Use The Allegory of the Orchard ?to discuss how the political determinants of health negatively impact the health outcomes of a group of patients
Post a response detailing the following:
Use The Allegory of the Orchard to discuss how the political determinants of health negatively impact the health outcomes of a group of patients for whom you care. Why are you, as a nurse, the right person to become politically involved in addressing these determinants?
-
AdvocacyArea.docx
Advocacy Area
In the first two Discussions, you identified a vulnerable or marginalized population for whom you can determine an issue that could be addressed through engaging in policy advocacy. Now it is time to present this advocacy area with evidence to support and defend your selection.
For this Assignment, you will explain and defend your selected advocacy issue. Using evidence and experience, you will determine the advocacy issue most important to your practice and organization. Why are you selecting this issue? Why is this an area of high need? How might this area be improved with policy? What can you do to advocate for this area of need?
Resources
Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity. Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.
WEEKLY RESOURCES
To Prepare
· Review resources associated with vulnerable or marginalized populations to determine an advocacy issue.
· Consider which advocacy issue you find most important, and why.
· Consider how policy might help to mitigate this need.
The Assignment: (1 page)
Select an issue you find most important, and then defend your position in a persuasive paper.
Submit a 1-page persuasive argument defending why you selected the advocacy issue to move forward with as your priority in this course.
Support—with evidence—why this advocacy issue is most important, and how it might be mitigated or eliminated through policy. Consider how this issue might set your policy agenda.
Reminder: The College of Nursing requires that all papers submitted include a title page, introduction, summary, and references. The Walden Writing Center Sample Paper provides an example of those required elements (available at https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/templates/general#s-lg-box-20293632Links to an external site. ). All papers submitted must use this formatting.
By Day 7 of Week 2
Submit your Assignment.
submission information
Before submitting your final assignment, you can check your draft for authenticity. To check your draft, access the Turnitin Drafts from the Start Here area.
1. To submit your completed assignment, save your Assignment as WK2Assgn_LastName_Firstinitial
2. Then, click on Start Assignment near the top of the page.
3. Next, click on Upload File and select Submit Assignment for review.
Rubric
NURS_8100_Week2_Assignment_Rubric
NURS_8100_Week2_Assignment_Rubric
|
Criteria |
Ratings |
Pts |
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSelect an advocacy area you find most important. |
40 to >35.0 ptsExcellentThe advocacy area selected is clearly appropriate to move forward throughout the course, as well as clearly appropriate for the identified marginalized or vulnerable population. 35 to >31.0 ptsGoodThe advocacy area selected is appropriate to move forward throughout the course, as well as appropriate for the identified marginalized or vulnerable population. 31 to >27.0 ptsFairThe advocacy area selected is vaguely appropriate to move forward throughout the course, as well as vaguely appropriate for the identified marginalized or vulnerable population. 27 to >0 ptsPoorThe advocacy area selected is not appropriate to move forward throughout the course, or it is missing. The advocacy area selected is not appropriate for the identified marginalized or vulnerable population, or it is missing. |
40 pts |
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDefend your position about the advocacy area selected. |
45 to >40.0 ptsExcellentThe response comprehensively and clearly defends the advocacy selection. The response is persuasive and includes relevant, specific, and appropriate examples that fully support the selection. 40 to >35.0 ptsGoodThe response clearly defends the advocacy selection. The response includes relevant, specific, and accurate examples that support the selection. 35 to >31.0 ptsFairThe response inaccurately or vaguely defends the advocacy selection. The response includes inaccurate and irrelevant examples that may support the selection. 31 to >0 ptsPoorThe response includes inaccurate and vague examples that do not defend the advocacy selection, or it is missing. The response includes inaccurate and vague examples that do not support reflection, or it is selection. |
45 pts |
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting—Paragraph Development and Organization: Paragraphs make clear points that support well-developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused—neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement and introduction is provided which delineates all required criteria. |
5 to >4.0 ptsExcellentParagraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion is provided which delineates all required criteria. 4 to >3.5 ptsGoodParagraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time. Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is stated, yet is brief and not descriptive. 3.5 to >3.0 ptsFairParagraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%–79% of the time. Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is vague or off topic. 3 to >0 ptsPoorParagraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time. No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion was provided. |
5 pts |
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting—English writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation are used. |
5 to >4.0 ptsExcellentUses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation, with no errors. 4 to >3.5 ptsGoodContains a few (1 or 2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. 3.5 to >3.0 ptsFairContains several (3 or 4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. 3 to >0 ptsPoorContains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding. |
5 pts |
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting: The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list. |
5 to >4.0 ptsExcellentUses correct APA format with no errors. 4 to >3.5 ptsGoodContains a few (1 or 2) APA format errors. 3.5 to >3.0 ptsFairContains several (3 or 4) APA format errors. 3 to >0 ptsPoorContains many (≥ 5) APA format errors. |
5 pts |
Total Points: 100
Dawes, Daniel E. (2020). The political determinants of health . Johns Hopkins University Press.
· Chapter 3, “The Political Determinants of Health Model” (pp. 41-77)
image3.png
image4.png
image2.png
image.png
The post Use The Allegory of the Orchard ?to discuss how the political determinants of health negatively impact the health outcomes of a group of patients first appeared on Nursing Worker.