Category: Nursing

  • [Solved] Week 1dis

    ✓ Verified Academic Solution Available

    Executive Solution Overview

    **General Instructions** This week, you will identify a quality or safety issue pertinent to your future advanced nursing practice role. **Include the following sections**: 1. **Application of Course Knowledge**: Answer all questions/criteria with explanations and detail. – Identify ONE client-focus…

    Instant Solution Download

    $6.99

    Immediate access to the full model answer, formatted citations, and rubric breakdown.

    Need a Fresh Custom Paper?

    Have this question answered from scratch according to your specific instructions and deadline.

    Order on TutorsGallery →

    Assignment Prompt & Instructions

    **General Instructions**
    This week, you will identify a quality or safety issue pertinent to your future advanced nursing practice role.
    **Include the following sections**:
    1. **Application of Course Knowledge**: Answer all questions/criteria with explanations and detail.
    – Identify ONE client-focused quality or safety issue that may be pertinent to your **future** advanced nursing practice role. Medication error may NOT be used as a topic for this assignment.
    – Describe the scope and impact of the issue.
    – Discuss three possible roles advanced practice nurses may play in addressing the issue.
    – Explain why the issue is of interest to your future role

  • [Solved] EBP, IS, AND QI

    ✓ Verified Academic Solution Available

    Executive Solution Overview

    ## USE THE ATTACHED AS GUIDELINE – ## powerpointtwmplatewk6.pptx – ## Iwk6mplementation_Science_as_a_Le.pdf – ## wk6Implementation_Science_as_a_Le.pdf – wk6assignmetEBP.docx – templatewk6SON_Writing_Template_with_Instructions_.docx – wk6A-student-nurse-in-the-MICU–Leveraging-unexpected…

    Instant Solution Download

    $6.99

    Immediate access to the full model answer, formatted citations, and rubric breakdown.

    Need a Fresh Custom Paper?

    Have this question answered from scratch according to your specific instructions and deadline.

    Order on TutorsGallery →

    Assignment Prompt & Instructions

    ## USE THE ATTACHED AS GUIDELINE

    – ## powerpointtwmplatewk6.pptx

    – ## Iwk6mplementation_Science_as_a_Le.pdf

    – ## wk6Implementation_Science_as_a_Le.pdf

    – wk6assignmetEBP.docx
    – templatewk6SON_Writing_Template_with_Instructions_.docx
    – wk6A-student-nurse-in-the-MICU–Leveraging-unexpected-leadership_2020_Nursing-O.pdf
    – wk6rubrics.docx
    – wk6An-integrated-model-of-multimorbidity-and-symptom-scienc_2020_Nursing-Outloo.pdf
    – wk6A-mapping-review-of-clinical-nurse-leader-and-nurse-educator-t_2020_Nursing-.pdf

    **## powerpointtwmplatewk6.pptx**

    ## image2.jpg

    ## image11.jpg

    ## image18.jpg

    ## image19.jpg

    ## image21.jpg

    ## image22.jpg

    ## image23.jpg

    ## image24.jpg

    **## Iwk6mplementation_Science_as_a_Le.pdf**

    491The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing · Vol 50, No 11, 2019

    leadership and development

    In a recent conversation with a col-
    league who interviewed individu-
    als for a leadership position, she

    noted that each candidate described
    their leadership style as transforma-
    tional. When asked to give an example
    of a transformation they had led—
    and its impact at the organizational
    level—few could cite a substantive
    transformational change at an organi-
    zational level. My colleague lamented
    that many see themselves as transfor-
    mative leaders, but few actually are. Is
    the ability to actually move an orga-
    nization in the direction of a desired
    change—given its culture, people
    with diverse backgrounds and educa-
    tional levels, and other complexities—

    far more rare than commonplace?
    Yet, health care organizations need
    to respond to change more than ever,
    making implementation science—the
    science of change—a requisite compe-
    tency.

    Dr. Dean Fixsen (2019), articu-
    lated three developmental levels on
    the journey to implementation sci-
    ence. The first level, letting it happen
    (change) aligns with the diffusion the-
    ory of change popularized by Everett
    Rogers who studied how innovations
    (change) spread through an organi-
    zation, simplified here by describing
    change as a domino effect. Fixsen
    described the second level as helping
    it (change) happen, equated with dis-
    semination science. Professional de-
    velopment educators know the power
    of education in advancing change,
    such that when groups are armed with
    education on a topic, an added stimu-
    lus to change occurs. Yet, education—
    as essential as it is as a stimulus for
    change—does not always equate to
    behavioral modification, individually
    or collectively. This leads to the third
    level of change mastery and imple-
    mentation science. Implementation
    science is necessary because it is the
    science of making nonoptional things
    happen. Leaders must guide organi-
    zational change, ensuring compliance
    and uniformity of actions, safeguard-

    ing the quality and safety of patients,
    and managing resources.

    IMPLEMENTATION
    SCIENCE DEFINED

    Bauer, Damschroder, Hagendorn,
    Smith, and Kilbourne (2015) offered
    a useful and concise definition of im-
    plementation science. They defined
    implementation science as “the sci-
    entific study of methods to promote
    the systematic uptake of research find-
    ings and other EBPs [evidence-based
    practices] into routine practice, and,
    hence, it improves the quality and ef-
    fectiveness of health services” (p. 1). In
    the definition are salient key points—
    namely, that leaders should use evi-
    dence and research when available to
    drive change. A second point is that
    the leader/change agent should make
    the client group (those affected by
    the expected change) keenly aware of
    what is at stake with regard to quality
    and effectiveness. The third point is
    that there is a science to implementa-
    tion. The science comprises methods
    to drive the systematic uptake of re-
    search and evidence-based practices in
    practice settings, one of the outcomes
    now associated with the Doctor of
    Nursing Practice degree and an expec-
    tation of leaders in all clinical settings.

    Implementation science drives
    nonoptional change, standardizes
    high-risk and high-stakes clinical in-
    terventions, and advances innovations
    within an organization. The science
    itself addresses the knowledge gap
    that exists between interventions that
    research has shown to be effective and
    its translation into practice in varying
    clinical settings. Increasingly, inter-

    abstract
    Leaders must distinguish be-

    tween diffusion as a change strat-
    egy, education as a stimulus for
    change, and implementation strat-
    egies associated with implementa-
    tion science. This article provides an
    operational definition for implemen-
    tation science, the distinguishing
    characteristics in leading transfor-
    mational change, and the degrees
    of implementation. [J Contin Educ
    Nurs. 2019;50(11):491-492.]

    Dr. Bleich is Senior Professor and Director, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Nursing,
    Langston Center for Innovation in Quality and Safety, and President and Chief Executive Officer,
    NursDynamics, Ballwin, Missouri.

