Daily Archives: April 13, 2024

NUR 4590 MRU Joint Commission & Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations PPT

NUR 4590 MRU Joint Commission & Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations PPT Description Powerpoint presentation about : Joint Commission and accreditation of healthcare organizations JCAHO( Regulatory Healthcare Agency) Outline 1- Definition…

Continue ReadingNUR 4590 MRU Joint Commission & Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations PPT

Understanding Business and Management Research Methods 2000 Words (not including references) Main Objective of the assessment This is an individual assignment. You are required to submit a critical analysis of research topic in relation to a chosen topic of study/area of interest in the context of Business Studies. This research topic normally relates the research issues in your master programme subject area. Description of the Assessment You need to undertake a significant literature review, which outlines the underpinning methodologies and the research method(s) adopted in previous research that incorporates a range of viewpoints and perspectives. It is essential to provide a critical analysis that applies the knowledge and understanding acquired during the module to evaluate theoretical and technical aspects of related research methodologies and methods. You are expected to demonstrate both breadth and depth of understanding of relevant academic literature of the chosen topic. You are required to explain, discuss and evaluate the methodologies applied in the reviewed literature. Typically, your essay should have (a) an executive summary (b) Introduction (c) literature review (d) Analysis, discussion and evaluation of research methodology (e) Findings and what you have learnt from this assignment (f) References (Harvard Referencing System). In this individual assignment, you are expected to use relevant materials from academic research books and academic empirical journal articles (ABS Criterion Grade descriptors according to: Content appropriateness of material, relevance, feasibility, quality of solutions Knowledge (25%) Evidence of reading in the area of Research Methods and the relevant topic understudy A* to A- Excellent, Comprehensive, detailed and well organised and structured review of selected factual information on the topic understudy, with correct emphasis on the question at hand. Evidence of reading of a wide range of relevant literature sources including effective use of the reading list. Makes very good use of factual evidence to support arguments. Well sustained effective style of writing that is appropriately concise or expansive. Accurate Referencing B+ to B- Very good, relevant evaluation, detailed and well organised response. Good overview of the topic understudy, and the use of factual information to address the question at hand, which is consistent and mainly error free. Evidence of effective use of the reading list with some evidence of wider reading. Competent English and fluent writing. Good referencing C+ to C- Fair range of information and use of terminology but not complete and/or some errors. Limited evidence of the topic understudy, from relevant reading in the area of the topic understudy, including the reading list and/or course notes. Few grammatical errors. Limited, but adequate referencing D+ to D- Mainly descriptive answer, satisfactory but not complete. Evidence of some reading, but little real research effort is shown. Some barely adequate references not well presented and not consistent. Lack of knowledge in some areas of the topic understudy, relevant to the question at hand and some factual errors. English is adequate E+ to E- Work does not demonstrate evidence of understanding the question at hand and/or the wider general aspects of the topic understudy. Limited information and content, many factual errors, and/or little evidence of reading. F Little or no adequate content relating to the topic understudy, few relevant facts, and/or major factual errors, too short and no evidence of reading ranking listed journals) in your subject area to support your analysis and arguments when formulating your assignment. Your analysis, discussion and evaluation should be backed with appropriate academic references and examples where necessary. This assignment should be presented with 12 pt. Times New Roman Text with line spacing of 1.5. The word limit is 2000 words (excluding references). Note that assignment below this word limit by more than 10% would result in decrease in the overall achieved mark by 10%. Proper referencing of all ideas, concepts, theories and quotes used in your work is essential. Normally you are required to present no less than 15 academic journal article references. The Harvard referencing system must be used, details of which are contained on your handbook. Failure to employ a clear and appropriate system of referencing will be penalized. 