Recent Question/Assignment

Important Copyright Notice for
Western Sydney University Students
The material in this learning resource has been made available to you by and on behalf of Western Sydney University for your personal use and study only.
The material contained in this resource is subject to copyright protection.
You may not make any further copies and share the learning resources in whole or in part by any hardcopy, digital and or online technologies.
Concept Paper: Assessment 2 (2500 Words)
• Assessment 2: Concept Paper
• Weighting: 50%
• Word count/duration: 2500 Words
• Due Date: Wednesday 29 May by 11.59 PM
• Aim of assessment
• This assessment item gives students the opportunity to choose and analyse a concept that they see as significant to their nursing practice in particular and to the discipline of nursing in general.
• Details
• Using Walker and Avant’s (2011) concept analysis method, analyse a concept which is significant to nursing as a discipline and is relevant to your area of nursing practice. ( Note: Walker & Avant 2011 available on 400774 vUWS site :Reading 2.6 in Readings & Resources menu on vUWS & in Assessment Zone-Assessment 2 Link on vUWS)
• Introduce the concept and give adequate rationales for your choice
• Justify the use of the concept analysis method for the current analysis of the concept
• Analyse the concept using Walker & Avant’s (2011) 8 step concept analysis method
• Critically evaluate how well the theoretical and research literature addresses the concept
• Critically evaluate the actual or potential implications for nursing in relation to this concept
(400774 Learning guide 2019, p. 9)
)
Resources
Resources:
Students are strongly advised to see resources on the unit’s views site including Walker and Avant (2011, Chapter 10 –Essential Reading 2.6) as well as published examples of concept analysis papers available on the unit VUWS site (see Module 2 Readings and Assessment 2 –Link for resources
See Module 2 Readings including:
• Reading 2.5 • Textbook
• Meleis, A. I. (2018, Chapters 10, 14. 15). Theoretical nursing: Development and progress (6th ed.). Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer.
• Reading 2.6
• Walker, L. O., & Avant, K. C. (2011). Strategies for theory construction in nursing (5th ed., pp. 157179). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education Inc. • Reading 2.7
• Garcia-Dia, M. J., DiNapoli, J. M., Garcia-Ona, L., Jakubowski, R., & O’Flaherty, D. (2013). Concept analysis: Resilience. Archives of Psychiatric Nursing, 27, 264-270.
• Reading 2.8
• Brush, B. L., Kirk, K., Gultekin, L., & Baiardi, J. M. (2011). Overcoming: A concept analysis. Nursing Forum, 46 (3), 160-168.
• Reading 2.9
• Goodnite, P. M. (2013) Stress: A concept analysis. Nursing Forum, 49 (1), 71-74.
Note re student directions
• The work is to be structured as a formal essay, with a relevant introduction, body of work and conclusion, however, headings and subheadings may be used.
• The assessment task as set must be adequately and appropriately addressed.
• There must be clear identification and evidence of understanding of major issues, with evidence of critical examination of issues, including sound arguments and positions adequately supported by academic literature as appropriate and required.
• The work is to conform to the conventions of academic writing, with logical flow of ideas, clarity and conciseness of expression, non-discriminatory use of language, and consistently accurate spelling, grammar, punctuation, and sentence and paragraph construction.
• You are required to have at least five (5) recent (i.e. from 2014) references from peer-reviewed academic journals, preferably from nursing journals. All sources of information must be adequately acknowledged by correct and complete referencing. References must be: in the APA style, adequately and correctly given, both in text and in the final reference list, and in strict accordance with the Western Sydney University (2016) American Psychological Association referencing style guide. Available from:
http://library.westernsydney.edu.au/main/sites/default/files/cite_APA.pdf . This reference guide is based on the
Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (6th edition) (American Psychological
Association, 2010). Use of non-academic literature is not acceptable. Further, it is not acceptable to copy any information from other sources, including Websites or other electronic sources, other students, books, journals, etc., and present it as your own work, please see the Student Misconduct Rule policy.
• References:
• Western Sydney University (2016). American Psychological Association referencing style guide. Penrith: WSU. Retrieved September 9th, 2016 from
http://library.westernsydney.edu.au/main/sites/default/files/cite_APA.pdf
• Walker, L., & Avant, K. (2011). Strategies for theory construction in nursing (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education Inc.