    The author has disclosed no potential conflicts of interest, financial or otherwise.
    Address correspondence to Michael R. Bleich, PhD, RN, NEA-BC, FNAP, FAAN, Senior Professor

    and Director, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Nursing, Langston Center for Innovation
    in Quality and Safety, and President and Chief Executive Officer, NursDynamics, 221 Jasmin Park
    Court, Ballwin, MO 63021; e-mail: mbleich350@gmail.com.

    doi:10.3928/00220124-20191015-03

    Implementation Science as a Leadership and
    Doctor of Nursing Practice Competency

    Associate Editors: Michael R. Bleich, PhD, RN, NEA-BC, FNAP, FAAN
    Jan Jones-Schenk, DHSc, RN, NE-BC, FAAN

    Author: Michael R. Bleich, PhD, RN, NEA-BC, FNAP, FAAN

    492 Copyright © SLACK Incorporated

    vention researchers must build into
    their studies a science-based imple-
    mentation strategy, as well as philan-
    thropic organizations, to ensure that
    their efforts reach the point of intend-
    ed impact (Easterling & Metz, 2016).

    DEGREES OF IMPLEMENTATION
    A highly recommended resource

    for professional development educa-
    tors is the work of Fixsen, Naoom,
    Blase, Friedman, and Wallace (2005),
    which provided a useful synthesis of
    implementation science research.
    Their summary reflects that imple-
    mentation takes place with differ-
    ing levels of engagement, similarly
    to the letting it change, helping it
    change, and making it happen levels
    mentioned earlier. Paper implementa-
    tion—often required by regulators—
    refers to changes that result from the
    adoption of policies and procedures,
    where a needed paper trail documents
    change. Organizational leaders should
    be competent in preparing policies,
    procedures, algorithms, and protocols
    to give direction and insight into prac-
    tice.

    Process implementation advances
    paper implementation. Educators
    play a pivotal role as leaders who pro-
    vide training as the backdrop for spec-
    ifying the rationale for change, the
    expectations linked to innovations,
    and simulation or competency expec-
    tations to ensure that the client system
    affected by the change is able to per-
    form, without the guarantee that they
    will perform or change their practice.
    Process implementation eliminates
    the variable relating to knowing what
    to do, as it has been measured and
    evaluated.

    The third level of implementa-
    tion is where the change is actually
    implemented and takes hold in the
    organization, known as performance
    implementation. This is where the
    consolidated framework for imple-
    mentation research model developed
    by Damschroder et al. (2009) is a use-
    ful reference for educators and leaders.
    This model depicts the variables at play
    during the implementation of innova-
    tions with supportive evidence being
    generated by implementation scien-
    tists. Implementation is influenced by
    (a) intervention characteristics, which
    vary in factors such as adaptability, ad-
    vantage, and complexity; (b) the outer
    settings, with factors such as patient ex-
    perience and expectations, incentives,
    and pressure from peer organizations;
    (c) the inner setting, with its unique
    structural characteristics and networks;
    (d) the characteristics of the individuals
    involved, such as their knowledge and
    identification with the organization;
    and (e) the process of implementation,
    such as how it was planned, executed,
    and other factors. When taken com-
    pletely, it immediately becomes clear
    that multiple and often confound-
    ing variables are required for effective
    change management, offering a par-
    tial explanation for the often dismally
    slow uptake of innovations in health
    care settings. As the Doctor of Nurs-
    ing Practice enters the workforce in
    expanding roles, it should be with the
    ability to discern and lead innovations
    and change, from paper to practice.

    SUMMARY
    The professional development

    educator, whether in the practice
    or academic setting, who is teach-

    ing implementation science content
    should move beyond the comfort
    zone of the process implementation
    described above. Yes, education at the
    process level is key to the implementa-
    tion of innovations—it can incentiv-
    ize and motivate learners to take heed
    of answering the “what” and “why” of
    change needed. However, widespread
    change that takes hold organization-
    wide is the skill and competency set
    needed by leaders. Novice leaders may
    not possess awareness of all the vari-
    ables to consider in driving change
    that must happen. Offering leaders
    training in the models and resources
    presented in this article is a starting
    point for advancing their competence
    in implementation science.

    REFERENCES
    Bauer, M.S., Damschroder, L., Hagendorn, H.,

    Smith, J., & Kilbourne, A.M. (2015). An
    introduction to implementation science for
    the non-specialist. Retrieved from https://
    bmcpsychology.biomedcentral.com/track/
    pdf/10.1186/s40359-015-0089-9

    Damschroder, L.J., Aron, D.C., Keith, R.E.,
    Kirsh, S.R., Alexander, J.A., & Lowery,
    J.C. (2009). Fostering implementation of
    health services research findings into prac-
    tice: A consolidated framework for advanc-
    ing implementation science. Implementation
    Science, 4(50).

    Easterling, D., & Metz, A. (2016). Getting real
    with strategy: Insights from implementation
    science. The Foundation Review, 8, 97-115.

    Fixsen, D. (2019, February 4). The science of im-
    plementation—Dr. Dean Fixsen—episode 11
    [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.
    youtube.com/watch?v=t4k8pk9Bgps

    Fixsen, D.L., Naoom, S.F., Blase, K.A., Fried-
    man, R.M., & Wallace, F. (2005). Imple-
    mentation research: A synthesis of the litera-
    ture. Retrieved from https://nirn.fpg.unc.
    edu/sites/nirn.fpg.unc.edu/files/resources/
    NIRN-MonographFull-01-2005.pdf

    Reproduced with permission of copyright owner. Further reproduction
    prohibited without permission.

    **## wk6Implementation_Science_as_a_Le.pdf**

    491The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing · Vol 50, No 11, 2019

    leadership and development

    In a recent conversation with a col-
    league who interviewed individu-
    als for a leadership position, she

    noted that each candidate described
    their leadership style as transforma-
    tional. When asked to give an example
    of a transformation they had led—
    and its impact at the organizational
    level—few could cite a substantive
    transformational change at an organi-
    zational level. My colleague lamented
    that many see themselves as transfor-
    mative leaders, but few actually are. Is
    the ability to actually move an orga-
    nization in the direction of a desired
    change—given its culture, people
    with diverse backgrounds and educa-
    tional levels, and other complexities—

    far more rare than commonplace?
    Yet, health care organizations need
    to respond to change more than ever,
    making implementation science—the
    science of change—a requisite compe-
    tency.

    Dr. Dean Fixsen (2019), articu-
    lated three developmental levels on
    the journey to implementation sci-
    ence. The first level, letting it happen
    (change) aligns with the diffusion the-
    ory of change popularized by Everett
    Rogers who studied how innovations
    (change) spread through an organi-
    zation, simplified here by describing
    change as a domino effect. Fixsen
    described the second level as helping
    it (change) happen, equated with dis-
    semination science. Professional de-
    velopment educators know the power
    of education in advancing change,
    such that when groups are armed with
    education on a topic, an added stimu-
    lus to change occurs. Yet, education—
    as essential as it is as a stimulus for
    change—does not always equate to
    behavioral modification, individually
    or collectively. This leads to the third
    level of change mastery and imple-
    mentation science. Implementation
    science is necessary because it is the
    science of making nonoptional things
    happen. Leaders must guide organi-
    zational change, ensuring compliance
    and uniformity of actions, safeguard-

    ing the quality and safety of patients,
    and managing resources.

