Your task for this module’s SLP is to further discuss the plan identified in the case assignment. Please include the following: (Critical Thinking Skills Assignment)
Identify and clarify an ethical dilemma associated with the chosen topic of your course project.
Identify and discuss several alternatives and select one to address in your plan.
Explain the components in your hypothetical plan for resolving the problem by implementing the solution.
Present the plan in an outline and identify the roles of various participants in addressing the problem.
SLP Assignment Expectations
Length: This assignment should be between 2-3 pages (500-750 words) in length, excluding references.
References: At least two references should be included from academic sources (e.g. peer-reviewed journal articles).
Organization: Subheadings should be used to organize your paper
Format: APA format is recommended. While APA formatting of references is not a requirement, the references need to be presented in order using a standard citation style (APA, AMA, MLA etc). When material is copied verbatim from external sources, it MUST be enclosed in quotes. The references should be cited within the text and also listed at the end of the assignment in the References section. See Syllabus page for more information on APA format.
Grammar and Spelling: While no points are deducted, assignments are expected to adhere to standards guidelines of grammar, spelling, punctuation, and sentence syntax. Points may be deducted if grammar and spelling impact clarity.
Your paper will be evaluated based on the rubric criteria.
At the bottom of this page, there is a link to a critical thinking rubric. The rubric WILL BE USED to assess the quality of your paper and assign a grade for this assignment. Please review it carefully before you begin this assignment. Your paper will be graded on the following attributes: organization, contextual awareness, knowledge of conventions, and appropriate use of sources and evidence. The point value for each attribute and what you’ll need to do in order to earn the maximum possible points on this assignment can be found in the writing rubric.
The purpose of using this rubric is to assist you in strengthening your critical thinking skills. As you know, this is a skill set that’s essential for establishing a successful career. If you have any questions regarding the expectations as outlined in the rubric, please don’t hesitate to bring them to my attention.
Joseph F. Coates. (2004). The radical solution to rising health-care costs. Employment Relations Today, 31(2), 1-11.
Experts Suggest Solutions to the Healthcare Crisis. (1992). Management Review, 81(7), 20.
Robinson, F.. (2010). Tackling health inequalities. Practice Nurse, 39(5), 9-10
HealthReform.Gov. Retrieved 3/2/2013 from http://www.healthcare.gov/
Kristen Starnes-Ott, Michael J Kremer. (2007). Recruitment and retention of nurse anesthesia faculty: Issues and strategies. AANA Journal, 75(1), 13-6.
Critical Thinking Definition http://www.aacu.org/value/rubrics/pdf/CriticalThinking.pdf
Critical thinking is a habit of mind characterized by the comprehensive exploration of issues, ideas, artifacts, and events before accepting or formulating an opinion or conclusion. At TUI students demonstrate and exercise critical thinking skills in written papers presented in response to Case and Session Long Project assignments. Signature assignments are best characterized by those that require an argumentative essay approach to include problem identification, establishing a position on one or more issue surrounding the problem, and utilizing background readings and other information sources to develop a well-reasoned argument to support their position on the issue.
Critical Thinking Rubric
Student Performance Criteria
Coverage of issues
Demonstrate the ability to clearly and comprehensively describe the problem and issues addressed in the assignment.
Issue/problem to be considered critically is stated without clarification or description.1
Issue/problem to be considered critically is stated but description leaves some terms undefined, ambiguities unexplored, boundaries undetermined, and/or backgrounds unknown.
Issue/problem to be considered critically is stated, described, and clarified so that understanding is not seriously impeded by omissions.
Issue/problem to be considered critically is stated clearly and described comprehensively, delivering all relevant information necessary for full understanding.
Demonstrate the ability to discern between relevant and non-relevant information in concisely presenting information for full understanding of the issue or problem.
Information presented as relevant to the problem is not adequate. Some critical relevant information is omitted. Some irrelevant information is presented as relevant.
The information presented is relevant, and marginally adequate to support the argument. Some relevant information is omitted. No irrelevant information is presented as relevant.
