Assignment 2—Integration of theory with practice- Case world Scenario Critical reflection

Critical reflection is an extension of “critical thinking” and requires students to think about their practice and to examine their thinking by asking probing questions. Critical reflection moves beyond examining past situations and moves forward to apply theoretical knowledge to the future. In this assignment students must ;
•    choose one of the case world scenarios used in this topic to develop a written piece of work that demonstrates their capacity to critically analyse a patient situation.
•    consider the following theoretical perspectives : pathophysiology, relevant pharmacology, best practice, inter-professional roles in patient centred care, lifespan and psychosocial issues and choose four (4) perspectives, from the chosen case world scenario  for extended discussion within your assignment.
•    demonstrate the capacity to think critically and relate theoretical concepts to clinical practice.
•    use the following headings in the structure of their paper:

Heading    Intent
Introduction     •    Purpose of this paper.
•    Introduce the patient, and the scenario.
•    Introduce the four chosen perspectives discussed in this paper.
Extended discussions of each of the four (4) chosen perspectives.    •    Theoretical foundation of the chosen perspective
•    Identify objective & subjective data
•    Provide a brief rationale for each of the perspectives identified.
•    How does the theory influence and inform care provided
Relating knowledge to Clinical practice.    •    Demonstrate integration of knowledge to care provided:
o    eg. best practice, patient centred care, pharmacology, inter-professional roles, lifespan and  psychosocial issues, pathophysiology.
•    Demonstrate understanding of the importance of Evidence Based Practice in nursing practice,
•    demonstrate capacity to think critically and link theoretical concepts with clinical practice
Conclusion    Succinct synopsis of the keys points discussed in the paper
References    A minimum of eight (8) primary or secondary references must be used in the format described in the SoNM referencing guide.In text referencing and reference lists must be evident

AssessmentCriteria    Excellent(5)    Good(4)    Satisfactory(3)    Unacceptable(2)
Introduction
Purpose of this paper. Introduce the patient, and the scenario. Introduce what will be discussed in this paper.
5%     Excellent outline of aim and purpose of the paper. Logical signposting of the content that will be discussed in the paper.

Aim and purpose of the paper may have minor inaccuracies. There is logical signposting of the content that is to be discussed in the paper.    Aim and purpose of the paper is introduced however with some ambiguity and is not clear.   Some elements are missing.    Topic not well introduced. Introduction is absent. May be unclear, lengthy, or too short, uninformative. No logical signposting of the content of the paper.

Understanding the condition
Pathophysiology of the condition. Identify objective & subjective data & formulate relevant actual or potential nursing issues (4) based on the data presented in the scenario. Provide a brief rationale for each of the issues identified.
30%    Pathophysiology of the condition is discussed in-depth. Objective and subjective data identified correctly. Majority of issues identified are relevant to the scenario. Demonstrated an excellent critical analysis of the scenario. Correct information presented. Discussion is closely relevant to the case scenario.    Pathophysiology of the condition is discussed adequately. Most of objective and subjective data identified correctly. Most of the issues identified are relevant to the scenario. Demonstrated a good critical analysis of the scenario. Mostly correct information presented.Discussion is mostly relevant to the case scenario.    Pathophysiology of the condition is discussed but lack depth. Some of the objective and subjective data identified correctly. Some of the issues identified are relevant to the scenario. Demonstrated a sufficient critical analysis of the scenario. Mostly correct information presented. Discussion is relevant to the case scenario.    Pathophysiology of the condition is not discussed with a sufficient depth, or absent. Incorrect or irrelevant data identified.  Most of the issues identified are not relevant to the scenario and an inpatient setting. Insufficient critical analysis of the scenario and/or incorrect information presented.Discussion lacks relevance to the case scenario.
Relating knowledge to Clinical practice
Demonstrate knowledge and understanding of best practice, patient centred care, pathophysiology, pharmacology, inter-professional roles, lifespan and  psychosocial issues. Demonstrate understanding of the importance of EBP in nursing practice.
Demonstrates the capacity to think critically and relate theoretical concepts to clinical practice.
30%    Excellent understanding of best practice, patient centred care, pathophysiology, pharmacology, inter-professional roles, lifespanand psychosocial issues. Thorough and clear links made between these concepts and the case scenario and nursing practice. Demonstrates a critical analysis of the scenario using all concepts and theories in a sophisticated application.  There is evidence of relevant research and a range of resource material is used    Good understanding of best practice, patient centred care, pathophysiology, pharmacology, inter-professional roles, lifespan and psychosocial issues. Clear links made between these concepts and the case scenario and nursing practice.Demonstrates an ability to describe the scenario with some critique. The use of all concepts and theories is correctly applied. Some research is evidence and the resources used are relevant    Adequate understanding of best practice, patient centred care, pathophysiology, pharmacology, inter-professional roleslifespan and psychosocial issues. Adequate links made between these concepts and the case scenario and nursing practice. Discussion of the scenario is mostly descriptive. The use of concepts and theories is minimal and may contain some errors. Minimal research is evident and the resources used may be only partly relevant.      Lack of understanding of best practice, patient centred care, pathophysiology, pharmacology, inter-professional roleslifespan and psychosocial issues. Unclear or no links made between these concepts and the case scenario and nursing practice. Minimal or no reference to link between physical condition and potential psychosocial issues.Discussion of the scenario is descriptive and confused.  There is little or no use of concepts and theories.  Minimal research is evident and use of resources is irrelevant
Conclusion
Succinct synopsis of the keys points discussed in the paper
15%     Conclusion is logically drawn from the body of the paper, clear demonstration that key points have been discussed. Synthesis of material is clearly evident.    Conclusion is logically drawn from the body of the paper, mostly demonstrates that key points have been understood and applied.    Conclusion is satisfactory and contains most of the key points some key findings are highlighted.     Conclusion is unclear or too short and does not make conclusions, or does not demonstrate understanding of key points. Conclusion is absent
Presentation
5%    Writing is presented clearly and logically with no spelling or grammatical errors. Introduction, main content and conclusion are clear and concise. clearly evident. Excellent academic presentation of the work.    Writing is presented clearly and logically. Minimal spelling and grammatical errors that do not distract from the flow of the paper. Introduction, main content and conclusion evident. The paper is academically presented.    The paper is satisfactorily presented Introduction, main content and conclusion evident. The flow is at times lost. Some grammatical and spelling errors but not significant enough to distract from the meaning.    The presentation is poor, frequent spelling errors and poor grammatical phrasing detracts from the work. Unclear writing style.  Introduction, main content and conclusion not evident.

References

15%    Sourcesindicatedepth
andbreadthofresearch,withevidenceofextendedresearch.  References are relevant to the Australian context. References are from peer-reviewed journals or reputable texts, well utilised and integrated into the text. There is a full reference list and referencing conforms to Harvard referencing style.      Sources indicate considerable depth and breadth of research.  References are relevant to the Australian context.  References are from peer-reviewed journals or reputable texts.  Referencing conforms to Harvard Referencing style with only minimal and minor referencing errors evident in the reference list and intext.     Sources are acceptable but some material is inadequate or not relevant to course activities.  References are relevant to the Australian context.  References mainly conform to Harvard referencing style, minor errors evident. Adequate sources were used.     Sources used are unacceptable or inadequate.  References are not relevant to the Australian context, are not peer-reviewed and/or not relevant to the topic. The reference list is not appropriately formatted. Referencing does not comply with Harvard referencing style.  Sources are either not acknowledged or poorly acknowledged.

Mark____/100     Comments