    IMPLEMENTATION
    SCIENCE DEFINED

    Bauer, Damschroder, Hagendorn,
    Smith, and Kilbourne (2015) offered
    a useful and concise definition of im-
    plementation science. They defined
    implementation science as “the sci-
    entific study of methods to promote
    the systematic uptake of research find-
    ings and other EBPs [evidence-based
    practices] into routine practice, and,
    hence, it improves the quality and ef-
    fectiveness of health services” (p. 1). In
    the definition are salient key points—
    namely, that leaders should use evi-
    dence and research when available to
    drive change. A second point is that
    the leader/change agent should make
    the client group (those affected by
    the expected change) keenly aware of
    what is at stake with regard to quality
    and effectiveness. The third point is
    that there is a science to implementa-
    tion. The science comprises methods
    to drive the systematic uptake of re-
    search and evidence-based practices in
    practice settings, one of the outcomes
    now associated with the Doctor of
    Nursing Practice degree and an expec-
    tation of leaders in all clinical settings.

    Implementation science drives
    nonoptional change, standardizes
    high-risk and high-stakes clinical in-
    terventions, and advances innovations
    within an organization. The science
    itself addresses the knowledge gap
    that exists between interventions that
    research has shown to be effective and
    its translation into practice in varying
    clinical settings. Increasingly, inter-

    abstract
    Leaders must distinguish be-

    tween diffusion as a change strat-
    egy, education as a stimulus for
    change, and implementation strat-
    egies associated with implementa-
    tion science. This article provides an
    operational definition for implemen-
    tation science, the distinguishing
    characteristics in leading transfor-
    mational change, and the degrees
    of implementation. [J Contin Educ
    Nurs. 2019;50(11):491-492.]

    Dr. Bleich is Senior Professor and Director, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Nursing,
    Langston Center for Innovation in Quality and Safety, and President and Chief Executive Officer,
    NursDynamics, Ballwin, Missouri.

    The author has disclosed no potential conflicts of interest, financial or otherwise.
    Address correspondence to Michael R. Bleich, PhD, RN, NEA-BC, FNAP, FAAN, Senior Professor

    and Director, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Nursing, Langston Center for Innovation
    in Quality and Safety, and President and Chief Executive Officer, NursDynamics, 221 Jasmin Park
    Court, Ballwin, MO 63021; e-mail: mbleich350@gmail.com.

    doi:10.3928/00220124-20191015-03

    Implementation Science as a Leadership and
    Doctor of Nursing Practice Competency

    Associate Editors: Michael R. Bleich, PhD, RN, NEA-BC, FNAP, FAAN
    Jan Jones-Schenk, DHSc, RN, NE-BC, FAAN

    Author: Michael R. Bleich, PhD, RN, NEA-BC, FNAP, FAAN

    492 Copyright © SLACK Incorporated

    vention researchers must build into
    their studies a science-based imple-
    mentation strategy, as well as philan-
    thropic organizations, to ensure that
    their efforts reach the point of intend-
    ed impact (Easterling & Metz, 2016).

    DEGREES OF IMPLEMENTATION
    A highly recommended resource

    for professional development educa-
    tors is the work of Fixsen, Naoom,
    Blase, Friedman, and Wallace (2005),
    which provided a useful synthesis of
    implementation science research.
    Their summary reflects that imple-
    mentation takes place with differ-
    ing levels of engagement, similarly
    to the letting it change, helping it
    change, and making it happen levels
    mentioned earlier. Paper implementa-
    tion—often required by regulators—
    refers to changes that result from the
    adoption of policies and procedures,
    where a needed paper trail documents
    change. Organizational leaders should
    be competent in preparing policies,
    procedures, algorithms, and protocols
    to give direction and insight into prac-
    tice.

    Process implementation advances
    paper implementation. Educators
    play a pivotal role as leaders who pro-
    vide training as the backdrop for spec-
    ifying the rationale for change, the
    expectations linked to innovations,
    and simulation or competency expec-
    tations to ensure that the client system
    affected by the change is able to per-
    form, without the guarantee that they
    will perform or change their practice.
    Process implementation eliminates
    the variable relating to knowing what
    to do, as it has been measured and
    evaluated.

    The third level of implementa-
    tion is where the change is actually
    implemented and takes hold in the
    organization, known as performance
    implementation. This is where the
    consolidated framework for imple-
    mentation research model developed
    by Damschroder et al. (2009) is a use-
    ful reference for educators and leaders.
    This model depicts the variables at play
    during the implementation of innova-
    tions with supportive evidence being
    generated by implementation scien-
    tists. Implementation is influenced by
    (a) intervention characteristics, which
    vary in factors such as adaptability, ad-
    vantage, and complexity; (b) the outer
    settings, with factors such as patient ex-
    perience and expectations, incentives,
    and pressure from peer organizations;
    (c) the inner setting, with its unique
    structural characteristics and networks;
    (d) the characteristics of the individuals
    involved, such as their knowledge and
    identification with the organization;
    and (e) the process of implementation,
    such as how it was planned, executed,
    and other factors. When taken com-
    pletely, it immediately becomes clear
    that multiple and often confound-
    ing variables are required for effective
    change management, offering a par-
    tial explanation for the often dismally
    slow uptake of innovations in health
    care settings. As the Doctor of Nurs-
    ing Practice enters the workforce in
    expanding roles, it should be with the
    ability to discern and lead innovations
    and change, from paper to practice.

    SUMMARY
    The professional development

    educator, whether in the practice
    or academic setting, who is teach-

    ing implementation science content
    should move beyond the comfort
    zone of the process implementation
    described above. Yes, education at the
    process level is key to the implementa-
    tion of innovations—it can incentiv-
    ize and motivate learners to take heed
    of answering the “what” and “why” of
    change needed. However, widespread
    change that takes hold organization-
    wide is the skill and competency set
    needed by leaders. Novice leaders may
    not possess awareness of all the vari-
    ables to consider in driving change
    that must happen. Offering leaders
    training in the models and resources
    presented in this article is a starting
    point for advancing their competence
    in implementation science.

    REFERENCES
    Bauer, M.S., Damschroder, L., Hagendorn, H.,

    Smith, J., & Kilbourne, A.M. (2015). An
    introduction to implementation science for
    the non-specialist. Retrieved from https://
    bmcpsychology.biomedcentral.com/track/
    pdf/10.1186/s40359-015-0089-9

    Damschroder, L.J., Aron, D.C., Keith, R.E.,
    Kirsh, S.R., Alexander, J.A., & Lowery,
    J.C. (2009). Fostering implementation of
    health services research findings into prac-
    tice: A consolidated framework for advanc-
    ing implementation science. Implementation
    Science, 4(50).

    Easterling, D., & Metz, A. (2016). Getting real
    with strategy: Insights from implementation
    science. The Foundation Review, 8, 97-115.

    Fixsen, D. (2019, February 4). The science of im-
    plementation—Dr. Dean Fixsen—episode 11
    [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.
    youtube.com/watch?v=t4k8pk9Bgps

    Fixsen, D.L., Naoom, S.F., Blase, K.A., Fried-
    man, R.M., & Wallace, F. (2005). Imple-
    mentation research: A synthesis of the litera-
    ture. Retrieved from https://nirn.fpg.unc.
    edu/sites/nirn.fpg.unc.edu/files/resources/
    NIRN-MonographFull-01-2005.pdf

    Reproduced with permission of copyright owner. Further reproduction
    prohibited without permission.

