Purpose
The purpose of this assignment is for learners to:
- Improve their knowledge base and understanding of disease processes in neurology.
- Have the opportunity to integrate knowledge and skills learned throughout all core courses in the FNP track and previous clinical courses.
- Demonstrate the ability to analyze the literature be able to perform an evidenced-based review of disease presentation, diagnosis and treatment.
- Demonstrate professional communication and leadership, while advancing the education of peers.
Course Outcomes
This assignment enables the student to meet the following course outcomes:
CO 1- Interpret subjective and objective data to develop appropriate diagnoses and evidence based management plans for patients and families with complex or multiple diagnoses across the lifespan.
CO 4 -Develop management plans based on current scientific evidence and national guidelines.
Requirements
For Week 1 of the course there is no case study given to you by the faculty. Instead you will be assigned to diseases to compare and contrast based on the first letter of your last name. This information will be posted in the course announcements under Week 1 Welcome as well as the “Assignment” portion of the Week 1 module.
A comparison and contrast assignment’s focus is to identify and explore similarities and differences between two similar topics. The goal of this exploration is to bring about a better understanding of both topics.
Week 1- Part 1: Due Wednesday by 11:59 p.m. MT
You will research the two areas of content assigned to you and compare and contrast them in discussion post in a discussion post. NOTE: A comparison and contrast assignment is not about listing the info regarding each disease separately but rather looking at each disease side by side and discussing the similarities and differences given the categories in the categories below. Evaluation of mastery is focused on the student’s ability to demonstrate specific understanding of how to diagnoses differ and relate to one another.
Address the following topics below:
- Presentation
- Pathophysiology
- Assessment
- Diagnosis
- Treatment
Throughout the Week: Participate in interactive dialogue with faculty and students responding to their Part 1 post moving the discussion forward.
Grading Rubric
| Criterion | Exceptional
Outstanding or highest level of performance |
Exceeds
Very good or high level of performance |
Meets
Satisfactory level of performance |
Needs Improvement
Poor or failing level of performance |
Developing
Unsatisfactory level of performance |
| Total Points Possible = 100 | |||||
| Application of Course Knowledge
|
25 Points | 22 Points
|
21 Points | 10 Points | 0 Points |
| Post contributes unique perspectives/insights applicable to the identified diseases.
Demonstrates course knowledge by thorough, thoughtful, evidence-based discussion of similarities and differences in reference to: ● Presentation ● Pathophysiology ● Assessment ● Diagnosis ● Treatment |
Post contributes unique perspectives or insights, but may lack some applicability/specificity to the assigned diseases.
|
Post has limited comparison/contrast perspective, insights and/or applicability to assigned disease.
|
Post perspectives are not consistent with current practice.
Disease information is listed without comparison/contrast analysis. |
Post offer no insight or application to the assigned diseases.
|
|
| Support from Evidence-Based Practice (EBP)
|
25 Points | 22 Points
|
21 Points | 10 Points | 0 Points |
| Discussion post supported by evidence from appropriate sources published within the last five years. In-text citations and full references are provided.
|
Discussion post is partially supported by evidence from appropriate sources published within the last five years.
In-text citations and full references are provided. Evidence-based reference(s) used but may not fully support first line treatment recommendations.
|
Sources may not be scholarly in nature or may be older than five years.
In-text citations and/or full references may be incomplete or missing.
|
Citations to non-scholarly websites given as rationale to support differences in presentation, assessment, pathophysiology, diagnosis and treatment.
|
Discussion post contains no evidence-based practice reference or citation.
*Students should note that factitious sources, sources that are clearly not read by the student and used, or sources that have incorrect dates will result in an automatic ZERO for this section for the week. |
|
| Organization | 15 points | 13 points | 12 points | 6 point | 0 points |
| Discussion post presented in a logical, meaningful, and understandable sequence. | Discussion post relevant to the topic but may be unclear or difficult to follow in places. | Discussion post not fully relevant to the topic. May be unclear or difficult to follow in places. | Discussion post sometimes unclear to follow and may not always be relevant to assigned diseases. | Discussion post is not relevant to assigned diseases. | |
| Interactive Dialogue | 25 Points | 22 Points
|
21 Points | 10 Points | 0 Points |
| Presents diseases together and responds substantively to at least one peer including evidence from appropriate sources, and all direct faculty questions posted.
|
Presents diseases together and responds substantively to at least peer. Does include evidence from appropriate sources.
Responds to some direct faculty questions. |
Responds to a student peer and/or faculty questions but the post doesn’t include reflection on critical thinking behind the answers chosen.
Does not include evidence from appropriate sources. |
Responds to a student peer and/or faculty, but the nature of the response is not substantive.
Does not include evidence from any sources. |
Does not respond to at least one peer and/or does not respond to faculty questions posted by Sunday.
*A zero may be assessed here for not responding to questions posed by faculty. |
|
| Grammar, Syntax, APA
|
10 points | 9 points | 8 points | 4 point | 0 points |
| APA format, grammar, spelling, and/or punctuation are accurate, or with zero to one errors. | Two to four errors in APA format, grammar, spelling, and syntax noted. | Five to seven errors in APA format, grammar, spelling, and syntax noted. | Eight to nine errors in APA format, grammar, spelling, and syntax noted. | Post contains ten or greater errors in APA format, grammar, spelling, and/or punctuation or repeatedly makes the same errors after faculty feedback. | |
| Participation
Enters first post to part one by 11:59 p.m. MT on Wednesday. |
0 points deducted | Points deducted for late or missing posts | |||
| Enters first post to part one by 11:59 p.m. MT on Wednesday; enters peer/faculty response by Sunday 11:59 p.m. MT. | 10% if submitted after Wednesday 11:59 p.m. MT and before the cut-off of Sunday 11:59 p.m. MT. Students will not receive credit for work in the threads submitted after Sunday 11:59 p.m. MT.
|
||||