N584 All Assignments Latest 2018 December Question # 00597635 Course Code : N584 Subject: Health Care Due on: 02/02/2019 Posted On: 02/02/2019 09:19 AM Tutorials: 2 Rating: 4.8/5

N584
Curriculum Development, Implementation and Evalution

Module 1 Assignment

Remember to submit your work following the file naming
convention FirstInitial.LastName_M01.docx. For example, J.Smith_M01.docx.
Remember that it is not necessary to manually type in the file extension; it
will automatically append.

Start by reading and following these instructions:

1. Quickly skim the questions or assignment below and the
assignment rubric to help you focus.

2. Read the required chapter(s) of the textbook and any
additional recommended resources. Some answers may require you to do additional
research on the Internet or in other reference sources. Choose your sources
carefully.

3. Consider the course discussions so far and any insights
gained from it.

4. Create your Assignment submission and be sure to cite
your sources if needed, use APA style as required, and check your spelling.

Assignment:

With the exception of a few years in the early 1990s, the
shortage of nurses to provide care in hospitals has been a chronic problem with
intermittent acute exacerbations since the 1930s. What effects at both macro
level (e.g. public opinion, social policy) and micro level (e.g. individual
schools, courses) has this had on nursing education? Has the net balance of
positive and negative effects been beneficial for nursing education? Why?

Debate the wisdom and feasibility of setting the master’s
degree as the minimum marker for the professional segment of the nursing
continuum. Given the 20/20 hindsight gained from the debacle of the 1965
Position Paper, how would you advise national nursing organizations to go about
changing this definition, if it were to be changed?

Analyze how the triangulation of subject, setting, and
student characteristics serve to frame curriculum planning and development.

Conduct a literature search on the history and evolution of
nursing curricula. Summarize the key aspects of the scholarly article, and
speculate on how past and present events will frame the future.

N584
Curriculum Development, Implementation and Evalution

Module 2 Assignment

Remember to submit your work following the file naming
convention FirstInitial.LastName_M01.docx. For example, J.Smith_M01.docx.
Remember that it is not necessary to manually type in the file extension; it
will automatically append.

Start by reading and following these instructions:

1. Quickly skim the questions or assignment below and the
assignment rubric to help you focus.

2. Read the required chapter(s) of the textbook and any
additional recommended resources. Some answers may require you to do additional
research on the Internet or in other reference sources. Choose your sources
carefully.

3. Consider the discussion and the any insights you gained
from it.

4. Create your Assignment submission and be sure to cite
your sources, use APA style as required, check your spelling.

Assignment:

Critical Thinking Exercises :

Case Study #1: Meadowvale University School of Nursing

Dr. Manuela Lopez is director and professor of Meadowvale
University School of Nursing. Enrollment is 550 undergraduate and 85 graduate
students. The teaching staff comprises 26 full-time faculty (19
doctorally-prepared, 7 masters-prepared) and 40 part-time faculty (22
masters-prepared, 18 baccalaureate). Approximately 30% of faculty members were
hired in the previous 3 years. Dr. Lopez is an active member of the university
administrators group, the community health administrators association, and
nursing professional organizations. She keeps abreast of changes in nursing,
nursing education, and health care. She has excellent relationships with
faculty members, university administrators, and clinical and professional
colleagues.

The undergraduate curriculum was first implemented 15 years
ago. Since then, there have been minor curriculum revisions, but the
philosophical approaches, goals, and basic structure of the largely behaviorist
curriculum have remained unchanged.

Although faculty have attended workshops and conferences on
new and evolving educational paradigms, some are generally comfortable with the
present curriculum. Some act more in accordance with a caring,
humanistic-educative approach, and others are strong feminists. Some advance
ideas of social justice in the courses they teach.

Members of the School of Nursing were shocked when, for the
first time, nearly 20% of graduates failed the NCLEX. Those graduates were
public in voicing their displeasure with the School. Along with this, there has
been informal feedback from a few employers that Meadowvale graduates are
having difficulties beyond those experienced by new graduates of other schools.
Further, there has been increasing pressure from the university’s central
administration to increase the number and size of research grants and the
publication rate of faculty. The school is 3 years away from an accreditation
review and Dr. Lopez thinks that the time might be right for discussion about
curriculum development. She calls a special meeting to discuss the possibility
of curriculum development.

