Include an Explanation as to How Walden’s Vision, Mission, Goals and Social Change Initiatives Relate to your Professional and Academic goals and to your Becoming a Scholar-Practitioner
Include an Explanation as to How Walden’s Vision, Mission, Goals and Social Change Initiatives Relate to your Professional and Academic goals and to your Becoming a Scholar-Practitioner
In this module, you begin laying the foundation for your academic and professional success. Your efforts begin with a vision that includes your own definition of success. Your vision may vary from those of your colleagues, but this does not mean you have to take these first steps alone.
Walden University and the College of Nursing also have a vision and mission, which include helping you to make your own vision a reality. Members of your new academic community, such as faculty, support teams, and fellow students, can also be helpful. Current practitioners and other member of the professional community can also help you to clarify your vision.
This Module’s Discussion asks you to consider how the Walden mission and vision as well as the College of Nursing’s mission and vision apply to your professional and academic goals. You will also begin to identify individuals and teams who can help you along the way as you begin designing the “blueprint”—your Academic Success and Professional Development Plan—that will guide you toward your own vision for academic and professional success. Finally, you will explain the importance of networking and how it can help you achieve your professional and academic goals.
Note: Unless otherwise noted, initial postings to Discussions are due on or before Day 3, and response postings are due on or before Day 6. You are required to participate in the Discussion on at least three different days (a different day for main post and each response). It is important to adhere to the weekly time frame to allow others ample time to respond to your posting. In addition, you are expected to respond to questions directed toward your own initial posting in a timely manner.
To Prepare:
Review the Walden and College of Nursing mission and vision statements, Walden’s goals and University Outcomes, and the MSN Program Learning Outcomes presented in this Module’s Learning Resources.
Reflect on your professional and academic goals as they relate to your program/specialization.
Consider how the information in these resources fit with your own goals and to your becoming a scholar-practitioner.
Also consider academic and professional individuals and teams with whom you may collaborate in support of your efforts as a student at the university and as a professional within your organization and career.
Consider the importance of networking and how it may help you achieve your professional and academic goals.
By Day 3 of Week 1
Post a brief introduction of yourself to your colleagues. Include an explanation as to how Walden’s vision, mission, goals, and social change initiatives relate to your professional and academic goals and to your becoming a scholar-practitioner. Also include an explanation for how the Walden MSN Program Outcomes and perspectives relate to your professional and academic goals and to your becoming a scholar-practitioner. Finally, explain why networking is important and how it may help you achieve your professional and academic goals.
By Day 6 of Week 1
Respond to at least two of your colleagues’ posts by suggesting additional individuals and/or teams with whom you wish to collaborate or by offering additional networking strategies.
NURS_6003_Module01_Week01_Discussion_Rubric
Grid View
List View
Excellent Good Fair Poor
Main Posting
Points Range: 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.
Points Range: 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.
Points Range: 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.
Points Range: 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
Points Range: 10 (10%) – 10 (10%)
Posts main post by day 3.
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not post by day 3.
First Response
Points Range: 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.
Points Range: 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.
Points Range: 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.
Points Range: 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
Points Range: 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.
Points Range: 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.
Points Range: 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.
Points Range: 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
Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days.
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days.
Total Points: 100
Name: NURS_6003_Module01_Week01_Discussion_Rubric