NURS600 Assignment 8.1 Theory Project Project Evaluation

• NURS600 Assignment 8.1 Theory Project Evaluation

Evaluation of Student 1: Hildegard

Hildegard successfully presented key aspects of Peplau’s theory of interpersonal relations, meeting most rubric requirements. Her title slide provided a clear overview, and her introduction comprehensively set the stage for the theorist’s background (2 points). The inclusion of biographical details and Peplau’s influence on nursing highlighted her understanding of the theorist’s contributions (3 points). Hildegard’s alignment of Peplau’s theory with her professional goals demonstrated personal interest and insight into the content (3 points).

Explore NURS600 Assignment 7.2 Theory Project Post-Theory Presentation on Kaltura for more information.

Phases and Roles in Peplau’s Theory

Hildegard explained each phase of Peplau’s theory and the roles of nurses in detail, showcasing a strong grasp of the framework (4 points). Her critique of the theory’s relevance to nursing practice and healthcare effectively tied theoretical principles to real-world applications (4 points). Specific clinical examples and the identification of necessary skills further enhanced the presentation’s practical value (4 points).

Strengths and Areas for Improvement

The infographic on relationships, a core aspect of Peplau’s theory, was particularly engaging. However, the discussion on health equity and disparities could have been more in-depth (2 points). The critique of Peplau’s theory was organized and evaluated clarity, completeness, and accessibility, alongside its strengths and limitations (3 points). The conclusion reinforced key points, emphasizing the importance of Peplau’s theory in nursing practice. While references were included, they did not fully adhere to APA formatting, slightly reducing the presentation’s professionalism (2 points).

Final Assessment

Hildegard demonstrated a comprehensive understanding of Peplau’s theory, effectively communicating its significance in nursing practice. Her presentation was clear, professional, and well-structured, earning a total of 43 out of 50 points for NURS600 Assignment 8.1.

Evaluation of Student 2: Brittany Brusven

Brittany Brusven delivered a well-rounded presentation that effectively addressed all rubric aspects. Her title slide was concise, and the introduction clearly outlined the presentation’s purpose (2 points). Biographical details of the theorist were included, providing a glimpse into their life and professional contributions (2 points). Brittany’s choice of Good’s theory was logical, aligning with her personal and professional interests (3 points).

Explanation of Good’s Theory

Brittany concisely and comprehensively explained Good’s theory, including its propositions and goals (3 points). Her understanding of the theory’s mid-range framework was evident through a clear explanation of its applicability to nursing perspectives (3 points). She connected theory to practice by presenting three points of consideration, demonstrating how Good’s principles align with nursing interventions (3 points).

Strengths and Practical Examples

The presentation included relevant examples, such as the application of Good’s theory in clinical contexts, enhancing its practical relevance (3 points). The use of infographics made the material more engaging and accessible (2 points). Brittany’s critique of the theory was logical, addressing its implications and applicability (3 points). She also explored the connections between Good’s theory and Janice Morse’s theory on suffering, effectively linking the two concepts (3 points).

Final Assessment

Brittany presented a thorough discussion of Good’s theory, demonstrating its utility in nursing practice. While citations were included, stricter adherence to APA formatting would have improved professionalism (2 points). Her presentation earned 42 out of 50 points for NURS600 Assignment 8.1.

Evaluation of Student 3: Sharon Zipporah Champion

Sharon Zipporah Champion’s presentation on Nola J. Pender’s Health Promotion Model (HPM) was detailed and engaging. The title slide provided a brief but effective introduction, and the biographical overview covered Pender’s achievements and contributions comprehensively (3 points). Sharon clearly articulated the reasons for choosing Pender’s model, connecting it to her professional aspirations (3 points).

Explanation of HPM

Sharon thoroughly explained the key concepts, propositions, and goals of HPM, demonstrating her understanding of the model (4 points). She situated the theory within a mid-range framework, emphasizing shared processes between individuals and their environments (3 points). Her analysis of the theory’s assumptions and rationale was clear and insightful, discussing benefits like its patient-oriented focus and drawbacks such as challenges in quantifying abstract notions (3 points).

Practical Application and Contributions to Nursing

Sharon’s examples of HPM’s real-world application were practical and relatable, effectively illustrating the model’s relevance (3 points). She also explored how critical race theory could integrate with Pender’s model, demonstrating an understanding of interdisciplinary connections (3 points). Her discussion of the model’s contributions to nursing practice was thorough, highlighting its widespread use and relevance in different countries (4 points).

Final Assessment

Sharon’s presentation was well-organized, comprehensive, and insightful. While references were provided, stricter adherence to APA formatting would have enhanced the presentation’s professionalism (2 points). Her work earned a total of 44 out of 50 points for NURS600 Assignment 8.1.

References

Godsey, J. A., Houghton, D. M., & Hayes, T. (2020). Registered nurse perceptions of factors contributing to the inconsistent brand image of the nursing profession. Nursing Outlook, 68(6), 808–821. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.outlook.2020.06.005

Hak, F., Guimarães, T., & Santos, M. (2022). Towards effective clinical decision support systems: A systematic review. PLOS ONE, 17(8).
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0272846

Hartweg, D. L., & Metcalfe, S. A. (2022). Orem’s self-care deficit nursing theory: Relevance and need for refinement. Nursing Science Quarterly, 35(1), 70–76.
https://doi.org/10.1177/08943184211051369

Im, E.-O. (2021). The status quo of situation-specific theories. Springer EBooks, 303–322. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-63223-6_21

Karataş, T., & Polat, Ü. (2020). Effect of nurse-led program on the exercise behavior of coronary artery patients: Pender’s health promotion model. Patient Education and Counseling, 104(5). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2020.10.003

Niyi Jacob Ogunode, Kingsley Edinoh, & Tope Gloria Olatunde-Aiyedun. (2023). Staff training in schools. Journal of Innovation in Education and Social Research, 1(3), 192–207. https://journals.proindex.uz/index.php/jiesr/article/view/232

Raaijmakers, L. H. A., Schermer, T. R., Wijnen, M., van Bommel, H. E., Michielsen, L., Boone, F., Vercoulen, J. H., & Bischoff, E. W. M. A. (2023). Development of a person-centred integrated care approach for chronic disease management in Dutch primary care: A mixed-method study. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 20(5), 3824. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20053824

Sharma, M. C., & Kalia, R. (2021). Testing Katharine Kolcaba theory of comfort. Journal of Pediatric Surgical Nursing, Publish Ahead of Print(4).
https://doi.org/10.1097/jps.0000000000000320

Wakibi, S., Ferguson, L., Berry, L., Leidl, D., & Belton, S. (2020). Teaching evidence-based nursing practice: A systematic review and convergent qualitative synthesis. Journal of Professional Nursing, 37(1).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.profnurs.2020.06.005