Summative Assessment
For this summative assessment, you will prepare a comprehensive case study analysis that reflects on an ethical dilemma you have encountered during their clinical practice or another relevant experience. The analysis should be approximately 1,500 words and include the following components:
- Overview of the Ethical Dilemma:
- Clearly describe the ethical dilemma, including the context, stakeholders involved, and the ethical principles at stake (e.g., autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, justice).
- Evaluation of Strategies Used:
- Analyze the strategies that were employed or could have been employed to address the ethical dilemma. Refer to ethical decision-making models (such as the Four-Quadrant Approach) and discuss the role of patient engagement, interprofessional collaboration, and organizational policies in the decision-making process.
- Recommendations for Improvement:
- Propose additional strategies or alternative approaches that could enhance the management of the ethical dilemma. Focus on how these strategies promote better patient outcomes, uphold ethical principles, and facilitate shared decision-making.
- Reflection on Personal Growth:
- Reflect on how this ethical dilemma and its management have influenced your personal values, ethical reasoning, and professional development as a nurse leader. Discuss how this experience prepares you for future ethical challenges in your practice.
- Conclusion:
- Summarize the key insights gained from your analysis and reinforce the importance of effective strategies for managing ethical dilemmas in nursing practice.
Document type/ template:
- Word Document
- Formatted according to APA style guidelines
C2: Summative Assessment Rubric
Criteria Ratings
Writing Mechanics
Sources
APA formatting
MASTERY Only minimal spelling, grammar, and/or punctation errors present (1-2 errors). The overall sentence structure is well developed throughout, and paragraphs are fully developed with consistent style and clear communication.
PROFICIENT Minor spelling, grammar, and/or punctuation errors present, and/or sentence structure lacks minor elements of professional writing, and/or paragraphs are consistently developed. (3-4 errors)
DEVELOPING Minimal spelling, grammar, and/or punctuation errors present, and/or sentence structure lacks elements of professional writing, and/or paragraphs are not consistently developed. (5- 7 errors)
EMERGING Multiple spelling grammar and/or punctuation errors present and/or sentence structure does not meet professional writing standards, and/or paragraphs are minimally developed. (more than 7-9 errors)
NOT EVIDENT Significant spelling, grammar, and/or punctuation errors present, and/or sentence structure does not meet professional writing standards, and/or paragraphs are poorly developed. (10 or more errors
MASTERY The use of sources was consistent throughout the document in all areas to support claims and/or statements in the artifact.
PROFICIENT In most areas, sources were consistently used throughout the submission to support claims and/or statements in the artifact.
DEVELOPING Sources were occasionally used to support some claims and/or statements in the artifact, but statements were not consistently supported with sources throughout.
EMERGING Minimal usage of sources present in the artifact, and/or the overall communication lacked appropriate research support.
NOT EVIDENT Sources were not used to support major statements and/or claims, where needed in the artifact
MASTERY Citations, references, and formatting
PROFICIENT Citations, references, and formatting
DEVELOPING APA style is demonstrated with some consistency,
EMERGING Formatting, citations, and/or references,
NOT EVIDENT Formatting, citations, and references
Criteria Ratings
Ethical Implications
Analysis of model/theory in the case study.
follow APA style guide, with only one or two minor errors.
follow APA style guide, with more than 2 errors, but they are minor.
but the majority of the citation, references, and/or formatting is not correct.
are attempted, but do not follow APA style guidelines consistently.
are not included, or do not follow appropriate APA style guide.
MASTERY Ethical implications are addressed from a study / participant view point and a study findings / community viewpoint with detailed description of the ethical implication and the outcome of those implications.
PROFICIENT Ethical implications information was addressed with good information for the study.
DEVELOPING Ethical implications information was addressed, but wasn’t always aligned with the study, participants, or community.
EMERGING Brief mention of ethical implications, but is not tied to the topic of the study.
NOT EVIDENT Limited or no ethical implications provided.
MASTERY Submission includes a detailed communication of the learning theory, specific aspects from the theory used to support student learning in the scenario, and a strong rationale included in the comparison with aspects from another theory that could also be
PROFICIENT Submission includes a clear description of the learning theory, aspects from the theory used to support student learning in the scenario, and a comparison with aspects from another theory that could also be used to
DEVELOPING Submission includes a description of the learning theory used in the scenario and a comparison with aspects from another learning theory that could also be used in a similar setting.
EMERGING Submission includes a description of the learning theory used in the scenario and a comparison with aspects from another theory that could also be used in a similar setting, but the rationale for one or both learning theories is not clear.
NOT EVIDENT Submission includes a description of the learning theory used in the scenario and/or another theory that could be used in a similar setting, but rationale for either of the learning theories is not clear.
Criteria Ratings
Application
used to achieve a similar goal.
achieve a similar goal.
MASTERY The reflective paper effectively explains the experience of collaborating with a Subject Matter Expert. The paper effectively highlights the application of ADA and accessibility considerations in the Digital Lesson design.
PROFICIENT The reflective paper explains the experience of collaborating with a Subject Matter Expert. The paper highlights the application of ADA and accessibility considerations in the Digital Lesson design.
DEVELOPING The reflective paper somewhat explains the experience of collaborating with a Subject Matter Expert. The paper somewhat highlights the application of ADA and accessibility considerations in the Digital Lesson design.
EMERGING The reflective paper minimally explains the experience of collaborating with a Subject Matter Expert. The paper minimally highlights the application of ADA and accessibility considerations in the Digital Lesson design.
NOT EVIDENT The reflective paper does not explain the experience of collaborating with a Subject Matter Expert. The paper excludes highlights on the application of ADA and accessibility considerations in the Digital Lesson design.
Leave a Reply