1. What factors or influences would propel Meadowvale
nursing faculty toward curriculum development? What might be the objections and
responses to these?

2. What could be the sources of support for curriculum development?
Sources of resistance?

3. How would Dr. Lopez’s initiation of the idea of
curriculum development influence faculty members’ decision about whether or not
to proceed?

4. What is a suitable timeframe for curriculum revision in
light of the reasons for curriculum development and the upcoming accreditation
review?

5. How would Dr. Lopez assess faculty members’ acceptance of
the need for curriculum development and their readiness to support the process?

Case Study # 2: Rosemount University School of Nursing

Rosemount University School of Nursing has offered
baccalaureate and masters programs in nursing for 40 years. Most faculty have
kept abreast of current curriculum paradigms and teaching-learning methods in
order to deliver the “best” nursing program to qualified students.
Faculty development through attendance at occasional in-house meetings or
attendance at local, national, or international conferences has been considered
important to most of the faculty. However, an ongoing faculty development program
was not implemented due to resistance from a few “senior” faculty
members.

Recently, Dr. Angela Fabatini, director of the school,
attended a national meeting of baccalaureate nursing program deans and
directors. One recommendation, among many others developed by the group, was
that faculty development include activities intended to facilitate
participation in curriculum development.

On returning from the conference, Dr. Fabatini called a
faculty meeting. A review of faculty development activities was undertaken. The
results revealed a fragmented approach to faculty development, sporadic faculty
attendance, and very little attention to the specifics of the curriculum
process. Inexperienced faculty members wanted an ongoing faculty development
program to assist them in revising the present baccalaureate-nursing program.
Two “senior” experienced faculty members voiced their resistance to
this activity, claiming that the past practice of ad hoc meetings was
satisfactory and that there was no necessity for change, since the program is
accredited.

1. What are the strengths and limitations in the present
faculty development system?

2. What strategies might be instituted to encourage
participation in faculty development?

3. When agreement is reached to undertake faculty
development for curriculum change, what would be the goals of this activity?
What development activities could be instituted?

4. What responses might be appropriate for those faculty
members resisting change?

5. If the Rosemount University faculty decide to proceed
with curriculum development, which change theory would be useful, and how could
it be used?

N584
Curriculum Development, Implementation and Evalution

Module 3 Assignment

Remember to submit your work following the file naming convention
FirstInitial.LastName_M01.docx. For example, J.Smith_M01.docx. Remember that it
is not necessary to manually type in the file extension; it will automatically
append.

Start by reading and following these instructions:

1. Quickly skim the questions or assignment below and the
assignment rubric to help you focus.

2. Read the required chapter(s) of the textbook and any
additional recommended resources. Some answers may require you to do additional
research on the Internet or in other reference sources. Choose your sources
carefully.

3. Consider the discussions and the any insights gained from
it.

4. Create your Assignment submission and be sure to cite
your sources, use APA style as required, check your spelling.

Assignment:

Critical Thinking Exercises :

Case Study #1: Mountainview College Department of Nursing

Mountainview Community College , an associate
degree-granting college, is located in a medium-sized metropolitan city of
approximately 400,000 inhabitants. Health facilities include four hospitals,
several-drop in clinics staffed by physicians and primary health care nurse
practitioners; and a visiting nurse service in which all community-based health
care except medical care is coordinated. The College provides business,
technology, community service, and health science programs to approximately
6500 full and part-time students. Among the programs is a 2-year,
associate-degree nursing (ADN) program. Springhaven University is also located
in the city and offers a 4-year baccalaureate nursing (BSN) program. In
addition to offering the 2-year ADN program, Mountainview College has entered
into a collaborative partnership with Springhaven University, to offer the
first two years of the BSN program. Springhaven will offer the third and fourth
years. There is agreement to develop a new curriculum together. Participants
from both institutions and the health community are working collaboratively to
develop the new BSN curriculum.

