Strategies for Academic Portfolios Discussion

Strategies for Academic Portfolios Discussion

Strategies for Academic Portfolios Discussion

ORDER NOW FOR AN EXCELLENT PAPER FROM HEALTH CARE PAPER GURUS: Strategies for Academic Portfolios Discussion

Question Description
I’m studying for my Nursing class and don’t understand how to answer this. Can you help me study?

APA Format

2 Paragraphs

5-6 Sentences each Paragraph

3 References

Discussion: Strategies for Academic Portfolios
In the realm of marketing, a successful branding strategy is one of the most important contributors to organizational success. A solid branding strategy can help add visibility and credibility to a company’s products.

Similarly, nurse-scholars can build a personal brand to add visibility and credibility to their work. You can begin building your brand by developing and maintaining an academic portfolio. Such an activity can help share the results of your efforts and contribute to your success. This Module’s Discussion asks you to consider and share strategies for building your portfolio.

To Prepare:

Reflect on strategies that you can pursue in developing portfolios or portfolio elements that focus on academic achievements.
Review one or more samples from your own research of resources focused on portfolio development.

Learning Resources
Note: To access this week’s required library resources, please click on the link to the Course Readings List, found in the Course Materials section of your Syllabus.
REQUIRED READINGS
Burns, M. K. (2018). Creating a nursing portfolio. Ohio Nurses Review, 93(3), 16–17.
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
Casey, D. & Egan, D. (2013). The use of professional portfolios for career enhancement. British Journal of Nursing, 15(11), 547–552. doi:10.12968/bjcn.2010.15.11.79625
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
East, R. (2015). Developing a nurse practitioner portfolio. ACORN: The Journal of Perioperative Nursing in Australia, 28(4), 35.
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
Hannans, J. & Olivo, Y. (2017). Craft a positive nursing digital identity with an ePortfolio. American Nurse Today, 12(11), 48–49. Retrieved November 14, 2018, from https://www.americannursetoday.com/wp-content/uplo…
Leahy, R., & Filiatrault, A. (2017). Employers’ perceptions of the benefits of employment electronic portfolios. International Journal of ePortfolio, 7(2), 217–223.
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
McMillan, L. R., Parker, F., & Sport, A. (2014). Decisions, decisions! E-portfolio as an effective hiring assessment tool. Nursing Management, 45em>(4), 52–54.
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
Walden University. (n.d.). Walden University catalog. Retrieved October 4, 2019, from https://catalog.waldenu.edu
Select College of Health Sciences, then Master of Science in Nursing (MSN). Review the MSN Learning Outcomes on this page.
Walden University Writing Center. (n.d.). Walden templates: Overview. Retrieved from https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/t…
Note: Download and review the College of Nursing Template by navigating to “Program-Specific Templates” and then “College of Nursing,” and selecting “College of Nursing Writing Template With Instructions.”
APA Basics Checklist: Citations, Reference List, and Style (PDF)
Academic Success and Professional Development Plan Template (Word document)

Rubric Detail
Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.

Name: NURS_6003_Module05_Week08_Discussion_Rubric

Grid View
List View
Excellent Good Fair Poor
Main Posting
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.
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.
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.
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
10 (10%) – 10 (10%)

Posts main post by day 3.

0 (0%) – 0 (0%)

0 (0%) – 0 (0%)

0 (0%) – 0 (0%)

Does not post by day 3.

First Response
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days.

0 (0%) – 0 (0%)

0 (0%) – 0 (0%)

0 (0%) – 0 (0%)

Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days.

Total Points: 100
Name: NURS_6003_Module05_Week08_Discussion_Rubric

Strategies for Academic Portfolios Discussion

Strategies for Academic Portfolios Discussion

You must proofread your paper. But do not strictly rely on your computer’s spell-checker and grammar-checker; failure to do so indicates a lack of effort on your part and you can expect your grade to suffer accordingly. Papers with numerous misspelled words and grammatical mistakes will be penalized. Read over your paper – in silence and then aloud – before handing it in and make corrections as necessary. Often it is advantageous to have a friend proofread your paper for obvious errors. Handwritten corrections are preferable to uncorrected mistakes.