4 marking criteria all equally weighted ? Understanding (25%) Use of Normative literature to explain the conceptual aspects of Rsearch Methods and the relecvant topic understudy A* to A- Demonstrates comprehensive grasp of concepts, theories and methods relevant to the topic understudy, and in particular the question at hand. Articulate explanation of relevant theory. Offers a largely complete answer to the question, which is consistent, cogent and expands the bounds of the question. B+ to B- Demonstrates very good understanding of many of the relevant concepts, theories and methods relevant to the topic understudy, Summarises and extrapolates pertinent issues, but not always consistent or clear in explanation. C+ to C- Demonstrates understanding by translating, reorganising, and/or rephrasing relevant concepts, theory and methods relevant to the topic understudy, Some evidence of understanding aided by reading, not always lucid. Some areas of issues/topics presented may be weak or not complete D+ to D- Satisfactory understanding, explanation and summarisation of concepts, theory and methods relevant to the topic understudy. However, mainly descriptive answer, which is not complete and offers little insight from, sources other than lecture material and the reading list. The response lacks depth and perception; variable and/or limited grasp of appropriate content and context E+ to E- Vague, unconvincing and inconsistent response, but sufficient to create basis for an adequate answer. Little or no real explanation, summarisation or interpretation of concepts, theories or methods relevant to the topic understudy. Little or no evidence of the use of lecture material or the reading list. F No real explanation, summarisation or interpretation of concepts, theories or methods relevant to the topic understudy. Errors of understanding and no evidence of the use of lecture material or the reading list. Analysis (25%) Synthesis of literature with practical examples to emphasise important issues A* to A- Very effective identification of relevant concepts, methods and theory with evidence from a wide variety of reading and practical examples. Comprehensively breaks down arguments, theories and structures. Very good analytical arguments effectively based on thorough review of evidence, and effective B+ to B- Good, relevant and comprehensive breakdown of arguments with good recognition of relevant concepts, theory and methods. Analysis is based on some evidence linked to practice. Logically structured and links topics to make points but within clear boundaries of the question at hand. C+ to C- Adequate breakdown of subject but not comprehensive. Some ability to discern and discuss theory, methods and concepts pertinent to the topic understudy, but within limited boundaries of the question at hand. Generally logical and clear arguments presented using a clear structure and D+ to D- Basic analysis of concepts, theory and methods relevant to the question at hand. However, correctly identifies some content and context relevant to the topic understudy, with fair discussion. Some structure to argument, but shallow and not always logical and makes few or no links to practice. E+ to E- Very limited or no analysis of concepts, theory and methods relevant to the topic understudy, e.g. project management and the response fails to tackle the question at hand. Inadequate structure and/or logic to the arguments presented and the response offers no F No evidence of significant analytical ability, arguments presented is uncl ear or erroneous, and the response lacks proper structure and logic and offers no evidence or links to practice. linking of topics within the wider domain of the topic understudy. breakdown of topics, but offer few examples or evidence from practice. evidence or links to practice. Evaluation (25%) Use of literature, practical examples and own opinions to draw conclusions and justify arguments A* to A- Extremely effective, Relevant and comprehensive evaluation of concepts, theory and methods pertinent to the topic understudy, and the question at hand. Expresses personal perspectives, with some self-criticism where appropriate and recognizes limits of own judgement and knowledge. Good critical thinking, and evaluates issues and material beyond the scope of the question. B+ to B- Fair judgement of relevant concepts, theory and methods relevant to the topic understudy, within the scope of the question at hand. Some development of major and/or minor issues, some judgement correctly expressed but based on arguments from source material with some limitations C+ to C- Some adequate evaluation based on an adequate if simple analysis. May identify some concepts, theory and methods relevant to the topic understudy, but the arguments and evaluation is not well developed. Work is mainly descriptive with some analysis but not endowed with incisive judgement D+ to D- At most some minimal evaluation based on limited or simple analysis of some concepts, theory and methods relevant to the topic understudy, that may be shallow, weak or vague. The response lacks critical evaluation. E+ to E- Little or no evaluation is offered of concepts, theory and methods relevant to the topic understudy, or the question at hand. F No effective evaluation is offered of any concepts, theory and methods relevant to the topic understudy, or the question at hand. . Y