    **wk6assignmetEBP.docx**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/wk6assignmetebp-docx)

    **templatewk6SON_Writing_Template_with_Instructions_.docx**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/templatewk6son-writing-template-with-instructions-docx)

    **wk6A-student-nurse-in-the-MICU–Leveraging-unexpected-leadership_2020_Nursing-O.pdf**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/wk6a-student-nurse-in-the-micu-leveraging-unexpected-leadership-2020-nursing-o-pdf)

    **wk6rubrics.docx**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/wk6rubrics-docx-10474117)

    **wk6An-integrated-model-of-multimorbidity-and-symptom-scienc_2020_Nursing-Outloo.pdf**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/wk6an-integrated-model-of-multimorbidity-and-symptom-scienc-2020-nursing-outloo-pdf)

    **wk6A-mapping-review-of-clinical-nurse-leader-and-nurse-educator-t_2020_Nursing-.pdf**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/wk6a-mapping-review-of-clinical-nurse-leader-and-nurse-educator-t-2020-nursing-pdf)

    **wk6A-mapping-review-of-clinical-nurse-leader-and-nurse-educator-t_2020_Nursing-.pdf**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/wk6a-mapping-review-of-clinical-nurse-leader-and-nurse-educator-t-2020-nursing-pdf)

    **## powerpointtwmplatewk6.pptx**

    ## image2.jpg

    ## image11.jpg

    ## image18.jpg

    ## image19.jpg

    ## image21.jpg

    ## image22.jpg

    ## image23.jpg

    ## image24.jpg

    **## Iwk6mplementation_Science_as_a_Le.pdf**

    491The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing · Vol 50, No 11, 2019

    leadership and development

    In a recent conversation with a col-
    league who interviewed individu-
    als for a leadership position, she

    noted that each candidate described
    their leadership style as transforma-
    tional. When asked to give an example
    of a transformation they had led—
    and its impact at the organizational
    level—few could cite a substantive
    transformational change at an organi-
    zational level. My colleague lamented
    that many see themselves as transfor-
    mative leaders, but few actually are. Is
    the ability to actually move an orga-
    nization in the direction of a desired
    change—given its culture, people
    with diverse backgrounds and educa-
    tional levels, and other complexities—

    far more rare than commonplace?
    Yet, health care organizations need
    to respond to change more than ever,
    making implementation science—the
    science of change—a requisite compe-
    tency.

    Dr. Dean Fixsen (2019), articu-
    lated three developmental levels on
    the journey to implementation sci-
    ence. The first level, letting it happen
    (change) aligns with the diffusion the-
    ory of change popularized by Everett
    Rogers who studied how innovations
    (change) spread through an organi-
    zation, simplified here by describing
    change as a domino effect. Fixsen
    described the second level as helping
    it (change) happen, equated with dis-
    semination science. Professional de-
    velopment educators know the power
    of education in advancing change,
    such that when groups are armed with
    education on a topic, an added stimu-
    lus to change occurs. Yet, education—
    as essential as it is as a stimulus for
    change—does not always equate to
    behavioral modification, individually
    or collectively. This leads to the third
    level of change mastery and imple-
    mentation science. Implementation
    science is necessary because it is the
    science of making nonoptional things
    happen. Leaders must guide organi-
    zational change, ensuring compliance
    and uniformity of actions, safeguard-

    ing the quality and safety of patients,
    and managing resources.

    IMPLEMENTATION
    SCIENCE DEFINED

    Bauer, Damschroder, Hagendorn,
    Smith, and Kilbourne (2015) offered
    a useful and concise definition of im-
    plementation science. They defined
    implementation science as “the sci-
    entific study of methods to promote
    the systematic uptake of research find-
    ings and other EBPs [evidence-based
    practices] into routine practice, and,
    hence, it improves the quality and ef-
    fectiveness of health services” (p. 1). In
    the definition are salient key points—
    namely, that leaders should use evi-
    dence and research when available to
    drive change. A second point is that
    the leader/change agent should make
    the client group (those affected by
    the expected change) keenly aware of
    what is at stake with regard to quality
    and effectiveness. The third point is
    that there is a science to implementa-
    tion. The science comprises methods
    to drive the systematic uptake of re-
    search and evidence-based practices in
    practice settings, one of the outcomes
    now associated with the Doctor of
    Nursing Practice degree and an expec-
    tation of leaders in all clinical settings.

    Implementation science drives
    nonoptional change, standardizes
    high-risk and high-stakes clinical in-
    terventions, and advances innovations
    within an organization. The science
    itself addresses the knowledge gap
    that exists between interventions that
    research has shown to be effective and
    its translation into practice in varying
    clinical settings. Increasingly, inter-

    abstract
    Leaders must distinguish be-

    tween diffusion as a change strat-
    egy, education as a stimulus for
    change, and implementation strat-
    egies associated with implementa-
    tion science. This article provides an
    operational definition for implemen-
    tation science, the distinguishing
    characteristics in leading transfor-
    mational change, and the degrees
    of implementation. [J Contin Educ
    Nurs. 2019;50(11):491-492.]

    Dr. Bleich is Senior Professor and Director, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Nursing,
    Langston Center for Innovation in Quality and Safety, and President and Chief Executive Officer,
    NursDynamics, Ballwin, Missouri.

    The author has disclosed no potential conflicts of interest, financial or otherwise.
    Address correspondence to Michael R. Bleich, PhD, RN, NEA-BC, FNAP, FAAN, Senior Professor

    and Director, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Nursing, Langston Center for Innovation
    in Quality and Safety, and President and Chief Executive Officer, NursDynamics, 221 Jasmin Park
    Court, Ballwin, MO 63021; e-mail: mbleich350@gmail.com.

    doi:10.3928/00220124-20191015-03

    Implementation Science as a Leadership and
    Doctor of Nursing Practice Competency

    Associate Editors: Michael R. Bleich, PhD, RN, NEA-BC, FNAP, FAAN
    Jan Jones-Schenk, DHSc, RN, NE-BC, FAAN

    Author: Michael R. Bleich, PhD, RN, NEA-BC, FNAP, FAAN

    492 Copyright © SLACK Incorporated

    vention researchers must build into
    their studies a science-based imple-
    mentation strategy, as well as philan-
    thropic organizations, to ensure that
    their efforts reach the point of intend-
    ed impact (Easterling & Metz, 2016).

    DEGREES OF IMPLEMENTATION
    A highly recommended resource

    for professional development educa-
    tors is the work of Fixsen, Naoom,
    Blase, Friedman, and Wallace (2005),
    which provided a useful synthesis of
    implementation science research.
    Their summary reflects that imple-
    mentation takes place with differ-
    ing levels of engagement, similarly
    to the letting it change, helping it
    change, and making it happen levels
    mentioned earlier. Paper implementa-
    tion—often required by regulators—
    refers to changes that result from the
    adoption of policies and procedures,
    where a needed paper trail documents
    change. Organizational leaders should
    be competent in preparing policies,
    procedures, algorithms, and protocols
    to give direction and insight into prac-
    tice.

