:52 AM
Total price:
$26
The price is based on these factors:
Academic level
Number of pages
Urgency
Basic features
  • Free title page and bibliography
  • Unlimited revisions
  • Plagiarism-free guarantee
  • Money-back guarantee
  • 24/7 support
On-demand options
  • Writer’s samples
  • Part-by-part delivery
  • Overnight delivery
  • Copies of used sources
  • Expert Proofreading
Paper format
  • 275 words per page
  • 12 pt Arial/Times New Roman
  • Double line spacing
  • Any citation style (APA, MLA, Chicago/Turabian, Harvard)

Our guarantees

Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.

Money-back guarantee

You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.

Read more

Zero-plagiarism guarantee

Each paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.

Read more

Free-revision policy

Thanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.

Read more

Privacy policy

Your email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.

Read more

Fair-cooperation guarantee

By sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.

Read more