Understanding Business and Management Research Methods 2000 Words (not including references)       Main Objective of the assessment This is an individual assignment. You are required to submit a…

Continue ReadingUnderstanding Business and Management Research Methods 2000 Words (not including references) Main Objective of the assessment This is an individual assignment. You are required to submit a critical analysis of research topic in relation to a chosen topic of study/area of interest in the context of Business Studies. This research topic normally relates the research issues in your master programme subject area. Description of the Assessment You need to undertake a significant literature review, which outlines the underpinning methodologies and the research method(s) adopted in previous research that incorporates a range of viewpoints and perspectives. It is essential to provide a critical analysis that applies the knowledge and understanding acquired during the module to evaluate theoretical and technical aspects of related research methodologies and methods. You are expected to demonstrate both breadth and depth of understanding of relevant academic literature of the chosen topic. You are required to explain, discuss and evaluate the methodologies applied in the reviewed literature. Typically, your essay should have (a) an executive summary (b) Introduction (c) literature review (d) Analysis, discussion and evaluation of research methodology (e) Findings and what you have learnt from this assignment (f) References (Harvard Referencing System). In this individual assignment, you are expected to use relevant materials from academic research books and academic empirical journal articles (ABS Criterion Grade descriptors according to: Content appropriateness of material, relevance, feasibility, quality of solutions Knowledge (25%) Evidence of reading in the area of Research Methods and the relevant topic understudy A* to A- Excellent, Comprehensive, detailed and well organised and structured review of selected factual information on the topic understudy, with correct emphasis on the question at hand. Evidence of reading of a wide range of relevant literature sources including effective use of the reading list. Makes very good use of factual evidence to support arguments. Well sustained effective style of writing that is appropriately concise or expansive. Accurate Referencing B+ to B- Very good, relevant evaluation, detailed and well organised response. Good overview of the topic understudy, and the use of factual information to address the question at hand, which is consistent and mainly error free. Evidence of effective use of the reading list with some evidence of wider reading. Competent English and fluent writing. Good referencing C+ to C- Fair range of information and use of terminology but not complete and/or some errors. Limited evidence of the topic understudy, from relevant reading in the area of the topic understudy, including the reading list and/or course notes. Few grammatical errors. Limited, but adequate referencing D+ to D- Mainly descriptive answer, satisfactory but not complete. Evidence of some reading, but little real research effort is shown. Some barely adequate references not well presented and not consistent. Lack of knowledge in some areas of the topic understudy, relevant to the question at hand and some factual errors. English is adequate E+ to E- Work does not demonstrate evidence of understanding the question at hand and/or the wider general aspects of the topic understudy. Limited information and content, many factual errors, and/or little evidence of reading. F Little or no adequate content relating to the topic understudy, few relevant facts, and/or major factual errors, too short and no evidence of reading ranking listed journals) in your subject area to support your analysis and arguments when formulating your assignment. Your analysis, discussion and evaluation should be backed with appropriate academic references and examples where necessary. This assignment should be presented with 12 pt. Times New Roman Text with line spacing of 1.5. The word limit is 2000 words (excluding references). Note that assignment below this word limit by more than 10% would result in decrease in the overall achieved mark by 10%. Proper referencing of all ideas, concepts, theories and quotes used in your work is essential. Normally you are required to present no less than 15 academic journal article references. The Harvard referencing system must be used, details of which are contained on your handbook. Failure to employ a clear and appropriate system of referencing will be penalized. 4 marking criteria all equally weighted ? Understanding (25%) Use of Normative literature to explain the conceptual aspects of Rsearch Methods and the relecvant topic understudy A* to A- Demonstrates comprehensive grasp of concepts, theories and methods relevant to the topic understudy, and in particular the question at hand. Articulate explanation of relevant theory. Offers a largely complete answer to the question, which is consistent, cogent and expands the bounds of the question. B+ to B- Demonstrates very good understanding of many of the relevant concepts, theories and methods relevant to the topic understudy, Summarises and extrapolates pertinent issues, but not always consistent or clear in explanation. C+ to C- Demonstrates understanding by translating, reorganising, and/or rephrasing relevant concepts, theory and methods relevant to the topic understudy, Some evidence of understanding aided by reading, not always lucid. Some areas of issues/topics presented may be weak or not complete D+ to D- Satisfactory understanding, explanation and summarisation of concepts, theory and methods relevant to the topic understudy. However, mainly descriptive answer, which is not complete and offers little insight from, sources other than lecture material and the reading list. The response lacks depth and perception; variable and/or limited grasp of appropriate content and context E+ to E- Vague, unconvincing and inconsistent response, but sufficient to create basis for an adequate answer. Little or no real explanation, summarisation or interpretation of concepts, theories or methods relevant to the topic understudy. Little or no evidence of the use of lecture material or the reading list. F No real explanation, summarisation or interpretation of concepts, theories or methods relevant to the topic understudy. Errors of understanding and no evidence of the use of lecture material or the reading list. Analysis (25%) Synthesis of literature with practical examples to emphasise important issues A* to A- Very effective identification of relevant concepts, methods and theory with evidence from a wide variety of reading and practical examples. Comprehensively breaks down arguments, theories and structures. Very good analytical arguments effectively based on thorough review of evidence, and effective B+ to B- Good, relevant and comprehensive breakdown of arguments with good recognition of relevant concepts, theory and methods. Analysis is based on some evidence linked to practice. Logically structured and links topics to make points but within clear boundaries of the question at hand. C+ to C- Adequate breakdown of subject but not comprehensive. Some ability to discern and discuss theory, methods and concepts pertinent to the topic understudy, but within limited boundaries of the question at hand. Generally logical and clear arguments presented using a clear structure and D+ to D- Basic analysis of concepts, theory and methods relevant to the question at hand. However, correctly identifies some content and context relevant to the topic understudy, with fair discussion. Some structure to argument, but shallow and not always logical and makes few or no links to practice. E+ to E- Very limited or no analysis of concepts, theory and methods relevant to the topic understudy, e.g. project management and the response fails to tackle the question at hand. Inadequate structure and/or logic to the arguments presented and the response offers no F No evidence of significant analytical ability, arguments presented is uncl ear or erroneous, and the response lacks proper structure and logic and offers no evidence or links to practice. linking of topics within the wider domain of the topic understudy. breakdown of topics, but offer few examples or evidence from practice. evidence or links to practice. Evaluation (25%) Use of literature, practical examples and own opinions to draw conclusions and justify arguments A* to A- Extremely effective, Relevant and comprehensive evaluation of concepts, theory and methods pertinent to the topic understudy, and the question at hand. Expresses personal perspectives, with some self-criticism where appropriate and recognizes limits of own judgement and knowledge. Good critical thinking, and evaluates issues and material beyond the scope of the question. B+ to B- Fair judgement of relevant concepts, theory and methods relevant to the topic understudy, within the scope of the question at hand. Some development of major and/or minor issues, some judgement correctly expressed but based on arguments from source material with some limitations C+ to C- Some adequate evaluation based on an adequate if simple analysis. May identify some concepts, theory and methods relevant to the topic understudy, but the arguments and evaluation is not well developed. Work is mainly descriptive with some analysis but not endowed with incisive judgement D+ to D- At most some minimal evaluation based on limited or simple analysis of some concepts, theory and methods relevant to the topic understudy, that may be shallow, weak or vague. The response lacks critical evaluation. E+ to E- Little or no evaluation is offered of concepts, theory and methods relevant to the topic understudy, or the question at hand. F No effective evaluation is offered of any concepts, theory and methods relevant to the topic understudy, or the question at hand. . Y

