Discussion: Where in the World Is Evidence-Based Practice?
March 21, 2010, was not EBP’s date of birth, but it may be the date the approach “grew up” and left home to take on the world.
When the Affordable Care Act was passed, it came with a requirement of empirical evidence. Research on EBP increased significantly. Application of EBP spread to allied health professions, education, healthcare technology, and more. Health organizations began to adopt and promote EBP.
In this Discussion, you will consider this adoption. You will examine healthcare organization websites and analyze to what extent these organizations use EBP.
To Prepare:
- Review the Resources and reflect on the definition and goal of EBP.
- Choose a professional healthcare organization’s website (e.g., a reimbursing body, an accredited body, or a national initiative).
- Explore the website to determine where and to what extent EBP is evident.
By Day 3 of Week 1
Post a description of the healthcare organization website you reviewed. Describe where, if at all, EBP appears (e.g., the mission, vision, philosophy, and/or goals of the healthcare organization, or in other locations on the website). Then, explain whether this healthcare organization’s work is grounded in EBP and why or why not. Finally, explain whether the information you discovered on the healthcare organization’s website has changed your perception of the healthcare organization. Be specific and provide examples.
Rubric Detail
Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.
Name: NURS_6052_Module01_Week01_Discussion_Rubric
| Excellent | Good | Fair | Poor | |||
| Main Posting | 45 (45%) – 50 (50%) Answers all parts of the discussion question(s) expectations with reflective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources. Supported by at least three current, credible sources. Written clearly and concisely with no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. |
40 (40%) – 44 (44%) Responds to the discussion question(s) and is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. At least 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth. Supported by at least three credible sources. Written clearly and concisely with one or no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. |
35 (35%) – 39 (39%) Responds to some of the discussion question(s). One or two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed. Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis. Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. Post is cited with two credible sources. Written somewhat concisely; may contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors. Contains some APA formatting errors. |
0 (0%) – 34 (34%) Does not respond to the discussion question(s) adequately. Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria. Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis. Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. Contains only one or no credible sources. Not written clearly or concisely. Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors. Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style. |
||
| Main Post: Timeliness | 10 (10%) – 10 (10%) Posts main post by day 3. |
0 (0%) – 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Does not post by day 3. |
||
| First Response | 17 (17%) – 18 (18%) Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings. Responds fully to questions posed by faculty. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources. Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives. Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed. Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. |
15 (15%) – 16 (16%) Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings. Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources. Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. |
13 (13%) – 14 (14%) Response is on topic and may have some depth. Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication. Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed. Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited. |
0 (0%) – 12 (12%) Response may not be on topic and lacks depth. Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication. Responses to faculty questions are missing. No credible sources are cited. |
||
| Second Response | 16 (16%) – 17 (17%) Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings. Responds fully to questions posed by faculty. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources. Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives. Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed. Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. |
14 (14%) – 15 (15%) Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings. Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources. Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. |
12 (12%) – 13 (13%) Response is on topic and may have some depth. Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication. Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed. Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited. |
0 (0%) – 11 (11%) Response may not be on topic and lacks depth. Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication. Responses to faculty questions are missing. No credible sources are cited. |
||
| Participation | 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days. |
0 (0%) – 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days. |
||
| Total Points: 100 | ||||||
Name: NURS_6052_Module01_Week01_Discussion_Rubric
