​     The length of the paper is up to 6 pages, double-spaced.  There are two sections–the first half is an analysis of a passage from one of the texts we’ve discussed in the first two Units of the course (History or Theory): e.g. Hume’s argument that reason is a slave to the passions, Aristotle’s argument for why the life of contemplation is best, etc.  You tell me, in your own words, exactly what the philosopher is saying.  The second half is your own reaction to the passage: Does the claim sound plausible to you?  Are you inclined to agree with it?  Are there any issues that you think are especially relevant to such a claim that might be raised?

     These are roughly the first two parts of almost any philosophy paper.  In a paper that you would write for, say, a higher level course, you would then go on to actually argue against or in support of the claim you are focusing on–e.g. stating why you thought one or more of its premises need not be accepted (or must be), why the conclusion does not necessarily follow (or does), etc., and bringing in secondary sources to support your arguments.  You do not have to do that here.  This is more like a training exercise, albeit a very important one–being able to understand a philosophical argument clearly is a crucial part of writing a good research paper on these difficult questions.

Introduction

Determining the potential benefits, costs, and value of a potential capstone project to the organization requires a thoughtful comparison of the benefits and costs, an analysis of project features as value considerations, and the development of anticipated measurable outcomes.

Instructions

Complete a critical analysis of a potential doctoral capstone project and make final recommendations, based on the project’s benefits, costs, and value to the organization.

Requirements

The assignment requirements, outlined below, correspond to the scoring guide criteria, so be sure to address each main point. Read the performance-level descriptions for each criterion to see how your work will be assessed. In addition, note the additional requirements for document format, length, and supporting evidence.

• Substantiate the prospect of a potential capstone project to mitigate the negative effect of an organizational challenge.
  • Explain how the project will mitigate the negative effect of the challenge on the organization and/or a population.
  • Discuss the project’s potential to facilitate improvements for the larger industry and other populations and organizations.
  • Substantiate the potential of the project to improve current, publicly reported metrics, compared to benchmarks.
• Critically analyze the benefits of a potential capstone project to the organization and/or a population.
  • Describe anticipated, improved project outcomes.
  • Describe the benefits of the project relative to the organization’s performance, quality, mission, and goals or outcomes for a population.
  • Critically analyze the potential costs and benefits of the project to the organization.
• Critically analyze a potential capstone project’s value to the organization and/or a population.
  • Discuss aspects of the project that could potentially require the organization to dedicate energy, staff, time, and financial resources.
  • Describe ways in which approvable mentee capstone practicum activities can minimize the costs to the organization.
  • Summarize the features of the project that will provide benefit to the organization and/or a population.
• Make recommendations for a potential doctoral capstone project, based on its benefits, costs, and value to the organization and/or a population.  
  • Present an argument for the project, based on its benefits, costs, and value to the organization and/or a population.
    • Weigh both the positive and negative aspects of the project.
  • Substantiate that the benefits of the project outweigh the costs, or that the costs outweigh the benefits.
  • Recommend next steps in communicating with the preceptor and site leaders on the project’s potential.
• Organize content so ideas flow logically with smooth transitions.
• Support main points, assertions, arguments, conclusions, or recommendations with relevant and credible evidence.
  • Assess the relevance and credibility of information sources.

1. Increase Population Participation- Racial and ethnic differences create considerable barriers for populations to be included in health research studies. Some of the barriers involve linguistic differences, lack of information on enrolment, beliefs and values, lack of support, financial barriers, and lack of resources (Nipp et al., 2019). Enrollment to cancer clinical research is perceived to only involve certain population in the society. improvements in the enrollment and retention of minorities in clinical trials.

2. Improve multi-level factors that contribute to this organizational challenge- Application of the evidence in an organizational level would result to changes mitigating system barriers such as financial costs and resources limitations. Also, community engagement from the individual level would increase participation and ownership of the research. Meanwhile, the individual level evidence reduces individual barriers like population support reducing agreements to enrollment. Interpersonal level evidence addresses barriers related to biasness, communication, and understanding of the trials.