Refer to the journal articles you read for this unit, as you explain what are considered medication errors and what can be done to prevent them.

Refer to the journal articles you read for this unit, as you explain what are considered medication errors and what can be done to prevent them.. For this discussion post,…

Continue ReadingRefer to the journal articles you read for this unit, as you explain what are considered medication errors and what can be done to prevent them.

2 pages Next week, you will attend Symposium I and have the opportunity to work on and refine the topic of your dissertation. In preparation for the work you will do at Symposium, write a paper that describes your initial thoughts and ideas for your Dissertation research. You will use this assignment in the first Symposium session.Your paper should include the following: State your original research ideas related to your topic and why you are interested in this topic. Write an initial draft of your problem statement, research purpose, and research question. What is the difference between your problem, purpose, and research question? Support your problem, purpose, and research question by summarizing the literature that you have already reviewed related to your topic. Cite at least 2 peer-reviewed articles using APA format.

2 pages Next week, you will attend Symposium I and have the opportunity to work on and refine the topic of your dissertation.  In preparation for the work you will…

Continue Reading2 pages Next week, you will attend Symposium I and have the opportunity to work on and refine the topic of your dissertation. In preparation for the work you will do at Symposium, write a paper that describes your initial thoughts and ideas for your Dissertation research. You will use this assignment in the first Symposium session.Your paper should include the following: State your original research ideas related to your topic and why you are interested in this topic. Write an initial draft of your problem statement, research purpose, and research question. What is the difference between your problem, purpose, and research question? Support your problem, purpose, and research question by summarizing the literature that you have already reviewed related to your topic. Cite at least 2 peer-reviewed articles using APA format.

Outline the nurses role in addressing the top three priority patient health issues using assessment coordination of care and provision of care.

Outline the nurses role in addressing the top three priority patient health issues using assessment coordination of care and provision of care.. Length: 1500 word limit +/- 10% excluding references…

Continue ReadingOutline the nurses role in addressing the top three priority patient health issues using assessment coordination of care and provision of care.