Recent Question/Assignment

NSG2NMR Assessment 1 2018
Assessment 1 (10%). Group Assessment (500 words per student equivalent)
Topic Propose research questions about clinical practice in nursing and midwifery. Decide upon the best a) paradigm AND b) research design to answer these questions and discuss why this was the most appropriate approach.
Length 500 word equivalent / per student (+/-10%)
• In-text references are included in word count.
• Reference list is excluded from the word count.
• Words in template (177) are excluded from word count
Value 10% of the total marks for NSG2NMR
SILOS 1 & 2
Due date 9.00am Thursday 29 March 2018.
Format A template has been provided for this task.
References References should be in APA 6th referencing style.
Our intention with this subject (and this assessment) is to encourage you to be curious. Curiosity is a key attribute underpinning Evidence Based Practice in healthcare – the provision of care not just as it has always been done but to identify practices that are supported by research evidence, clinical experience, are appropriate to the individual’s context and resources at hand, as well as being in keeping with the values of the patient (Hoffmann, Bennett, & Del Mar, 2010).
As professionals we would encourage you to be curious about practice and to ask questions; why do that practice then, why in that way, why might that be effective, or why might that be effective but only for those patients. As such, with this assessment our intention is to have you work with other students to think of varied research questions and consider how the main research paradigms and designs can used to obtain evidence to answer those questions and enhance nursing care, nurse wellbeing, healthcare systems and process, and patient outcomes.
At the start of this subject you will be allocated to groups.
Each member of the team will need to propose one “research question” about a clinical issue or nursing.
The team should then discuss each question and decide upon the best paradigm (Qualitative, Quantitative) to answer this question and the specific design (ethnography, cohort study) that is most appropriate.
Using the template provided, the team should present:
• The research question
• A summary of the selected paradigm and design (including definitions) • The reason why the team thought this was the most appropriate approach
(approximately 500 words per question).
The research question may be in response to a clinical issue you have observed or queried while on clinical placement from your other subjects (e.g., NSG1INA, NSG1NAM). It might be from the content in your other subjects that left you wondering ‘why do we do it like this’? It might also be something you have observed through your own firsthand experiences with the healthcare system.
Your question might be a very specific example of one of these general types of enquiry:
• Why do we do it like that? (e.g., Is there evidence to support the routine removal of peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVC) 72 hours following insertion?)
• Why don't we do it differently (e.g., Does patient education pre operatively impact on patient outcomes?)
• What evidence supports providing care in a particular way (e.g., Is a 4 hourly repositioning regimen frequent enough to prevent patients developing pressure injuries?)
• What evidence is there to support using certain assessment tools (e.g., Is there evidence that the introduction of the national graphic observation chart has increased nurses recognition and response to the deteriorating patient?)
• Is there emerging evidence or a change to practice that could enhance outcomes? (e.g., Does “alarm fatigue” among nurses in critical care increase the risk of complications among patients?)
Team Member Contributions
If you are unable to attend Workshop 1 please ensure you contact your facilitator at the earliest opportunity so they can ensure you are allocated to a team and can pass on your contact details. Please contact the Subject Coordinator, Charne Miller ( if you are unsure who your facilitator is.
It is expected that team members will all think of a research question. The question can be refined in consultation with team members. Every team member should review each question and provide contribute to the discussion regarding each question. Facilitators have scope to ask teams for evidence (emails/ online posts) that each team member did in fact make a contribution to the discussion to each question.
Time will be provided in Workshop 1 for teams to work on this Assessment 1 task, however, it is expected that the team will make arrangements for the bulk of the work to occur in their own study time.
Marking Group Work: All students receive the “Group” mark. There is no capacity for individual marks within a group assessment. If it is determined that one student did not make a contribution to the group efforts, that individual will receive a “0” mark. All other members of the group will receive the mark associated with the submitted work.
General Instructions for Assessment 1
The SILOs associated with this assessment task include SILOs 1 & 2
For further clarification of the grading criteria and mark allocation, refer to the Assessment 1 rubric.
Submission: To Turnitin via the LMS site for NSG2NMR. Please utilise the Template that has been provided on the LMS site. You do NOT require a coversheet for this assignment. Only ONE member of the team needs to submit the document via Turnitin. Please email your facilitator to advise when the submission occurred, under which student the assessment was submitted, and confirm the team members who were part of the team.
• Penalties as per the La Trobe University Policy will be incurred after the due date/time.
• Applications for extension must be received 72 hours (3 days) prior to the due date/time.
• In accordance with University policy, because this assessment is worth more than 10%, it is not eligible for remarking.
Originality: The assessment should be a product of individuals who are members of the group and the group’s original work. For further information please refer to the University webpage on academic integrity ( )
Turnitin: The University uses text matching software, Turnitin, to analyse similarity between published material and student assignments. The software also matches to other student assignments. All teams are required to submit their assessment to Turnitin, by the due date/time; assessments will not be graded until the Turnitin report is available to Facilitators. You will have an opportunity to submit assessment drafts to Turnitin to check the similarity index for issues with paraphrasing and citation, and make amendments if required, before finalising the assessment by the due date/time. The report on your first submission will be available almost immediately, but reports on subsequent submissions can take 24 hours to process.
Document format: The assignment should be submitted as a Microsoft Word document using the template provided. Turnitin will NOT accept Pages documents (i.e., the format created on Macs). Please convert your file format if you need to.
Penalties: Late submissions shall be penalised in accordance with La Trobe University’s policy and procedure on ‘Late Submission of Tasks’
( . All assignments received more than FIVE days after the due date/time will not be accepted. A score of '0' will be recorded. The assignment will NOT be marked.
Assignments submitted within FIVE days of the due date/time will have the penalty subtracted after the assignment grade has been determined. Weekend days, public holidays, and University holidays are not counted as days overdue. Penalties for late work will be calculated as follows:
Submission by due date/time: no penalty
• Within 24 hrs (1 day) after the assignment was due: subtract 5 marks
• Within 48 hrs (2 days) after the assignment was due: subtract 10 marks
• Within 72 hrs (3 days) after the assignment was due: subtract 15 marks
• Within 96 hrs (4 days) after the assignment was due: subtract 20 marks
• Within 120 hrs (5 days) after the assignment was due: subtract 25 marks
After 120 hrs (5 days) after the assignment was due: not accepted. Not graded. Score of '0' given.
Remark procedure: As this assessment task is worth less than 20%, as per university policy no requests for remarking as possible with this assessment.

Looking for answers ?