Criteria 1- INTRODUCTION
Criteria High
Distinction Distinction Credit Pass Unsatisfactory
Criteria 1 – Introduction
Exceptional, outstanding clear, concise introduction of concept, and justifications of choice, cogently argued. Excellent overview of all major issues of concept analysis to be addressed. Superior, very good introduction of concept and justification of choice. Very good, relevant, clear overview of concept analysis issues to be addressed. Good
introduction of concept and justification of choice. Good, relevant, clear overview of concept analysis issues to be addressed. Satisfactory introduction of concept and justification of choice. Satisfactory, relevant, clear overview of concept analysis issues to be addressed. Concept not adequately identified, introduced or justified. Poor or absent overview of main issues to be addressed.
4.5-5 4 3.5 2.5-3 0-2
Using Walker and Avant (2011) (see essential reading ) concept analysis method, analyse a concept which is significant to nursing as a discipline and is relevant to your area of nursing practice.
Criteria 1 – The Introduction
• It is important that you read and reference Walker and
Avant (2011 ) (see unit essential reading 2.6 on 400774 vUWs site) to enable you to understand what is meant by and how to apply the major terms:
• Concept
• Concept Analysis
Examples of concepts are:
• Pain, safety, competence, caring, fall risk, resilience, wound healing, aged-care, holistic nursing care, quality assurance, community health practice, nurse practitioners, etc.
Introduce the concept and give adequate rationales for your choice (in terms of its significance to nursing as a discipline and its relevance to your own area of nursing practice which needs to be clearly identified in the introduction.
-Choice of concept is critical.
-Do NOT choose a concept for which there is a published paper which has undertaken a concept analysis using the Walker and Avant Concept analysis method. This is not acceptable as this needs to be your concept analysis
-
-
• In the INTRODUCTION:
• Introduce the topic.
• Introduce the concept and give adequate rationales for your choice
• Define the major terms and describe how they will be applied in the paper
• Provide overview of what the concept paper and concept analysis issues that will be covered in the work.
• Provide the Thesis statement:
State the aim of the paper
CONCEPTS
“Concepts are the basic building blocks in theory construction…. For a concept to be solid and strong, it must clearly name the thing to which it refers, it must be clearly defined (structure), and its uses in the theory should be clear (function) so that anyone who sees the concept and its definition within the theory can understand exactly what is being described, explained, or predicted.
Examining the structure and function of a concept is the purpose of concept analysis ( Concepts contain within themselves the attributes or characteristics that make them unique from other concepts. Thus, we speak of concepts as containing defining characteristics or attributes that permit us to decide which phenomena match the concept and which do not. Concepts are mental constructions; they are our attempts to order our environmental stimuli in a meaningful way. Concepts, therefore, represent categories of information that contain the defining Attributes” (Walker & Avant, 2011, p. 157)
Criteria 2: Justifies the use of the concept analysis method for the current analysis of the concept
Criteria 2 – Justifies the use of the concept analysis method for the current analysis of the concept.
Outstanding, clear, concise and expert identification of designated concept analysis method, including all major elements. Expert understanding and cogent argumentation in relation to justification for use of the particular concept analysis method for the concept under review evidenced. Very good
identification of designated concept analysis method, including all major elements. Very good understanding and well-argued justification for use of the particular concept analysis method for the concept under review evidenced. Well identifies designated concept analysis method, including all major elements. Good understanding and justification for use of the particular concept analysis method for the concept under review evidenced. Satisfactorily identifies designated concept analysis method. Adequate understanding and justification for use of the particular concept analysis method for the concept under review evidenced. Fails to adequately identify chosen concept analysis method. Poor understanding and justification for use of the particular concept analysis method for the concept under review.
4.5-5 4 3.5 2.5-3 0-2
Criteria 2: Justifies the use of the concept analysis method for the current analysis of the concept
• There are numerous approaches or methods of concept analysis including These include Wilson’s Method of Concept Analysis (Wilson 1963 /1969, cited in Meleis, 2018, pp. 345-347), Walker and Avant’s (1995; 2005; 2011) model which was derived from Wilson’s earlier model, and Rodgers evolutionary concept analysis ( Rodgers, 2000 cited in Tofthagen, 2010).
• Hence in addressing this section you need to clarify and justify why you are using the Walker and Avant (2011) Concept Analysis method for analyzing your chosen concept rather than another concept analysis method.