1. Describe matters that the dean of nursing at Springhaven
University and the Chair of the nursing department at Mountainview Community
College should discuss about leadership of the collaborative curriculum
development project.

2. What factors should be considered when deciding on
leadership for the collaborative curriculum development process?

3. How might a curriculum leader be selected or appointed?
Who should the leader be? Should there be two leaders, one for each
institution? Why or why not? How could community nursing leaders contribute to
the leadership of the curriculum development enterprise?

4. What should be included in a faculty development program
to prepare potential curriculum leaders?

Case Study #2: Montag College Department of Nursing

Old Ivy University College of Nursing offers BSN, BSN
completion, MS, and PhD programs. It is located in a large metropolitan city of
approximately 2,500,000 inhabitants. Health facilities include twelve
hospitals, nurse practitioner clinics, home health services, and drop-in
clinics. The university provides graduate and undergraduate programs to 52,000
full-and part-time students in a full range of programs.

The College of Nursing has approximately 1300 students, of
whom approximately sixty percent are full-time, and these mainly in the BSN
program. The BSN program has been accredited. Although the curriculum content
and teaching-learning approaches have been updated periodically, the overall
structure of the curriculum and the location of clinical experiences have
undergone little change. Most faculty members believe that the curriculum has
lost its unity and that it is time to develop a new curriculum with more
progressive philosophical approaches and learning experiences.

Most faculty teaching classroom courses in the BSN program
have a PhD degree; some have a master’s degree. Some clinical instructors have
master’s degrees, although the majority has a BSN. Doctorally-prepared faculty
teach in the MS and PhD programs although most without an undergraduate
teaching assignment do guest lectures in the BSN program.

Dr. Lumella, the Dean of the College of Nursing, is
supportive of the undergraduate faculty’s proposal to design a completely new
curriculum. She has appointed Dr. Beverly Eme, an experienced and long-time
faculty member, as the curriculum leader. Dr. Eme is a popular choice since she
teaches in the BSN program and is highly supportive of faculty colleagues. Dr.
Eme begins to plan how to proceed with her colleagues.

1. How can Dr. Eme help the faculty choose a change theory
to guide their overall process?

2. What committees could be struck in order to facilitate
curriculum development? What purposes would they serve? How should committee
members be selected or appointed? Who should the members be?

3. If some of the faculty teaching in the MS and PhD programs
are reluctant to participate in undergraduate curriculum development, how could
Dr. Lumella and Dr. Eme encourage them to do so?

4. What decision-making approaches would be effective for
the curriculum developers?

5. What could be a practical work plan for developing the
curriculum? What are the logistical factors associated with joint curriculum
planning by faculty members of two institutions?

6. What potential is there for publication arising from
curriculum development? How might faculty determine authorship?

7. What resources might be needed for the curriculum work to
be achieved?

8. What faculty development activities would be helpful?

N584
Curriculum Development, Implementation and Evalution

Module 4 Assignment

Remember to submit your work following the file naming
convention FirstInitial.LastName_M01.docx. For example, J.Smith_M01.docx.
Remember that it is not necessary to manually type in the file extension; it
will automatically append.

Start by reading and following these instructions:

1. Quickly skim the questions or assignment below and the
assignment rubric to help you focus.

2. Read the required chapter(s) of the textbook and any
additional recommended resources. Some answers may require you to do additional
research on the Internet or in other reference sources. Choose your sources
carefully.

3. Consider the discussions and any insights gained from it.

4. Create your Assignment submission and be sure to cite
your sources, use APA style as required, check your spelling.

Assignment:

Critical Thinking Exercises :

Case Study #1: Bellemore University School of Nursing

Bellemore University , an accredited, long-standing
institution of some 150 years, with approximately 10,000 full- and part-time
students, is located in a mid-western industrial city of 350,000 inhabitants.
University departments offer programs in liberal arts, social, physical, and
health sciences. The four-year baccalaureate nursing program is one of three
others within the College of Health Sciences. Eighty students are admitted
annually to the nursing program, which has a total complement of 290 students
in the four years. The majority is female and enrolled on a full-time basis.
Approximately 25% of students study part-time, are mature, and have taken jobs
in the community in order to meet tuition costs.