3. Remove culture biases- improve application of effective research strategies which are culture and language sensitive

Considering the multilevel framework of interventions, the organization is likely to facilitate improvements through organizational and individual levels to mitigate the negative impact of the challenge. This can be associated with resources, finance, assistance, support, awareness, community engagement, and positive attitudes towards the trials. The organization would stipulate its contribution of resources and finances since they are challenging factors in the population to reduce under-representation and lack of participation in trials. Assistance, support, awareness, and community engagement would be influenced through application of the resources towards effective organization-community relationships. The interventions specifically apply to the population characteristics through exposure to unique barriers. The barriers such as biasness and under-representation in clinical research resonate with the population. The interventions articulated consider equity and cultural sensitivity of the population. In addition, the population experiences a lot of disparities when assessing quality health care. The interventions ensure that their participation in the trials would lead to quality cancer care through reduced generalization of findings and treatments. The intervention is supported by all the articles articulating its quality and applicability in reducing the negative impacts of the organizational challenge. Additionally, the articles provide substantial evidence which effectively supports the specific intervention. This is because of its effectiveness and applicability. Considering the level of the intervention, it is appropriate as it directly deals with the organization, the community, and individual population members. To impact changes on inclusion in trials, the community, organization, and members ought to be involved. This is facilitated through education, awareness, support, and assistance. Community and organizational support are significant in enabling the inclusion of minorities in oncology clinical trials.

Reference

George, S., Duran, N. & Norris, K. (2014). A systematic review of barriers and facilitators to minority research participation among African Americans, Latinos, Asian Americans, and Pacific Islanders. American journal of public health 104(2). doi:10.2105/AJPH.2013. 301706)

Hamel, L., Penner, L., Albrecht, T., Heath, E., Gwede, C. & Eggly, S. (2016). Barriers to clinical enrollment in racial and ethnic minority patients with cancer. Cancer control 23(4), 327-337.

Nipp, R., Hing, K. & Paskett, E. (2019). Overcoming barriers to clinical trial enrollment. Care delivery and practice management. https://doi.org/ 10.1200/EDBK_ 243729

 REQUIREMENTS:

APA FORMAT

LESS THAN 20% PLAGIARISM

400 WORDS

AT LEAST 2 CITATIONS & 2 REFERENCES

DQ 1:

·      Select one question as your DQ 1

·      Follow the discussion questions participation and submission guidelines.

·      Follow the 3 x 3 rule: minimum three paragraphs per DQ, with a minimum of three sentences each paragraph.

·      All answers or discussions comments submitted must be in APA format according to Publication Manual American Psychological Association (APA) (6th ed.) 2009 ISBN: 978-1-4338-0561-5

·      Minimum of two references, not older than 2015.

Chapter 3: Philosophy of Nursing

1.  Where do you see yourself and your understanding of truth on the continuum of realism and idealism?

2.  How would you define person? Look at the following attributes given to a person: (1) the ability to think and conceptualize, (2) the capacity to interact with others, (3) the need for boundaries, and (4) the use of language (Doheny, Cook, & Stopper, 1997). Would you agree? What about Maslow’s description of humanness in terms of a hierarchy of needs with self-actualization at the top? Another possibility is that persons are the major focus of nursing. Do you see humans as good or evil?

3.  Where do you see yourself and your understanding of truth on the continuum of realism and idealism?

4.  What are your beliefs about the major concepts in nursing—person, environment, health, nursing?

5.  Do you believe there is more than one right answer to situations? How do you value the whole individual? What barriers prevent us from responding to the contextual needs of our patients?

6.  Do I believe in health care for everyone? Does health care for everyone have value to me as a person? Does it have value to me as a nurse? What value does universal health care have to my patients?

7.  How does my personal philosophy fit with the context of nursing? Does it fit? What areas, if any, need assessing?

Purpose 

The purpose of the graded collaborative discussions is to engage faculty and students in an interactive dialogue to assist the student in organizing, integrating, applying, and critically appraising knowledge regarding advanced nursing practice. Scholarly information obtained from credible sources as well as professional communication are required. Application of information to professional experiences promotes the analysis and use of principles, knowledge, and information learned and related to real-life professional situations. Meaningful dialogue among faculty and students fosters the development of a learning community as ideas, perspectives, and knowledge are shared. 

Activity Learning Outcomes 

Demonstrate logical and creative thinking in the analysis and application of a theory to nursing practice. 

Examine broad theoretical concepts as foundational to advanced nursing practice roles. 

Analyze theories from nursing and relevant fields with respect to the components, relationship among the components, and application to advanced nursing practice. 