Use a standard 10 to 12 point (10 to 12 characters per inch) typeface. Smaller or compressed type and papers with small margins or single-spacing are hard to read. It is better to let your essay run over the recommended number of pages than to try to compress it into fewer pages.

Likewise, large type, large margins, large indentations, triple-spacing, increased leading (space between lines), increased kerning (space between letters), and any other such attempts at “padding” to increase the length of a paper are unacceptable, wasteful of trees, and will not fool your professor.

The paper must be neatly formatted, double-spaced with a one-inch margin on the top, bottom, and sides of each page. When submitting hard copy, be sure to use white paper and print out using dark ink. If it is hard to read your essay, it will also be hard to follow your argument.

ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE CLASS

Discussion Questions (DQ)

Initial responses to the DQ should address all components of the questions asked, include a minimum of one scholarly source, and be at least 250 words.
Successful responses are substantive (i.e., add something new to the discussion, engage others in the discussion, well-developed idea) and include at least one scholarly source.
One or two sentence responses, simple statements of agreement or “good post,” and responses that are off-topic will not count as substantive. Substantive responses should be at least 150 words.
I encourage you to incorporate the readings from the week (as applicable) into your responses.
Weekly Participation

Your initial responses to the mandatory DQ do not count toward participation and are graded separately.
In addition to the DQ responses, you must post at least one reply to peers (or me) on three separate days, for a total of three replies.
Participation posts do not require a scholarly source/citation (unless you cite someone else’s work).
Part of your weekly participation includes viewing the weekly announcement and attesting to watching it in the comments. These announcements are made to ensure you understand everything that is due during the week.
APA Format and Writing Quality

Familiarize yourself with APA format and practice using it correctly. It is used for most writing assignments for your degree. Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in LoudCloud for APA paper templates, citation examples, tips, etc. Points will be deducted for poor use of APA format or absence of APA format (if required).
Cite all sources of information! When in doubt, cite the source. Paraphrasing also requires a citation.
I highly recommend using the APA Publication Manual, 6th edition.
Use of Direct Quotes

I discourage overutilization of direct quotes in DQs and assignments at the Masters’ level and deduct points accordingly.
As Masters’ level students, it is important that you be able to critically analyze and interpret information from journal articles and other resources. Simply restating someone else’s words does not demonstrate an understanding of the content or critical analysis of the content.
It is best to paraphrase content and cite your source.
LopesWrite Policy

For assignments that need to be submitted to LopesWrite, please be sure you have received your report and Similarity Index (SI) percentage BEFORE you do a “final submit” to me.
Once you have received your report, please review it. This report will show you grammatical, punctuation, and spelling errors that can easily be fixed. Take the extra few minutes to review instead of getting counted off for these mistakes.
Review your similarities. Did you forget to cite something? Did you not paraphrase well enough? Is your paper made up of someone else’s thoughts more than your own?
Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in LoudCloud for tips on improving your paper and SI score.
Late Policy

The university’s policy on late assignments is 10% penalty PER DAY LATE. This also applies to late DQ replies.
Please communicate with me if you anticipate having to submit an assignment late. I am happy to be flexible, with advance notice. We may be able to work out an extension based on extenuating circumstances.
If you do not communicate with me before submitting an assignment late, the GCU late policy will be in effect.
I do not accept assignments that are two or more weeks late unless we have worked out an extension.
As per policy, no assignments are accepted after the last day of class. Any assignment submitted after midnight on the last day of class will not be accepted for grading.
Communication

Communication is so very important. There are multiple ways to communicate with me:
Questions to Instructor Forum: This is a great place to ask course content or assignment questions. If you have a question, there is a good chance one of your peers does as well. This is a public forum for the class.
Individual Forum: This is a private forum to ask me questions or send me messages. This will be checked at least once every 24 hours.

NURS_6003_Module05_Week08_Discussion_Rubric

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