    Process implementation advances
    paper implementation. Educators
    play a pivotal role as leaders who pro-
    vide training as the backdrop for spec-
    ifying the rationale for change, the
    expectations linked to innovations,
    and simulation or competency expec-
    tations to ensure that the client system
    affected by the change is able to per-
    form, without the guarantee that they
    will perform or change their practice.
    Process implementation eliminates
    the variable relating to knowing what
    to do, as it has been measured and
    evaluated.

    The third level of implementa-
    tion is where the change is actually
    implemented and takes hold in the
    organization, known as performance
    implementation. This is where the
    consolidated framework for imple-
    mentation research model developed
    by Damschroder et al. (2009) is a use-
    ful reference for educators and leaders.
    This model depicts the variables at play
    during the implementation of innova-
    tions with supportive evidence being
    generated by implementation scien-
    tists. Implementation is influenced by
    (a) intervention characteristics, which
    vary in factors such as adaptability, ad-
    vantage, and complexity; (b) the outer
    settings, with factors such as patient ex-
    perience and expectations, incentives,
    and pressure from peer organizations;
    (c) the inner setting, with its unique
    structural characteristics and networks;
    (d) the characteristics of the individuals
    involved, such as their knowledge and
    identification with the organization;
    and (e) the process of implementation,
    such as how it was planned, executed,
    and other factors. When taken com-
    pletely, it immediately becomes clear
    that multiple and often confound-
    ing variables are required for effective
    change management, offering a par-
    tial explanation for the often dismally
    slow uptake of innovations in health
    care settings. As the Doctor of Nurs-
    ing Practice enters the workforce in
    expanding roles, it should be with the
    ability to discern and lead innovations
    and change, from paper to practice.

    SUMMARY
    The professional development

    educator, whether in the practice
    or academic setting, who is teach-

    ing implementation science content
    should move beyond the comfort
    zone of the process implementation
    described above. Yes, education at the
    process level is key to the implementa-
    tion of innovations—it can incentiv-
    ize and motivate learners to take heed
    of answering the “what” and “why” of
    change needed. However, widespread
    change that takes hold organization-
    wide is the skill and competency set
    needed by leaders. Novice leaders may
    not possess awareness of all the vari-
    ables to consider in driving change
    that must happen. Offering leaders
    training in the models and resources
    presented in this article is a starting
    point for advancing their competence
    in implementation science.

    REFERENCES
    Bauer, M.S., Damschroder, L., Hagendorn, H.,

    Smith, J., & Kilbourne, A.M. (2015). An
    introduction to implementation science for
    the non-specialist. Retrieved from https://
    bmcpsychology.biomedcentral.com/track/
    pdf/10.1186/s40359-015-0089-9

    Damschroder, L.J., Aron, D.C., Keith, R.E.,
    Kirsh, S.R., Alexander, J.A., & Lowery,
    J.C. (2009). Fostering implementation of
    health services research findings into prac-
    tice: A consolidated framework for advanc-
    ing implementation science. Implementation
    Science, 4(50).

    Easterling, D., & Metz, A. (2016). Getting real
    with strategy: Insights from implementation
    science. The Foundation Review, 8, 97-115.

    Fixsen, D. (2019, February 4). The science of im-
    plementation—Dr. Dean Fixsen—episode 11
    [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.
    youtube.com/watch?v=t4k8pk9Bgps

    Fixsen, D.L., Naoom, S.F., Blase, K.A., Fried-
    man, R.M., & Wallace, F. (2005). Imple-
    mentation research: A synthesis of the litera-
    ture. Retrieved from https://nirn.fpg.unc.
    edu/sites/nirn.fpg.unc.edu/files/resources/
    NIRN-MonographFull-01-2005.pdf

    Reproduced with permission of copyright owner. Further reproduction
    prohibited without permission.

    **## wk6Implementation_Science_as_a_Le.pdf**

    491The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing · Vol 50, No 11, 2019

    leadership and development

    In a recent conversation with a col-
    league who interviewed individu-
    als for a leadership position, she

    noted that each candidate described
    their leadership style as transforma-
    tional. When asked to give an example
    of a transformation they had led—
    and its impact at the organizational
    level—few could cite a substantive
    transformational change at an organi-
    zational level. My colleague lamented
    that many see themselves as transfor-
    mative leaders, but few actually are. Is
    the ability to actually move an orga-
    nization in the direction of a desired
    change—given its culture, people
    with diverse backgrounds and educa-
    tional levels, and other complexities—

    far more rare than commonplace?
    Yet, health care organizations need
    to respond to change more than ever,
    making implementation science—the
    science of change—a requisite compe-
    tency.

    Dr. Dean Fixsen (2019), articu-
    lated three developmental levels on
    the journey to implementation sci-
    ence. The first level, letting it happen
    (change) aligns with the diffusion the-
    ory of change popularized by Everett
    Rogers who studied how innovations
    (change) spread through an organi-
    zation, simplified here by describing
    change as a domino effect. Fixsen
    described the second level as helping
    it (change) happen, equated with dis-
    semination science. Professional de-
    velopment educators know the power
    of education in advancing change,
    such that when groups are armed with
    education on a topic, an added stimu-
    lus to change occurs. Yet, education—
    as essential as it is as a stimulus for
    change—does not always equate to
    behavioral modification, individually
    or collectively. This leads to the third
    level of change mastery and imple-
    mentation science. Implementation
    science is necessary because it is the
    science of making nonoptional things
    happen. Leaders must guide organi-
    zational change, ensuring compliance
    and uniformity of actions, safeguard-

    ing the quality and safety of patients,
    and managing resources.

    IMPLEMENTATION
    SCIENCE DEFINED

    Bauer, Damschroder, Hagendorn,
    Smith, and Kilbourne (2015) offered
    a useful and concise definition of im-
    plementation science. They defined
    implementation science as “the sci-
    entific study of methods to promote
    the systematic uptake of research find-
    ings and other EBPs [evidence-based
    practices] into routine practice, and,
    hence, it improves the quality and ef-
    fectiveness of health services” (p. 1). In
    the definition are salient key points—
    namely, that leaders should use evi-
    dence and research when available to
    drive change. A second point is that
    the leader/change agent should make
    the client group (those affected by
    the expected change) keenly aware of
    what is at stake with regard to quality
    and effectiveness. The third point is
    that there is a science to implementa-
    tion. The science comprises methods
    to drive the systematic uptake of re-
    search and evidence-based practices in
    practice settings, one of the outcomes
    now associated with the Doctor of
    Nursing Practice degree and an expec-
    tation of leaders in all clinical settings.

