NURS 8111

TEACHING PROJECT AND PAPER

Each student will select a teaching project that will be of value in a selected clinical setting and is of interest to the student. The project must have preliminary approval by both the preceptor and faculty member. The following project formats are among those acceptable: poster, pamphlet, staff in-service, class in the community, presentation at a local or regional professional meeting. The faculty member will observe the teaching session or critique the visual project.

Each student will also give a presentation about the project in the 8111 seminar. Please note that the power point presentation for the 8111 seminar should reflect the paper contents, it is not necessary to submit the slides that were used for the teaching assignment. The following criteria are used for the written report and presentation of the project:

A. Introduction and Need Assessment

Overall broad introduction to the general area of interest, followed by a statement of the issue/topic/problem area specifically addressed.

Explanation as to how the topic was chosen and how the need for this project/presentation was determined. If used, include findings from a specifically developed Needs Assessment Form distributed to the intended audience.

Description of how the project/presentation was marketed.

B. Project/Presentation Description

Overall goal/purpose of the project/presentation

Description of target audience and setting that influenced the delivery of the project

Literature review of the topic (summarize at least 5 articles related to the topic)

Format of the project/presentation (lecture, demonstration, discussion, booklet, etc.)

A minimum of 2 specific objectives (cognitive, psychomotor, affective) stated in clear and measurable terms (e.g. “At the conclusion of this program/activity, the learners/participants should….”) linked directly to the project/presentation content outline, and the method for evaluation of learningPlease use the table at the bottom of this page and incorporate this into the body of your paper.

Summary

C. Quality of the presentation and paper

Both presentation and paper are of scholarly quality.

Sample table

Learning Objective(what do you want them to learn?)Content Outline(what information are you going to cover?)Strategies and materials(how are you going to teach this?)Evaluation(how will you know they learned?)

D. Paper Length and References

A maximum of 8 pages excluding title page and reference page

A minimum total of 10 references; a minimum of 6 must be evidence-based practice journal articles.

E. Teaching Project Power Point Presentation

A maximum of 10 slides not including title page and reference page.

TEACHING PROJECT PAPER rubric100 points

This rubric will be used to grade your TEACHING Project Paper and Power Point Presentation

 Levels of Achievement
CriteriaExcellentGoodFairPoor
Content  Introduction PurposeSignificance20 points18.6 to 20 pointsIdentifies objective and why the objective is important to explore. Determinants of health for project covered in detail and supported by research. -Support for project is complex, complete, & in-depth. Writer involved with subject, not merely doing an assignment. –Clear and appropriate organization, with introduction purpose and significance clearly stated with effective transitions between sections.17 to 18.59 pointsIdentifies objective and why the objective is important to explore included however not clearly stated.Determinants of health for project addressed but minimally supported and lacking in depth or complexity. Organization, introduction, purpose and significance and transitions slightly lacking clarity and/or appropriateness.15 to 16.9 pointsIdentification of objective incomplete or missing why the objective is important to explore. -Support for project is not substantially sufficient. Organization, introduction, purpose, significance and transitions are inconsistent, lacking clarity and depth0 to 14.9 pointsIdentification of objective and why the objective is important to explore is missing.Support for project barely sufficient, and/or organization, introduction, purpose, significance and transitions are inconsistent, lacking clarity and depth
Quality of Research/Review of Literature20 points18.6 to 20 pointsAll components of the review of the literature covered in-depth. Research in depth and beyond the obvious revealing new insights17 to 18.59 pointsAll components of the review of the literature are addressed but not all of the research is in depth and does not beyond the obvious, does not reveal new insights15 to 16.9 pointsAll components of the review of literature are addressed by incomplete/sketchy0 to 14.9 pointsSome components of review of literature missing or not addressed.
Participants10 points9.3 to 10 pointsAll components of participants criteria covered in depth with extensive clear and appropriate discussion of the age/gender/cultural variables that impact the presentation of the project8.5 to 9.29 pointsAll components of participants criteria covered in depth but discussion of the age/gender/cultural variables that impact the presentation of the project slightly lacking clarity and/or appropriateness7.5 to 8.49 pointsSome of the components of participants criteria covered in depth but discussion of the age/gender/cultural variables that impact the presentation of the project lacking clarity and/or appropriateness0 to 7.49 pointsComponents of participants criteria not covered and/or missing or discussion of the age/gender/cultural variables that impact the presentation of the project missing or not appropriate
Learning /Content /Materials Table20 points18.6 to 20 pointsLearning Objectives, Content Outline/Strategies/Materials and Evaluation Table well developed and included in body of the paper with more than 2 objectives stated in clear and measurable terms17 to 18.59 pointsLearning Objectives/Content Outline/Strategies/Materials and Evaluation Table included in body of the paper with 2 objectives stated in clear and measurable terms, but table not well developed15 to 16.9 pointsLearning Objectives/Content Outline/Strategies/Materials and Evaluation Table included in body of the paper but with less than 2 objectives stated in clear and measurable terms and table not well developed0 to 14.9 pointsLearning Objectives/Content Outline/Strategies/Materials and Evaluation Table not included in body of the paper and/or missing objectives stated in clear and measurable terms
 Levels of Achievement
CriteriaExcellentGoodFairPoor
Publicity/Evaluation Plan15 points 13.95 to 15 pointsPublicity and evaluation plans extensive, well-developed and appropriate for project with extensive EBP documentation12.75 to 13.9 pointsPublicity and evaluation plans developed and appropriate for project but not extensive. EBP documentation adequate12.75 to 13.9 pointsPublicity and evaluation plans minimally developed and/or inappropriate for project. Minimal EBP documentation0 to 11.24 pointsPublicity and evaluation plans superficially addressed and/or inappropriate for projectNo EBP documentation.
Grammar/ Mechanics10 points9.3 to 10 points2 or less errors in format or punctuation or capitalization. –Consistent and appropriate voice. — Sophisticated and precise word choice. Paragraph size appropriate –No spelling errors. No slang. –No errors in agreement, pronouns/antecedents, or tense. –Met all style and min/max page requirements8.5 to 9.29 points4 or less errors in format, punctuation, or capitalization. — Voice mostly consistent and appropriate. Lengthy paragraphs — Fairly effective word choice. –No more than 2 spelling errors. –Fewer than 1 errors in agreement, pronouns/antecedents, or tense. –Met most style and min/max page requirements7.5 to 8.49 points6 or less errors in format, punctuation or capitalization. Voice somewhat consistent and appropriate. Errors distract from readability. Lengthy paragraphs — Correct word choice. –More than 3 spelling errors. –More than 2 errors in agreement, pronouns/antecedents, or tense. Failed to meet style and/or min/max page requirements0 to 7.49 pointsMany errors in format, punctuation, or capitalization. Paper fails to flow in a logical sequence. Failed to meet style and/or min/max page requirements.
Bibliography5 points4.65 to 5 pointsSources reliable and properly cited. A minimum of 10 references (>6 EBP journal articles. All references correctly cited in the paper and the bibliography. All information relevant to topic.4.25 to 4.64 pointsSources reliable and properly cited but has secondary references. A minimum of 10 references (<6 EBP journal articles. All references correctly cited in the paper and the bibliography. Information relevant to topic.3.75 to 4.24 pointsSources reliable and properly cited. Articles do not substantially support your topic. 10 references (>6 EBP journal articles. All information relevant to topic.0 to 3.74 pointsSecond hand sources and incorrectly cited. Does not have a minimum of 10 references and/ or have less than 6 EBP journal articles. All information relevant to topic.

"Order a similar paper and get 15% discount on your first order with us
Use the following coupon
"FIRST15"

Order Now