Post 1. Identify one (1) issue you expect to experience in your transition from student to
graduate nurse. Using evidence-based literature, construct two (2) strategies which you
could implement to address the identified issue XXXXXXXXXXwords) (5 reference) use first
person i
Post 2. Outline 2 of the key differences between your cu
ent role as student nurse and
your future role as Graduate RN. Support your discussion with evidence-based
literature (300 words) (5 reference) use first person i
Post 3. Access cu
ent research publications from CINAHL and critically reflect on the
potential of social media to transform your future practice as a professional practitioner
(300 words) (5 reference) use first person i
Each post has a word limit of 300 words (+/- 10%) so these 3 posts will be around 1000
and can you please write separately the post which will be 300 words and at the please
give reference and same to post 2 and 3. and you can use 1st person as this
assignment is about u (student) and reference less than 5 year and apa 6th edition and
1 post equals to 5 reference
APPENDICES
Appendix A - Criterion Referenced Ru
ic: Assessment 1 - Discussion Forum Posts
1, 2 & 3
Criteria
(marks)
High Distinction
(HD XXXXXXXXXX%
Distinction (D)
84-75%
Credit (CR) 74-65% Pass (PA) 64-50% Fail (NN)
49-0%
Fail – No Attempt
Post 1
Content
and
Critical
Thinking
20 marks
Comprehensive,
concise discussion
that is all directly
elevant to the
topic/s of the post.
Clear identification
and comprehensive
analysis of a
elevant transition
issue.
Development and
construction of
strategies that are
all clear, relevant
and feasible.
20-17marks
Significant, concise
discussion is directly
elevant to the topic/s
of the post.
Clear identification
and mostly thorough
analysis of the
elevant transition
issue.
Development and
construction of
strategies that are
mostly clear, relevant
and feasible.
16.5-15marks
Mostly concise
discussion that is
mostly relevant to the
topic/s of the post.
Identification and
some analysis of the
elevant transition
issue.
Development and
construction of
strategies that are
vague but are mostly
elevant and feasible.
XXXXXXXXXXmarks
Repetitive discussion
ut content is mostly
elevant to the topic/s
of the post.
Identification but
minimal analysis of
the relevant
transition issue.
Development and
construction of
strategies that are
vague but some are
elevant and feasible.
12.5-10marks
Most of
the
discussio
n is
epetitive
and is
not
elevant
to the
topic/s of
the post.
Unclear
identifica
tion and
no
analysis
of the
elevant
transition
issue.
Develop
ment and
construct
ion of
strategie
s that are
vague
and are
mostly
not
elevant
or
feasible.
9.5-0
marks
There is no post or
the content is
i
elevant.
Post 1
Evaluation
of the
Evidence
10 marks
Discussion is all
supported and
justified by high
quality, credible and
appropriate
literature and
evidence.
There is evidence
of both depth and
eadth of reading.
10-8.5marks
Discussion is almost
all supported and
justified by high
quality, credible and
appropriate literature
and evidence.
There is evidence of
oth depth and
eadth of reading.
XXXXXXXXXXmarks
Discussion is mostly
supported and
justified by adequate
and appropriate
evidence and
literature.
XXXXXXXXXXmarks
Discussion is
supported by some
minimal but
appropriate evidence
and literature.
6.4-5 marks
Discussi
on is
supporte
d by
minimal
and
inapprop
iate
evidence
and
literature.
4.5-0
marks
There is no evidence
or literature.
Post 2
Content
and
Critical
Thinking
20 marks
Comprehensive,
concise discussion
that is all directly
elevant to the
topic/s of the post.
Clear identification
and detailed
analysis and
contrast of the
identified relevant
key role
differences.
20-17marks
Significant, concise
discussion that is
directly relevant to
the topic/s of the
post.
Clear identification
and mostly thorough
analysis of the
identified relevant
key role differences.
16.5-15marks
Mostly concise
discussion that is
mostly relevant to the
topic/s of the post.
Identification and
some analysis of the
identified relevant
key role differences.
XXXXXXXXXXmarks
Repetitive discussion
ut content is mostly
elevant to the topic/s
of the post.
Identification but
minimal analysis of
the identified relevant
key role differences.
12.5-10marks
Most of
the
discussio
n is
epetitive
and is
not
elevant
to the
topic/s of
the post
or there
is no
attempt.