Criteria 3: Analyse the concept using Walker and Avant’s Concept Analysis method.
Criteria 3 - Analyse the concept using Walker &
Avant’s (2011) 8 step concept
analysis method Outstanding, expert use of
Walker & Avant’s (2011) concept analysis method to analyse concept. All 8 steps of method addressed, including excellent determination of antecedents, essential attributes and consequences of concept, including cogent argumentation in provision of rationales for these. Excellent development of cases using nursing empirical referents. Very good use of
Walker & Avant’s (2011) concept analysis method to analyse concept. All 8 steps of method very well addressed, including very good
determination of antecedents, essential attributes and consequences of concept, including giving rationales for these. Very good development of cases using nursing empirical referents. Good, appropriate, correct, thorough use of Walker & Avant’s (2011) concept analysis method to analyse concept. All 8 steps of method well addressed, including good determination of antecedents, essential attributes and consequences of concept, including giving rationales for these. Good development of cases using nursing empirical referents. Adequate, appropriate and
correct use of
Walker & Avant’s (2011) concept analysis method to analyse concept. All 8 steps of method
satisfactorily addressed, including adequate determination of antecedents, essential attributes and consequences of concept, including giving rationales for these.
Development of cases using nursing empirical referents. Absent, incorrect, inadequate or inappropriate use of Walker & Avant’s (2011) concept analysis method to analyse concept.
13-15 11.5-12.5 10-11 7.5-9.5 0-7
Criteria 3
Analyse the concept using Walker & Avant’s 8 step concept analysis method
“concepts as containing • defining characteristics or attributes that permit us to Walker & Avant’s (2005;2011) concept analysis method involves the following 8 steps:
decide which phenomena match the concept and which do not… Concept analysis is a formal, linguistic exercise to determine those defining attributes”
(Walker & Avant, 2011, p.
160).
• “1. Select a concept.
• 2. Determine the aims or purposes of analysis.
• 3. Identify all uses of the concept that you can discover.
• 4. Determine the defining attributes.
• 5. Identify a model case.
• 6. Identify borderline, related, contrary, invented, and illegitimate cases.
• 7. Identify antecedents and consequences.
• 8. Define empirical referents” (Walker & Avant 2011, p. 160)
Criteria 4: Critically evaluates how well the theoretical and research literature addresses the concept
Criteria 4 - Critically evaluates how well the theoretical and research literature addresses the concept Expert, thorough use of current, relevant peer reviewed academic
literature to support cogent, focused, structured, critical
evaluation of how and how well the theoretical and research literature addresses concept. High quality work with extensive use of current, relevant peer reviewed academic
literature to support comprehensive
, critical
evaluation of how and how well the theoretical and research literature addresses concept. Effective, relevant use of current, relevant peer reviewed academic
literature to support good
critical evaluation of how well the theoretical and research literature addresses concept. Satisfactory use of a limited range of current, relevant peer reviewed academic
literature to adequately support critical evaluation of how well the theoretical and research literature addresses concept. The range, quality and regency of literature sources are inadequate, and/ or inappropriate. Little evidence of critical
evaluation of how and how
well
theoretical and research literature addresses the concept.
5 4-4.5 3-3.5 2.5
0-2
Criteria 5 - Critically evaluates the actual and potential implications for nursing in relation to concept Exceptional, innovative, original approach to identification and critical evaluation of actual and potential implications for nursing in relation to the concept, including expert comprehensive, substantiation from current, relevant academic
literature in such an evaluation. Superior, excellent identification and critical evaluation of actual and potential implications for nursing in relation to the concept, including excellent comprehensive, substantiation from current, relevant academic
literature in such an evaluation. Actual and potential implications for nursing in relation to concept comprehensivel y and well identified and critically evaluated. Good use of academic literature to support critical evaluation of implications. Actual and potential implications for nursing in
relation to concept satisfactorily identified and critically evaluated.
Adequate use of academic literature to support critical evaluation. Little or no actual and potential implications for nursing in
relation to concept identified and / or critically evaluated. Description in the main, rather than adequate
critical evaluation of actual and potential implications for nursing noted.
5 4-4.5 3-3.5 2.5 0-2
Criteria 6 Conclusion
• The conclusion should provide relevant, adequate summative conclusion based on preceding points, arguments and issues raised in the discussion paper. No new information should be introduced in the conclusion.