    Implementation science drives
    nonoptional change, standardizes
    high-risk and high-stakes clinical in-
    terventions, and advances innovations
    within an organization. The science
    itself addresses the knowledge gap
    that exists between interventions that
    research has shown to be effective and
    its translation into practice in varying
    clinical settings. Increasingly, inter-

    abstract
    Leaders must distinguish be-

    tween diffusion as a change strat-
    egy, education as a stimulus for
    change, and implementation strat-
    egies associated with implementa-
    tion science. This article provides an
    operational definition for implemen-
    tation science, the distinguishing
    characteristics in leading transfor-
    mational change, and the degrees
    of implementation. [J Contin Educ
    Nurs. 2019;50(11):491-492.]

    Dr. Bleich is Senior Professor and Director, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Nursing,
    Langston Center for Innovation in Quality and Safety, and President and Chief Executive Officer,
    NursDynamics, Ballwin, Missouri.

    The author has disclosed no potential conflicts of interest, financial or otherwise.
    Address correspondence to Michael R. Bleich, PhD, RN, NEA-BC, FNAP, FAAN, Senior Professor

    and Director, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Nursing, Langston Center for Innovation
    in Quality and Safety, and President and Chief Executive Officer, NursDynamics, 221 Jasmin Park
    Court, Ballwin, MO 63021; e-mail: mbleich350@gmail.com.

    doi:10.3928/00220124-20191015-03

    Implementation Science as a Leadership and
    Doctor of Nursing Practice Competency

    Associate Editors: Michael R. Bleich, PhD, RN, NEA-BC, FNAP, FAAN
    Jan Jones-Schenk, DHSc, RN, NE-BC, FAAN

    Author: Michael R. Bleich, PhD, RN, NEA-BC, FNAP, FAAN

    492 Copyright © SLACK Incorporated

    vention researchers must build into
    their studies a science-based imple-
    mentation strategy, as well as philan-
    thropic organizations, to ensure that
    their efforts reach the point of intend-
    ed impact (Easterling & Metz, 2016).

    DEGREES OF IMPLEMENTATION
    A highly recommended resource

    for professional development educa-
    tors is the work of Fixsen, Naoom,
    Blase, Friedman, and Wallace (2005),
    which provided a useful synthesis of
    implementation science research.
    Their summary reflects that imple-
    mentation takes place with differ-
    ing levels of engagement, similarly
    to the letting it change, helping it
    change, and making it happen levels
    mentioned earlier. Paper implementa-
    tion—often required by regulators—
    refers to changes that result from the
    adoption of policies and procedures,
    where a needed paper trail documents
    change. Organizational leaders should
    be competent in preparing policies,
    procedures, algorithms, and protocols
    to give direction and insight into prac-
    tice.

    Process implementation advances
    paper implementation. Educators
    play a pivotal role as leaders who pro-
    vide training as the backdrop for spec-
    ifying the rationale for change, the
    expectations linked to innovations,
    and simulation or competency expec-
    tations to ensure that the client system
    affected by the change is able to per-
    form, without the guarantee that they
    will perform or change their practice.
    Process implementation eliminates
    the variable relating to knowing what
    to do, as it has been measured and
    evaluated.

    The third level of implementa-
    tion is where the change is actually
    implemented and takes hold in the
    organization, known as performance
    implementation. This is where the
    consolidated framework for imple-
    mentation research model developed
    by Damschroder et al. (2009) is a use-
    ful reference for educators and leaders.
    This model depicts the variables at play
    during the implementation of innova-
    tions with supportive evidence being
    generated by implementation scien-
    tists. Implementation is influenced by
    (a) intervention characteristics, which
    vary in factors such as adaptability, ad-
    vantage, and complexity; (b) the outer
    settings, with factors such as patient ex-
    perience and expectations, incentives,
    and pressure from peer organizations;
    (c) the inner setting, with its unique
    structural characteristics and networks;
    (d) the characteristics of the individuals
    involved, such as their knowledge and
    identification with the organization;
    and (e) the process of implementation,
    such as how it was planned, executed,
    and other factors. When taken com-
    pletely, it immediately becomes clear
    that multiple and often confound-
    ing variables are required for effective
    change management, offering a par-
    tial explanation for the often dismally
    slow uptake of innovations in health
    care settings. As the Doctor of Nurs-
    ing Practice enters the workforce in
    expanding roles, it should be with the
    ability to discern and lead innovations
    and change, from paper to practice.

    SUMMARY
    The professional development

    educator, whether in the practice
    or academic setting, who is teach-

    ing implementation science content
    should move beyond the comfort
    zone of the process implementation
    described above. Yes, education at the
    process level is key to the implementa-
    tion of innovations—it can incentiv-
    ize and motivate learners to take heed
    of answering the “what” and “why” of
    change needed. However, widespread
    change that takes hold organization-
    wide is the skill and competency set
    needed by leaders. Novice leaders may
    not possess awareness of all the vari-
    ables to consider in driving change
    that must happen. Offering leaders
    training in the models and resources
    presented in this article is a starting
    point for advancing their competence
    in implementation science.

    REFERENCES
    Bauer, M.S., Damschroder, L., Hagendorn, H.,

    Smith, J., & Kilbourne, A.M. (2015). An
    introduction to implementation science for
    the non-specialist. Retrieved from https://
    bmcpsychology.biomedcentral.com/track/
    pdf/10.1186/s40359-015-0089-9

    Damschroder, L.J., Aron, D.C., Keith, R.E.,
    Kirsh, S.R., Alexander, J.A., & Lowery,
    J.C. (2009). Fostering implementation of
    health services research findings into prac-
    tice: A consolidated framework for advanc-
    ing implementation science. Implementation
    Science, 4(50).

    Easterling, D., & Metz, A. (2016). Getting real
    with strategy: Insights from implementation
    science. The Foundation Review, 8, 97-115.

    Fixsen, D. (2019, February 4). The science of im-
    plementation—Dr. Dean Fixsen—episode 11
    [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.
    youtube.com/watch?v=t4k8pk9Bgps

    Fixsen, D.L., Naoom, S.F., Blase, K.A., Fried-
    man, R.M., & Wallace, F. (2005). Imple-
    mentation research: A synthesis of the litera-
    ture. Retrieved from https://nirn.fpg.unc.
    edu/sites/nirn.fpg.unc.edu/files/resources/
    NIRN-MonographFull-01-2005.pdf

    Reproduced with permission of copyright owner. Further reproduction
    prohibited without permission.