Thirty full- and part-time faculty, 15 with doctoral
degrees, 12 with masters preparation, and 3 with baccalaureate degrees teach
classroom and clinical courses in the school of nursing. The nursing program
received full accreditation 4 years previously.

The main industry of the city of Bellemore, for which the
university is named, is automobile manufacture. The largest auto plant, which
employs approximately 2000 workers, offers health services to all employees.
There is concern that general downsizing of North American auto manufacturing
will soon lead to downsizing of the local auto plant.

In addition to the university, the city of Bellemore boasts
a 3000-student technological community college, as well as the following health
facilities and services: a 450-bed acute care general hospital; a 275-bed long
term and chronic care facility; 3 physician-serviced medical clinics; 2 walk-in
emergency clinics; 3 nurse practitioner clinics, many physicians’ offices, and
a county community health department.

Bellemore School of Nursing is preparing for a
reconceptualization of its four-year baccalaureate program. Examining the
contextual factors that will affect nursing practice, and hence the curriculum,
is recognized as integral to designing a future-oriented, context-relevant
curriculum.

Dr. Amèlie Le Blanc, the curriculum coordinator, requested a
meeting of the curriculum committee, made up of representatives from faculty,
students, and community health personnel, to discuss contextual factors
relevant to a redesigned curriculum. The group decided to schedule a faculty
development session to help them with this activity. As a result of this
session, several task force groups were formed to determine who would
participate, which relevant data to gather, the sources, methods, and tools for
this undertaking. The group agreed to meet again when the contextual
data-gathering phase was complete.

Which contextual factors would be most relevant to
Bellemore’s vision of a future-oriented nursing curriculum?

What are the essential data to collect about these
contextual factors?

Which data-gathering methods and tools might be employed to
obtain information about the contextual factors?

What would be a suitable time period for collecting and
collating these data?

Who could best participate in this data-gathering activity?
How could they organize to obtain relevant data expeditiously?

Case Study #2: Poplarfield University School of Nursing

Members of the Poplarfield University School of Nursing
completed their data-gathering about internal and external contextual factors.
A curriculum consultant was hired for a two-day retreat to help the group
derive the curriculum nucleus from the data. Dr. Werstiuk, the School Director,
stated her intention to attend and participate fully. The Dean of the Faculty
was also invited, since her support would be needed for any additional
resources that might be required for the new curriculum. Faculty believed that
the dean’s involvement would be an effective way to educate her about the
complexity of curriculum planning and the many influences on the nursing
curriculum. Additionally, members of the Curriculum Advisory Committee were
invited to attend, and two of the twelve members were able to do so.

In preparation for the retreat, data had been organized for
each contextual factor on a chart and a hard copy distributed to all faculty
members. A copy of the chart was loaded onto laptop computers, so that ideas
could be immediately recorded and preserved.

The group agreed to derive the curriculum nucleus
collectively, starting with a shared understanding of the environment. They
were committed to the ideas of inferring curriculum concepts and professional
abilities, proposing curriculum possibilities, and deducing curriculum
limitations. There was consensus to dismiss identification of administrative
issues, since “we already know what the issues are: not enough faculty and
not enough money in the budget.

Examining and Integrating Contextual Data: During the course
of discussion about contextual data, the faculty tried to focus on the meaning
of the data, and the inter-relationships among the contextual factors. They
also addressed curriculum concepts, professional abilities, and curriculum
possibilities without labeling these ideas as such, discussing ideas about how:

the presence of more aged people leads to a greater demand
for health care, which increases the requirement for health care professionals

the growing RN shortage could increase public demand for
more seats in nursing programs, and this in turn would necessitate more
resources for the School, including human resources

RN shortages could lead to more care by nonprofessionals,
increasing delegation and supervision by RNs. The RN shortage might result in
specialization by all RNs or de-professionalization of nursing

student skills in information technology could be developed
when they had limited expertise

professional standards for nursing practice, accreditation
standards, and the availability of clinical placements in and near Poplarfield
could be reconciled

local health problems can be addressed, in a society and
health care system which are focused on problems of national scope, such as
cancer

nursing priorities and mandates must be explicated for a
society with a growing proportion of elderly people and a health care system
where acute care stays are shortened and out-of-hospital care is increased

The group also talked in detail about some specific data,
and how to interpret it.