Criteria 6 - Conclusion Exceptional, outstanding clear, concise conclusion, excellently drawing on significant points raised in the essay and drawing these together in an outstanding manner. Very good, clear, concise conclusion, succinctly and meaningfully drawing on significant points raised in the essay and drawing these together in a very good manner. Relevant, clear, concise conclusion, that aptly supports the preceding arguments and significant points raised in the essay and drawing these
together in a good manner Relevant conclusion with reasonable support for preceding arguments and significant points in the essay. Problematic conclusion
that fails to provide a relevant, adequate conclusion for preceding
points, arguments and issues raised in the essay. Failure to address the basic requirement of a conclusion.
4.5-5 4 3.5 2.5-3 0-2
Criteria 7 References.
References must be correctly and adequately given in the American Psychological Association (APA) (6th ed.) referencing style as per the Western Sydney University (2016) American Psychological Association referencing style guide. Available from: https://library.westernsydney.edu.au/main/sites/default/files/cite_APA.pdf
Criteria 7 - References Flawless referencing, with all references adequately and correctly given, both in text and in final reference list according to APA style. Extensive, relevant current
academic
reference lists effectively utilized. Very good referencing, with adequate and correct references given both in text and in final
reference list according to APA style.
Comprehensive,
relevant, list of current academic references effectively used. Good, adequate referencing, using a reasonable range of current academic reference. Minimal referencing style
errors, following APA conventions
both in text and in final reference list. Satisfactory referencing, using a reasonable range of current academic reference (at least 5). Some referencing style errors ,but following APA conventions both in text and in final reference list. Unsatisfactory referencing, insufficient, current academic references (i.e. less than 5). Absent, inadequate or incorrect referencing style noted.
2.5 2 1.75 1.25-1.5 0-1
Criteria 8 – Correct Sentence, Paragraph, grammatical construction, spelling and punctuation.
Criteria 9 Clarity of expression throughout work with scholarly and non discriminatory use of language.
Criteria 8 - Correct sentence, paragraph, grammatical construction, spelling and punctuation. Publishable or outstanding level of clarity of expression, scholarly writing style and absence of any discriminatory use of language throughout. Clear concise clarity of expression, with no ambiguity issues, advanced, very good, well developed writing style with no use of discriminatory language throughout. Clear concise clarity of expression, with no ambiguity issues, good, well developed writing style with no use of discriminatory language throughout. Reasonable
clarity with little or no ambiguity issues.
Reasonable writing style but limited use of language. No use of discriminatory language throughout. Poor clarity, with ambiguity issues noted. Writing style of language impedes clarity of meaning and adequate communication of ideas.
2.5 2 1.75 1.25-1.5 0-1
Criteria 9 -
Clarity of Expression throughout work, with scholarly and
nondiscriminatory use of language Publishable or outstanding level of clarity of expression, scholarly writing style and absence of any discriminatory use of language throughout. Clear concise clarity of expression, with no ambiguity issues, advanced, very good, well developed writing style with no use of discriminatory language throughout. Clear concise clarity of expression, with no ambiguity issues, good, well developed writing style with no use of discriminatory language throughout. Reasonable
clarity with little or no ambiguity issues.
Reasonable writing style but limited use of language. No use of discriminatory language throughout. Poor clarity, with ambiguity issues noted. Writing style of language impedes clarity of meaning and adequate communication of ideas.
2.5 2 1.75 1.25-1.5 0-1
Criteria 10-Organized and logical sequencing.
Criteria 10 - Organized and logical sequencing Expert, outstanding coherent, logical organized sequencing. Very good, cogent, focused, structured sequencing with logically ordered flow of ideas.
Concise and orderly. Effective, focused structured sequencing with logically ordered flow of ideas. Adequate organization and logical sequencing of material and major points. Inadequate organization and logical sequencing. Illogical flow to presentation of ideas and arguments.
2.5 2 1.75 1.25-1.5 0-1
References
• Meleis, A. I. (2018). Theoretical nursing:
Development and progress (6th ed.). Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer
• Tofthagen, R. (2010). Rodgers’ evolutionary concept analysis – a valid method for developing knowledge in nursing science. Scandinavian Journal of Caring Science, 24, 21-31.
• Walker, L. O., & Avant, K. C. (2011). Strategies for theory construction in nursing (5th ed., pp. 157179). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education Inc

Looking for answers ?