    **wk6assignmetEBP.docx**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/wk6assignmetebp-docx)

    **templatewk6SON_Writing_Template_with_Instructions_.docx**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/templatewk6son-writing-template-with-instructions-docx)

    **wk6A-student-nurse-in-the-MICU–Leveraging-unexpected-leadership_2020_Nursing-O.pdf**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/wk6a-student-nurse-in-the-micu-leveraging-unexpected-leadership-2020-nursing-o-pdf)

    **wk6rubrics.docx**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/wk6rubrics-docx-10474117)

    **wk6An-integrated-model-of-multimorbidity-and-symptom-scienc_2020_Nursing-Outloo.pdf**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/wk6an-integrated-model-of-multimorbidity-and-symptom-scienc-2020-nursing-outloo-pdf)

    **wk6A-mapping-review-of-clinical-nurse-leader-and-nurse-educator-t_2020_Nursing-.pdf**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/wk6a-mapping-review-of-clinical-nurse-leader-and-nurse-educator-t-2020-nursing-pdf)

    **## powerpointtwmplatewk6.pptx**

    ## image2.jpg

    ## image11.jpg

    ## image18.jpg

    ## image19.jpg

    ## image21.jpg

    ## image22.jpg

    ## image23.jpg

    ## image24.jpg

    **## Iwk6mplementation_Science_as_a_Le.pdf**

    491The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing · Vol 50, No 11, 2019

    leadership and development

    In a recent conversation with a col-
    league who interviewed individu-
    als for a leadership position, she

    noted that each candidate described
    their leadership style as transforma-
    tional. When asked to give an example
    of a transformation they had led—
    and its impact at the organizational
    level—few could cite a substantive
    transformational change at an organi-
    zational level. My colleague lamented
    that many see themselves as transfor-
    mative leaders, but few actually are. Is
    the ability to actually move an orga-
    nization in the direction of a desired
    change—given its culture, people
    with diverse backgrounds and educa-
    tional levels, and other complexities—

    far more rare than commonplace?
    Yet, health care organizations need
    to respond to change more than ever,
    making implementation science—the
    science of change—a requisite compe-
    tency.

    Dr. Dean Fixsen (2019), articu-
    lated three developmental levels on
    the journey to implementation sci-
    ence. The first level, letting it happen
    (change) aligns with the diffusion the-
    ory of change popularized by Everett
    Rogers who studied how innovations
    (change) spread through an organi-
    zation, simplified here by describing
    change as a domino effect. Fixsen
    described the second level as helping
    it (change) happen, equated with dis-
    semination science. Professional de-
    velopment educators know the power
    of education in advancing change,
    such that when groups are armed with
    education on a topic, an added stimu-
    lus to change occurs. Yet, education—
    as essential as it is as a stimulus for
    change—does not always equate to
    behavioral modification, individually
    or collectively. This leads to the third
    level of change mastery and imple-
    mentation science. Implementation
    science is necessary because it is the
    science of making nonoptional things
    happen. Leaders must guide organi-
    zational change, ensuring compliance
    and uniformity of actions, safeguard-

    ing the quality and safety of patients,
    and managing resources.

    IMPLEMENTATION
    SCIENCE DEFINED

    Bauer, Damschroder, Hagendorn,
    Smith, and Kilbourne (2015) offered
    a useful and concise definition of im-
    plementation science. They defined
    implementation science as “the sci-
    entific study of methods to promote
    the systematic uptake of research find-
    ings and other EBPs [evidence-based
    practices] into routine practice, and,
    hence, it improves the quality and ef-
    fectiveness of health services” (p. 1). In
    the definition are salient key points—
    namely, that leaders should use evi-
    dence and research when available to
    drive change. A second point is that
    the leader/change agent should make
    the client group (those affected by
    the expected change) keenly aware of
    what is at stake with regard to quality
    and effectiveness. The third point is
    that there is a science to implementa-
    tion. The science comprises methods
    to drive the systematic uptake of re-
    search and evidence-based practices in
    practice settings, one of the outcomes
    now associated with the Doctor of
    Nursing Practice degree and an expec-
    tation of leaders in all clinical settings.

    Implementation science drives
    nonoptional change, standardizes
    high-risk and high-stakes clinical in-
    terventions, and advances innovations
    within an organization. The science
    itself addresses the knowledge gap
    that exists between interventions that
    research has shown to be effective and
    its translation into practice in varying
    clinical settings. Increasingly, inter-

    abstract
    Leaders must distinguish be-

    tween diffusion as a change strat-
    egy, education as a stimulus for
    change, and implementation strat-
    egies associated with implementa-
    tion science. This article provides an
    operational definition for implemen-
    tation science, the distinguishing
    characteristics in leading transfor-
    mational change, and the degrees
    of implementation. [J Contin Educ
    Nurs. 2019;50(11):491-492.]

    Dr. Bleich is Senior Professor and Director, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Nursing,
    Langston Center for Innovation in Quality and Safety, and President and Chief Executive Officer,
    NursDynamics, Ballwin, Missouri.

    The author has disclosed no potential conflicts of interest, financial or otherwise.
    Address correspondence to Michael R. Bleich, PhD, RN, NEA-BC, FNAP, FAAN, Senior Professor

    and Director, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Nursing, Langston Center for Innovation
    in Quality and Safety, and President and Chief Executive Officer, NursDynamics, 221 Jasmin Park
    Court, Ballwin, MO 63021; e-mail: mbleich350@gmail.com.

    doi:10.3928/00220124-20191015-03

    Implementation Science as a Leadership and
    Doctor of Nursing Practice Competency

    Associate Editors: Michael R. Bleich, PhD, RN, NEA-BC, FNAP, FAAN
    Jan Jones-Schenk, DHSc, RN, NE-BC, FAAN

    Author: Michael R. Bleich, PhD, RN, NEA-BC, FNAP, FAAN

    492 Copyright © SLACK Incorporated

    vention researchers must build into
    their studies a science-based imple-
    mentation strategy, as well as philan-
    thropic organizations, to ensure that
    their efforts reach the point of intend-
    ed impact (Easterling & Metz, 2016).

    DEGREES OF IMPLEMENTATION
    A highly recommended resource

    for professional development educa-
    tors is the work of Fixsen, Naoom,
    Blase, Friedman, and Wallace (2005),
    which provided a useful synthesis of
    implementation science research.
    Their summary reflects that imple-
    mentation takes place with differ-
    ing levels of engagement, similarly
    to the letting it change, helping it
    change, and making it happen levels
    mentioned earlier. Paper implementa-
    tion—often required by regulators—
    refers to changes that result from the
    adoption of policies and procedures,
    where a needed paper trail documents
    change. Organizational leaders should
    be competent in preparing policies,
    procedures, algorithms, and protocols
    to give direction and insight into prac-
    tice.

    Process implementation advances
    paper implementation. Educators
    play a pivotal role as leaders who pro-
    vide training as the backdrop for spec-
    ifying the rationale for change, the
    expectations linked to innovations,
    and simulation or competency expec-
    tations to ensure that the client system
    affected by the change is able to per-
    form, without the guarantee that they
    will perform or change their practice.
    Process implementation eliminates
    the variable relating to knowing what
    to do, as it has been measured and
    evaluated.

    The third level of implementa-
    tion is where the change is actually
    implemented and takes hold in the
    organization, known as performance
    implementation. This is where the
    consolidated framework for imple-
    mentation research model developed
    by Damschroder et al. (2009) is a use-
    ful reference for educators and leaders.
    This model depicts the variables at play
    during the implementation of innova-
    tions with supportive evidence being
    generated by implementation scien-
    tists. Implementation is influenced by
    (a) intervention characteristics, which
    vary in factors such as adaptability, ad-
    vantage, and complexity; (b) the outer
    settings, with factors such as patient ex-
    perience and expectations, incentives,
    and pressure from peer organizations;
    (c) the inner setting, with its unique
    structural characteristics and networks;
    (d) the characteristics of the individuals
    involved, such as their knowledge and
    identification with the organization;
    and (e) the process of implementation,
    such as how it was planned, executed,
    and other factors. When taken com-
    pletely, it immediately becomes clear
    that multiple and often confound-
    ing variables are required for effective
    change management, offering a par-
    tial explanation for the often dismally
    slow uptake of innovations in health
    care settings. As the Doctor of Nurs-
    ing Practice enters the workforce in
    expanding roles, it should be with the
    ability to discern and lead innovations
    and change, from paper to practice.