In trying to reach a shared understanding of the context in
which the curriculum would be implemented and graduates will practice nursing,
several integrated summaries were offered. Each resulted in some disagreement.
Finally, at the end of the morning, the group agreed that the environment could
be described as one in which:

there will be less institutionalized health care and growing
emphasis on community-based care

independent decision-making and supervision of
non-professional health care providers will become a stronger feature of nursing
practice

vulnerable groups in the community may grow in size

the proportion of aged people in the community will
increase, while young people will likely continue to leave the Poplarfield area

ethnic diversity will become more apparent

agriculture will continue to be a significant contributor to
the Poplarfield economy

In the afternoon, discussion progressed to identification of
the factors that should be most influential in shaping the curriculum.
Initially, there was a strong sentiment that all contextual factors were of
equal weight, apart from the internal factors of History; Philosophy, Mission,
and Goals; and Culture, all of which seemed less important. The consultant
agreed that the factors are highly inter-connected and that the division of the
data into these factors is somewhat artificial. Yet, she reminded faculty that
there must be some basis for identifying the key curriculum influences, and
thus for determining the curriculum nucleus.

The group then considered whether it was the recipients of nursing
services (Demographics), the nature of nursing (Professional Standards and
Trends), or the location and nature of health care (Health Care) that was most
important. Faculty phrased this as who, what, where, and how. Finally, they
agreed that most important were the people being served, and therefore,
Demographics and External Culture would be most significant in determining the
curriculum nucleus. History was immediately labeled as being of least
importance. After further discussion, faculty members concurred about the
rank-ordering of contextual factors:

Demographics; External Culture

Health Care; Professional Standards and Trends;
Infrastructure

Socio-politico-economics

Technology

Environment; Philosophy, Mission, and Goals of the
University and School of Nursing; Internal Culture; History

Inferring Curriculum Concepts and Professional Abilities,
Proposing Curriculum Possibilities, and Deducing Curriculum Limitations

The stakeholders wanted to complete this intellectual work
together, in the belief that it was necessary for all to participate in every
aspect. Ideas were recorded on charts, which had previously been loaded onto
laptop computers.

It became apparent that one more day would be insufficient
to complete this effort, if the group continued in the same way. The consultant
suggested that the contextual factors might be divided among smaller faculty
groups to complete the formulation of ideas about curriculum concepts,
professional abilities, curriculum possibilities, and curriculum limitations.
The group agreed to think about this proposal.

The next morning a member of the Advisory Committee proposed
that dividing into small groups would expedite the curriculum work. There was
now consensus about this. Three smaller groups were formed and each took
responsibility for some of the internal and external factors.

In reviewing the contextual data, members recognized that
curriculum concepts, professional abilities, and curriculum possibilities and
limitations did not necessarily arise from each internal factor. However, they
noted that the data about some of the factors could ultimately influence
decisions about curriculum, either limiting or propelling the curriculum
design. For example, when examining the School’s infrastructure, they
recognized that the existence of computer labs for students meant that
computer-mediated learning was a possibility, whereas the School budget and
faculty numbers could constrain the curriculum. Accordingly, they reaffirmed
their intention to identify the curriculum possibilities and limitations as
they examined each contextual factor. As the groups worked, they recognized
again that the contextual factors do not operate in isolation and that their
ideas reflected the inter-related nature of the internal and external context.
The ideas arising from the internal and external contextual data were recorded.

Identifying Administrative Issues : As they continued,
faculty quickly recognized that there were administrative issues beyond faculty
numbers and budget. Accordingly, the groups considered and recorded the
administrative issues. They also recognized that Financial Resources was an
important contextual factor.

At the end of their two days together, the participants felt
proud of their efforts. All were eager to proceed with synthesis of the
completed work, and the determination of the curriculum nucleus. See Table 7.1
for analysis of the external contextual factor of Demographics. Table 7.3
presents the internal factors of Financial Resources and Infrastructure. Table
7.4 outlines the analysis of the external factors of Culture, Health Care, and
Professional Standards and Trends. (Tables 7.3 and 7.4 follow the case
description).

