Just Click on Below Link To Download This Course:
http://bit.ly/36iCt4M
DNP 810 Week 3 Family History GCU
Details:
Taking a family history is an important step in
determining current and future health needs and education. There are many tools
available to complete a comprehensive health history. The Surgeon General’s
Family Health History tool is part of the larger Family Health History
Initiative that encourages people to talk about and write down health issues
that seem to run in the family, bringing a larger focus on this important
issue. This assignment allows the learner to use the tool and become familiar
with this initiative.
General
Guidelines:
Use the following information to ensure successful
completion of the assignment:
- This assignment uses a rubric.
Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become
familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
- Doctoral learners are required to
use APA style for their writing assignments. The APA Style Guide is
located in the Student Success Center.
- This
assignment requires that at least two additional scholarly research
sources related to this topic, and at least one in-text citation from each
source be included.
- You are required to submit this
assignment to LopesWrite. Please refer to the directions in the Student
Success Center.
- Use
the Surgeon General’s Family History Tool at (http://www.hhs.gov/familyhistory/portrait/index.html) to complete this assignment.
Directions:
Use
the Surgeon General’s Family History Tool (http://www.hhs.gov/familyhistory/portrait/index.html)
to document your own family history.
Designate a proband for the pedigree with a disease or
condition of interest.
Write a 750-1,000 word summary of your findings. Include
the following information:
- Discussion of the heredity
patterns discovered.
- Evaluate the risk of transmission
to other/new family members.
- Propose
the feasibility of using this tool in your own practice.
Portfolio
Practice Hours:
Practice
immersion assignments are based on your current course objectives, and are
intended to be application-based learning using your real-world practice
setting. These assignments earn practice immersion hours, and are indicated in
the assignment by a Portfolio Practice Hours statement which reminds you, the
student, to enter in a corresponding case log in Typhon. Actual clock
hours are entered, but the average hours associated with each practice
immersion assignment is 10.
You are required to complete your assignment using
real-world application. Real-world application requires the use of
evidence-based data, contemporary theories, and concepts presented in the
course. The culmination of your assignment must present a viable application in
a current practice setting. For more information on parameters for
practice immersion hours, please refer to DNP resources in the DC Network.
To earn portfolio practice hours, enter the following
after the references section of your paper:
Practice
Hours Completion Statement DNP-810
I,
(INSERT NAME), verify that I have completed (NUMBER OF) clock hours in
association with the goals and objectives for this assignment. I have also
tracked said practice hours in the Typhon Student Tracking System for
verification purposes and will be sure that all approvals are in place from my
faculty and practice mentor.
Family
History
|
1
Unsatisfactory 0.00% |
2
Less Than Satisfactory 74.00% |
3
Satisfactory 79.00% |
4
Good 87.00% |
5
Excellent 100.00% |
|
70.0 %Content
|
|
|||||
25.0 %Discussion of the Heredity Patterns Discovered
|
Discussion
of the heredity patterns discovered is not present.
|
Discussion
of the heredity patterns discovered is present but incomplete.
|
Discussion
of the heredity patterns discovered is present but done at a perfunctory
level.
|
Discussion
of the heredity patterns discovered is clearly present and convincing.
Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.
|
Discussion
of the heredity patterns discovered is clearly present and insightful.
Information presented is from current scholarly sources.
|
|
25.0 %Evaluation of the Risk of Transmission to
Other/New Family Members
|
Evaluation
of the risk of transmission to other/new family members is not present.
|
Evaluation
of the risk of transmission to other/new family members is present but
incomplete.
|
Evaluation
of the risk of transmission to other/new family members is present but done
at a perfunctory level.
|
Evaluation
of the risk of transmission to other/new family members is clearly present.
Discussion is convincing. Information presented is from scholarly though
dated sources.
|
Evaluation
of the risk of transmission to other/new family members is clearly present.
Discussion is insightful. Information presented is from current scholarly
sources.
|
|
20.0 %Proposal of the Feasibility of Using This Tool in
Your Own Practice
|
Proposal
of the feasibility of using this tool in your own practice is not presented.
|
Proposal
of the feasibility of using this tool in your own practice is presented but
incomplete.
|
Proposal
of the feasibility of using this tool in your own practice is presented but
done at a perfunctory level.
|
Proposal
of the feasibility of using this tool in your own practice is clearly
presented. Discussion is convincing. Information presented is from mostly
current scholarly but some outdated sources are used.
|
Proposal
of the feasibility of using this tool in your own practice is clearly
presented. Discussion is insightful and detailed. Information presented is
from current scholarly sources.
|
|
20.0 %Organization and Effectiveness
|
|
|||||
7.0 %Thesis Development and Purpose
|
Paper
lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.
|
Thesis
and/or main claim are insufficiently developed and/or vague; purpose is not
clear.
|
Thesis
and/or main claim are apparent and appropriate to purpose.
|
Thesis
and/or main claim are clear and forecast the development of the paper. It is
descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.
|
Thesis
and/or main claim are comprehensive. The essence of the paper is contained
within the thesis. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.
|
|
8.0 %Argument Logic and Construction
|
Statement
of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not
support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.
|
Sufficient
justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There
are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.
|
Argument
is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal
justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the
purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the
thesis.
|
Argument
shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is
a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources
are authoritative.
|
Clear
and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and
compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.
|
|
5.0 %Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling,
punctuation, grammar, language use)
|
Surface
errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning.
Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are used.
|
Frequent
and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in
language choice (register), sentence structure, and/or word choice are
present.
|
Some
mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the
reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are
used.
|
Prose
is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A
variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used.
|
Writer
is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
|
|
10.0 %Format
|
|
|||||
5.0 %Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the
major and assignment)
|
Template
is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed
correctly.
|
Appropriate
template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of
control with formatting is apparent.
|
Appropriate
template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be
present.
|
Appropriate
template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style.
|
All
format elements are correct.
|
|
5.0 %Research Citations (In-text citations for
paraphrasing and direct quotes, and reference page listing and formatting, as
appropriate to assignment and style)
|
No
reference page is included. No citations are used.
|
Reference
page is present. Citations are inconsistently used.
|
Reference
page is included and lists sources used in the paper. Sources are
appropriately documented, although some errors may be present.
|
Reference
page is present and fully inclusive of all cited sources. Documentation is
appropriate and citation style is usually correct.
|
In-text
citations and a reference page are complete and correct. The documentation of
cited sources is free of error.
|
|
100 %Total Weightage
|
|
No comments:
Post a Comment