Where can you look for evidence to support your ideas and scholarly writing? You will use research literature to explore ideas, guide your thinking, and gain new insights throughout your degree program.
It is critical to use peer-reviewed and scholarly journal resources when searching the research literature. You may have some favorite online resources and databases that you use or have found useful in the past. For this Discussion, you explore databases available through the Walden Library.
Get help with your discussion assignment from qualified tutors online. We have top nursing tutors ready to do your discussion and deliver accurate answers fast. Below are sample discussion questions we have answered accurately; place your order to get answers.
By Day 3 of Week 6
Post the following:
Using proper APA formatting, cite the peer-reviewed article you selected that pertains to your practice area and is of particular interest to you and identify the database that you used to search for the article. Explain any difficulties you experienced while searching for this article. Would this database be useful to your colleagues? Explain why or why not. Would you recommend this database? Explain why or why not. NURS 6003 Discussion: Using the Walden Library
By Day 6 of Week 6
Respond to at least two of your colleagues’ posts by offering suggestions/strategies for working with this database from your own experience, or offering ideas for using alternative resources.
Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: Discussion: Using the Walden Library NURS 6003
Using the Walden Library
Hello everyone and Welcome to your Week 4 discussion. Maintain your perseverance as you have only three (3) weeks remaining in the course.
Where can you find evidence to inform your thoughts and scholarly writing? Throughout your degree program, you will use research literature to explore ideas, guide your thinking, and gain new insights. As you search the research literature, it is important to use resources that are peer-reviewed and from scholarly journals. You may already have some favorite online resources and databases that you use or have found useful in the past. For this Discussion, you explore databases available through the Walden Library.
To Prepare:
- Review the information presented in the Resources for using the Walden Library, searching the databases, and evaluating online resources.
- Begin searching for a peer-reviewed article that pertains to your practice area and is of particular interest to you.
Main Post due by Day 3 February 3, 2021 by 11:59pm MT
Post the following for your Main Post:
Using proper APA formatting, cite the peer-reviewed article you selected that pertains to your practice area and is of particular interest to you and identify the database that you used to search for the article. Explain any difficulties you experienced while searching for this article. Would this database be useful to your colleagues? Explain why or why not. Would you recommend this database? Explain why or why not
| Support main post with 3 of more current, credible sources and cite source within content of posting and on a reference list in proper APA. |
Both Peer Responses are due by Day 6 Day 6 February 6, 2021 by 11:59pm MT
In your Peer Responses: Respond to at least two of your colleagues’ posts by offering suggestions/strategies for working with this database from your own experience, or offering ideas for use of alternative resources.
| Be sure to offer support from at least 2 current, credible sources in each required response to classmates’ main post and cite per APA. |
Click on the Reply button below to reveal the textbox for entering your message. Then click on the Submit button to post your message.
======================================================================
Important Discussion Information
As you continue to focus on the discussion topic and interacting with your peers, I will continue post to additional information that will benefit you now and especially in your future courses. During your Week 4 discussion I will again share as many links/tips with you that were covered during the preceding discussions. I encourage you to review my post to everyone so as to collect as much information as you wish.
Reminders:
FULLY REVIEW COURSE ANNOUNCEMNTS #7 AND #8.
Attachments:
Attachments will not be scored. This has been posted within prior announcements. Why are attachments not allowed? Due to the ever-evolving nature of computer viruses – your computer could be infected without you being aware, your attached submission be infected then transmitted via anyone else opening your attachment on their personal computer.
Cite your sources:
So, what exactly is Dr Gatlin expecting me to do regarding citations and the listing of references cited within the written work? Per the Discussion Grading Rubric concerning source utilization Dr Gatlin will evaluate for:
Main Post: Three (3) sources listed with each of those sources cited in the written work per APA format as indicated within the Discussion exemplar within your course resources. (This has been available to you the entire term)
Peer Responses: Two (2) sources listed with each of those sources cited in the written work per APA format.
*Concerning source utilization, in short – do not list a source and not cite it within the written work; nor cite a source without including it within your reference list. This action cost you valuable points as the discussion post point value is weighted as indicated within the rubric.
Label your Discussion post:
Label your Discussion Post = Main Post, Peer Response #1, Peer Response #2
Unlabeled Post leaves the Instructor with no choice but to grade the post as they are dated. This unfortunately can result in a tremendous value of points being deducted. Label your Discussion Post. Only post Identified per the above labeling will be scored!
Unlabeled Discussion Post will be scored in the order completed beginning with Main Post followed by Peer Response 1 then Peer Response 2.
Technical Issues:
If you experience technical issues while working with your Walden Template or issues with SafeAssign or submitting your assignment in BlackBoard – please contact the Walden Customer Care Team
Plagiarism Reminder – I will pick two different discussions from each student to submit via SafeAssign. However, if I detect any suspicious activity, as mentioned in the course announcement addressing plagiarism – I will explore further and will submit it also to SafeAssign.
As a reminder, at some point during the course, I will submit two (2) of your discussion posts to SafeAssign for plagiarism evaluation.
As a nurse and clinic manager in a neurosurgery clinic, we see a variety of issues relating to neurological conditions. Recently we have seen an increase in post-operative surgical site infections (SSI’s), especially in the first 30-day post-operative period. Because of this, I have found an interest in looking into research pertaining to issues related to SSI’s and how to better prevent them and early identification and interventions. The Walden Library made the research of this interest much easier to identify reliable evidence-based research to implement into practice. Other reliable sources such as Pub Med, NCBI, and EBSCO are also able to easily produce resources. I find that these databases, including the Walden Library are crucial to continuing education and pursuing an MSN.
NURS_6003_Module03_Week04_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 | |||||