Unclear
identifica
tion and
no
analysis
of the
identified
elevant
key role
differenc
es.
9.5-0
marks
There is no post or
the content is
i
elevant.
0 marks
Post 2
Evaluation
of the
Evidence
10 marks
Discussion is all
supported and
justified by high
quality, credible and
appropriate
literature and
evidence.
There is evidence
of both depth and
eadth of reading.
10-8.5marks
Discussion is almost
all supported and
justified by high
quality, credible and
appropriate literature
and evidence.
There is evidence of
oth depth and
eadth of reading.
XXXXXXXXXXmarks
Discussion is mostly
supported and
justified by adequate
and appropriate
evidence and
literature.
XXXXXXXXXXmarks
Discussion is
supported by some
appropriate and
some inappropriate
evidence and
literature.
6.4-5 marks
Discussi
on is
supporte
d by
minimal
or no
evidence
.
4.5-0
marks
There is no evidence
or literature. 0 marks
Post 3
Content and
Critical
Thinking
20 marks
Comprehensive, concise
discussion that is all
directly relevant to the
topic/s of the post.
Comprehensive critical
eflection on the potential
of social media to
transform future practice.
20-17marks
Mostly thorough
and concise
discussion that is
directly relevant
to the topic/s of
the post.
Significant critical
eflection on the
potential of social
media to
transform future
practice.
16.5-15marks
Mostly concise
discussion that is
mostly relevant to
the topic/s of the
post.
Identification and
some reflection
on the potential
of social media to
transform future
practice.
XXXXXXXXXXmarks
Repetitive discussion
ut content is mostly
elevant to the topic/s
of the post.
Identification but
minimal reflection on
the potential of social
media to transform
future practice.
12.5-10marks
Most of the
discussion is
epetitive and is
not relevant to
the topic/s of
the post or there
is no attempt.
Unclear and
inappropriate
eflection on the
potential of
social media to
transform future
practice or no
eflection.
9.5-0 marks
There is no
post or the
content is
i
elevant.
0 marks
Post 3
Evaluation
of the
Evidence
10 marks
Discussion is all supported
and justified by high
quality, credible and
appropriate literature and
evidence.
There is evidence of both
depth and
eadth of
eading.
10-8.5marks
Discussion is
almost all
supported and
justified by high
quality, credible
and appropriate
literature and
evidence.
There is evidence
of both depth and
eadth of
eading.
XXXXXXXXXXmarks
Discussion is
mostly supported
and justified by
adequate and
appropriate
evidence and
literature.
XXXXXXXXXXmarks
Discussion is
supported by some
appropriate and some
inappropriate
evidence and
literature.
6.4-5 marks
Discussion is
supported by
minimal or no
evidence.
4.5-0 marks
There is no
evidence or
literature. 0
marks
Mechanics
and
Referencing
5 marks
There are no e
ors with
grammar, spelling and
punctuation, and the
meaning is easily
discernible. Accurate use
of APA referencing style
on all occasions. 9 or more
eferences provided.
Accurate and consistent
use of a range of in-text
citations throughout.
5 marks
There are
minimal e
ors
with grammar,
spelling and
punctuation. The
meaning is
eadily
discernable.
Accurate use of
APA referencing
style on almost
all occasions. 1-3
e
ors noted.
7 or more
eferences
provided.
4 marks
There are some
e
ors with
grammar,
spelling and
punctuation. The
e
ors detract
The meaning is
discernable.
Accurate use of
APA referencing
style on most
occasions. 4-5
e
ors noted.
6 or more
eferences
provided.
3 marks
Accurate use of APA
eferencing style on
most occasions. 5-10
e
or noted.
5 or more references
provided.
2.5 marks
Many
inaccuracies
with the APA
eferencing
style. More than
10 e
ors noted.
Too many direct
quotations
(more than 5%).
Less than 5
eferences
provided.
2 - 0 marks
There are
no
eferences
used. 0
marks
Participatio
n 5 marks
Screenshot evidence that
all three (3) discussion
posts have been posted on
the relevant tutorial forum
during weeks 1-7.
5 marks
Screenshot
evidence that two
(2) of the
discussion posts
have been
posted on the
elevant tutorial
forum during
weeks 1-7.
4 marks
Screenshot
evidence that one
(1)