Discussion Criteria  

1. Application of Course Knowledge: The student post contributes unique perspectives or insights gleaned from personal experience or examples from the healthcare field. The student must accurately and fully discuss the topic for the week in addition to providing personal or professional examples. The student must completely answer the entire initial question. 
2. Engagement in Meaningful Dialogue: The student responds to a student peer and course faculty to further dialogue.
   • Peer Response: The student responds substantively to at least one topic-related post by a student peer. A substantive post adds content or insights or asks a question that will add to the learning experience and/or generate discussion.  
     • A post of “I agree” with a repeat of the other student’s post does not count as a substantive post. A collection of shallow posts does not equal a substantive post. 
     • The peer response must occur on a separate day from the initial posting.   
     • The peer response must occur before Sunday, 11:59 p.m. MT.   
   • Faculty Response: The student responds substantively to at least one question by course faculty. The faculty question may be directed to the student, to another student, or to the entire class.    

• A post of “I agree” with a repeat of the faculty’s post does not count as a substantive post. A collection of shallow posts does not equal a substantive post. 
• The faculty response must occur on a separate day from the initial posting.   

3. Integration of Evidence: The student post provides support from a minimum of one scholarly in-text citation with a matching reference and assigned readings or online lessons, per discussion topic per week.

• What is a scholarly resource? A scholarly resource is one that comes from a professional, peer-reviewed publication (e.g., journals and government reports such as those from the FDA or CDC). 
  • Contains references for sources cited 
  • Written by a professional or scholar in the field and indicates credentials of the author(s) 
  • Is no more than 5 years old for clinical or research articles 
• What is not considered a scholarly resource?  
  • Newspaper articles and layperson literature (e.g., Readers Digest, Healthy Life Magazine, Food, and Fitness) 
  • Information from Wikipedia  or any wiki 
  • Textbooks 
  • Website homepages 
  • The weekly lesson 
  • Articles in healthcare and nursing-oriented trade magazines, such as Nursing Made Incredibly Easy and RNMagazine (Source: What is a scholarly article.docx; Created 06/09 CK/CL  Revised: 02/17/11,  09/02/11  nlh/clm) 
• Can the lesson for the week be used as a scholarly source? 
  • Information from the weekly lesson can be cited in a posting; however, it is not to be the sole source used in the post. 
• Are resources provided from CU acceptable sources (e.g., the readings for the week)? 
  • Not as a sole source within the post. The textbook and/or assigned (required) articles for the week can be used, but another outside source must be cited for full credit. Textbooks are not considered scholarly sources for the purpose of discussions. 
• Are websites acceptable as scholarly resources for discussions? 
  • Yes, if they are documents or data cited from credible websites. Credible websites usually end in .gov or .edu; however, some .org sites that belong to professional associations (e.g., American Heart Association, National League for Nursing, American Diabetes Association) are also considered credible websites. Websites ending with .com are not to be used as scholarly resources.

resources:

Butts, J.B., & Rich, K.L. (2017). Philosophies And Theories For Advanced Nursing Practice. Jones & Bartlett Learning.

American Psychological Association. (2020). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (7th ed.).

Psychology of Disaster Course Project

Many topics of interest and importance are covered during the course; Week 7, especially, provides an opportunity to explore several, often overlooked topics that are critical to our understanding in the discussion of the psychology of disaster. For your course project, you are tasked with selecting one of the following areas, presented during week seven of the course, and examining a disaster event, using the selected area as the foundation of your work. The areas from which you may select include:

• Secondary Traumatic Stress (Effects of disasters on first responders/BH providers)
• Environmental Vulnerabilities and Considerations
• Critical Infrastructure Failures
• Disaster in School Environments
• In a 10 to 15 slide PowerPoint presentation, identify a recent disaster event (within the most recent 10 years), providing a description of the major events of the disaster leading up to, during, and after the event, to the extent possible.
  • Incorporating the selected area above, discuss, with detail and support, how the area is illustrated in the disaster event.
• Explore how the selected element influenced disaster response efforts.
  • Provide details of the ways in which these influences were observed.
  • Discuss any barriers presented by the selected element in providing effectual behavioral health interventions.
• Prepare a plan describing how the challenges experienced might be more effectively navigated using the principles of disaster behavioral health learned throughout the course.
  • Share the steps and resources you would deploy to overcome or avoid the challenges faced in the selected element.

In developing your work, be sure to rely upon academic, scholarly sources to support the definitions and recommendations provided. Ensure the plan presented is based upon evidenced based practices established in the field as effective in addressing psychological needs in disaster settings.

Work should be submitted in a PowerPoint file or other compatible file, and be 10 to 15 slides in length, excluding the required title slide and separate reference slide. Detailed speaker notes should accompany slides containing mostly bullet point data to include the details expected in the instructions above.