The information presented is relevant, and fully adequate to support the argument. No irrelevant information is presented.
All relevant items of information are presented, and both the nature and degree of their relevance are clearly explained. If some information available to the reader is superficially relevant, but actually irrelevant, then the nature of its irrelevance is explained.
Selection & use of evidence
Demonstrate the ability to identify, select, analyze, evaluate and apply relevant background materials, to include expert opinion, in formulating and supporting well-reasoned arguments.
Information search is inadequate. Information is taken from background materials without any interpretation or evaluation. The viewpoints of experts are taken as fact, and not questioned.
An attempt is made to identify and evaluate relevant background materials. The information extracted from the background materials is discussed, but the discussion is not adequate to support a coherent analysis. The viewpoints of experts are mostly taken as fact, with little questioning.
All relevant background materials are identified. The information extracted from the materials is subjected to enough interpretation and evaluation to develop a coherent analysis or synthesis.
Viewpoints of experts are subject to questioning.
All relevant background materials are identified. The information is extracted from the materials is subjected to thorough interpretation and evaluation, supporting a coherent, convincing analysis or synthesis. Viewpoints of experts are thoroughly critiqued.
Analysis of Assumptions & Context
When presenting a position, demonstrate the ability to thoroughly analyze one’s own and others’ assumptions, and the contexts within which those assumptions arise.
When presenting a position, the student is aware of the importance of assumptions, but sometimes confuses assumptions with mere assertions. The student can identify some contextual elements which give rise to assumptions, such as environmental, social and temporal factors.
When presenting a position, the student questions some assumptions, and identifies several contextual elements relating to those assumptions. May be more aware of others’ assumptions than one’s own (or vice versa).
When presenting a position, Identifies and interrogates one’s own assumptions, as well as those of others. Discusses relevant contextual elements relating to those assumptions.
Thoroughly (systematically and methodically) analyzes own and others’ assumptions when presenting a position. Presents and prioritizes all the relevant contextual elements relevant to those assumptions.
Demonstrates imagination in developing a position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis), taking into account the complexities of an issue.
Specific position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis) is stated, but is simplistic and obvious. The complexities of the issue are mostly ignored.
Specific position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis) is indicative of some careful thought, and acknowledges some of the complexities of the issue.
Specific position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis demonstrates creativity. The complexities of the issue are fully elucidated.
The specific position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis) offered is imaginative, taking into account all the complexities of the issue. The position is novel and counter-intuitive.
Demonstrates the ability to synthesize others’ points of view within position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis) and to consider the limits of the position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis).
Others’ points of view are ignored in formulating the position. The limits of the position, to include its domain of applicability, are ignored.
Others’ points of view are acknowledged, but not analyzed with respect to the issue. The position’s domain of applicability is recognized as having limits, but those limits are not explored.
Others’ points of view that support the position are incorporated into the argument. Opposing points of view are either ignored or minimized. Some attempt is made to delimit the domain of the position.
Others’ points of view with respect to the position are acknowledged, and the extent to which they support or fail to support the position are clearly explained. If others’ points of view fail to support the position, those points of view are presented, analyzed and refuted. The domain of applicability is clearly delineated.
Demonstrates ability to logically formulate and present conclusions from that reflect student’s informed evaluation.
Conclusion is inconsistently tied to some of the information discussed; related outcomes (consequences and implications) are oversimplified.
Conclusion is logically tied to information, because information is chosen to fit the desired conclusion; some related outcomes (consequences and implications) are identified clearly.
Conclusion is logically tied to a range of information, including opposing viewpoints; related outcomes (consequences and implications) are identified clearly.
Conclusions and related outcomes (consequences and implications) are logical and reflect student’s informed evaluation and ability to place evidence and perspectives discussed in priority order.
(1) Text in red: Measures taken directly, or with slight modification, from the AACU critical thinking value rubric (http://www.aacu.org/value/rubrics/pdf/CriticalThinking.pdf). Draft objectives were based on these measures