Resources were not available for an additional retreat day.
Therefore, the group agreed:

to distribute hard copies of the analysis of the contextual
factors, so all could individually review the work that had been completed by
all groups

to use a regularly-scheduled faculty meeting to collectively
review the work and add ideas that might have been omitted

to reorganize individual schedules so they could meet from
3-7 PM twice in the next 2 weeks to determine the curriculum nucleus

that Dr. Werstiuk and the Dean would meet to discuss the
identified administrative issues, and plan further discussion with senior
administrators, if necessary.

There was consensus that Professor Rose, Chair of the
Curriculum Committee, would lead the discussions. As well, members were
enthusiastic about the possibility of adding ideas to the work of other groups.
Professor Rose asked that all try to ground their thinking in the work to date
and, as much as possible, to look beyond personal beliefs.

The subsequent meetings were lively, and at times, tense.
Review of curriculum concepts, professional abilities, curriculum possibilities
and limitations, and administrative issues went quickly, with some additional
ideas offered. There was a sense of accomplishment at the end of the first
meeting, and impatience to get on with the definition of the curriculum
nucleus.

Determining Curriculum Nucleus : At the first 4-hour
meeting, there was consensus that synthesis of curriculum concepts,
professional abilities, and curriculum possibilities should be completed
collectively. Some important curriculum concepts were: aging; health promotion;
nursing care of people at home, in the community, and institutions; and
nurse-client relationships.

Professor Rose reminded them of the weighting they had
assigned to the contextual factors, noting that they had not attended to all
the factors they had weighted as second in importance. With this, the group
returned to Health Care, agreeing that the curriculum should address local
health problems as well as national ones. In considering Professional Standards
and Trends, faculty confirmed that a strong emphasis on health promotion was
warranted, and agreed that illness intervention must be included. One member
noted that rural health was an important concept that had been omitted, and
there was immediate agreement to include it. Synthesis and further discussion
of the curriculum concepts led to the conclusion that the core curriculum
concepts would be: health, aging; health promotion, illness intervention,
context, and nurse-client relationships.

In synthesizing curriculum possibilities, the group decided
that the principal teaching-learning processes would be self-direction,
collaborative learning, and use of information technologies. Synthesis of the
professional abilities led to the conclusion that the key professional
abilities would be would be: critical thinking, clinical reasoning, independent
and collaborative decision-making, cultural competence, and life-long learning.

The group recognized that acceptance of these ideas would
require resolution of administrative issues related to human, physical, and
financial resources, along with faculty development. Dr. Werstiuk reaffirmed
her commitment to work toward resolution of these matters.

The group then turned to a review of the philosophical
approaches. These had been proposed by a faculty sub-group and had been
tentatively accepted, pending further refinement of the narrative. The
philosophical approaches included beliefs about nursing’s role in society,
social justice, caring, and the nature of the nurse-client relationship, and
faculty members’ and students’ responsibility in the curriculum. They
considered the fit between the philosophical beliefs and the concepts,
abilities, and teaching-learning approaches that had been identified.

The group confirmed the curriculum nucleus to be comprised
of the following:

core curriculum concepts: health, aging; health promotion,
illness intervention, context, nurse-client relationships, social justice, and
caring (the latter two from the philosophical approaches)

key professional abilities: critical thinking, clinical
reasoning, independent and collaborative decision-making, cultural competence,
and life-long learning

principal teaching-learning approaches: self-direction,
collaborative learning, and use of information technologies

philosophical approaches: social justice, caring, humanism,
phenomenology

The group felt satisfied with the curriculum nucleus and
confirmed they could support these ideas as the basis for subsequent curriculum
development. Dr. Werstiuk and Professor Rose congratulated the participants for
their hard work, creativity in reconciling varying perspectives, and
intellectual courage in envisioning a curriculum that would require
considerable change and learning by each member. All were proud of themselves
individually and collectively, and anxious to begin the intensive planning that
would bring their ideas to fruition.

Please review T