    SUMMARY
    The professional development

    educator, whether in the practice
    or academic setting, who is teach-

    ing implementation science content
    should move beyond the comfort
    zone of the process implementation
    described above. Yes, education at the
    process level is key to the implementa-
    tion of innovations—it can incentiv-
    ize and motivate learners to take heed
    of answering the “what” and “why” of
    change needed. However, widespread
    change that takes hold organization-
    wide is the skill and competency set
    needed by leaders. Novice leaders may
    not possess awareness of all the vari-
    ables to consider in driving change
    that must happen. Offering leaders
    training in the models and resources
    presented in this article is a starting
    point for advancing their competence
    in implementation science.

    REFERENCES
    Bauer, M.S., Damschroder, L., Hagendorn, H.,

    Smith, J., & Kilbourne, A.M. (2015). An
    introduction to implementation science for
    the non-specialist. Retrieved from https://
    bmcpsychology.biomedcentral.com/track/
    pdf/10.1186/s40359-015-0089-9

    Damschroder, L.J., Aron, D.C., Keith, R.E.,
    Kirsh, S.R., Alexander, J.A., & Lowery,
    J.C. (2009). Fostering implementation of
    health services research findings into prac-
    tice: A consolidated framework for advanc-
    ing implementation science. Implementation
    Science, 4(50).

    Easterling, D., & Metz, A. (2016). Getting real
    with strategy: Insights from implementation
    science. The Foundation Review, 8, 97-115.

    Fixsen, D. (2019, February 4). The science of im-
    plementation—Dr. Dean Fixsen—episode 11
    [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.
    youtube.com/watch?v=t4k8pk9Bgps

    Fixsen, D.L., Naoom, S.F., Blase, K.A., Fried-
    man, R.M., & Wallace, F. (2005). Imple-
    mentation research: A synthesis of the litera-
    ture. Retrieved from https://nirn.fpg.unc.
    edu/sites/nirn.fpg.unc.edu/files/resources/
    NIRN-MonographFull-01-2005.pdf

    Reproduced with permission of copyright owner. Further reproduction
    prohibited without permission.

    **## wk6Implementation_Science_as_a_Le.pdf**

    491The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing · Vol 50, No 11, 2019

    leadership and development

    In a recent conversation with a col-
    league who interviewed individu-
    als for a leadership position, she

    noted that each candidate described
    their leadership style as transforma-
    tional. When asked to give an example
    of a transformation they had led—
    and its impact at the organizational
    level—few could cite a substantive
    transformational change at an organi-
    zational level. My colleague lamented
    that many see themselves as transfor-
    mative leaders, but few actually are. Is
    the ability to actually move an orga-
    nization in the direction of a desired
    change—given its culture, people
    with diverse backgrounds and educa-
    tional levels, and other complexities—

    far more rare than commonplace?
    Yet, health care organizations need
    to respond to change more than ever,
    making implementation science—the
    science of change—a requisite compe-
    tency.

    Dr. Dean Fixsen (2019), articu-
    lated three developmental levels on
    the journey to implementation sci-
    ence. The first level, letting it happen
    (change) aligns with the diffusion the-
    ory of change popularized by Everett
    Rogers who studied how innovations
    (change) spread through an organi-
    zation, simplified here by describing
    change as a domino effect. Fixsen
    described the second level as helping
    it (change) happen, equated with dis-
    semination science. Professional de-
    velopment educators know the power
    of education in advancing change,
    such that when groups are armed with
    education on a topic, an added stimu-
    lus to change occurs. Yet, education—
    as essential as it is as a stimulus for
    change—does not always equate to
    behavioral modification, individually
    or collectively. This leads to the third
    level of change mastery and imple-
    mentation science. Implementation
    science is necessary because it is the
    science of making nonoptional things
    happen. Leaders must guide organi-
    zational change, ensuring compliance
    and uniformity of actions, safeguard-

    ing the quality and safety of patients,
    and managing resources.

    IMPLEMENTATION
    SCIENCE DEFINED

    Bauer, Damschroder, Hagendorn,
    Smith, and Kilbourne (2015) offered
    a useful and concise definition of im-
    plementation science. They defined
    implementation science as “the sci-
    entific study of methods to promote
    the systematic uptake of research find-
    ings and other EBPs [evidence-based
    practices] into routine practice, and,
    hence, it improves the quality and ef-
    fectiveness of health services” (p. 1). In
    the definition are salient key points—
    namely, that leaders should use evi-
    dence and research when available to
    drive change. A second point is that
    the leader/change agent should make
    the client group (those affected by
    the expected change) keenly aware of
    what is at stake with regard to quality
    and effectiveness. The third point is
    that there is a science to implementa-
    tion. The science comprises methods
    to drive the systematic uptake of re-
    search and evidence-based practices in
    practice settings, one of the outcomes
    now associated with the Doctor of
    Nursing Practice degree and an expec-
    tation of leaders in all clinical settings.

    Implementation science drives
    nonoptional change, standardizes
    high-risk and high-stakes clinical in-
    terventions, and advances innovations
    within an organization. The science
    itself addresses the knowledge gap
    that exists between interventions that
    research has shown to be effective and
    its translation into practice in varying
    clinical settings. Increasingly, inter-

    abstract
    Leaders must distinguish be-

    tween diffusion as a change strat-
    egy, education as a stimulus for
    change, and implementation strat-
    egies associated with implementa-
    tion science. This article provides an
    operational definition for implemen-
    tation science, the distinguishing
    characteristics in leading transfor-
    mational change, and the degrees
    of implementation. [J Contin Educ
    Nurs. 2019;50(11):491-492.]

    Dr. Bleich is Senior Professor and Director, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Nursing,
    Langston Center for Innovation in Quality and Safety, and President and Chief Executive Officer,
    NursDynamics, Ballwin, Missouri.

    The author has disclosed no potential conflicts of interest, financial or otherwise.
    Address correspondence to Michael R. Bleich, PhD, RN, NEA-BC, FNAP, FAAN, Senior Professor

    and Director, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Nursing, Langston Center for Innovation
    in Quality and Safety, and President and Chief Executive Officer, NursDynamics, 221 Jasmin Park
    Court, Ballwin, MO 63021; e-mail: mbleich350@gmail.com.

    doi:10.3928/00220124-20191015-03

    Implementation Science as a Leadership and
    Doctor of Nursing Practice Competency

    Associate Editors: Michael R. Bleich, PhD, RN, NEA-BC, FNAP, FAAN
    Jan Jones-Schenk, DHSc, RN, NE-BC, FAAN

    Author: Michael R. Bleich, PhD, RN, NEA-BC, FNAP, FAAN

    492 Copyright © SLACK Incorporated

    vention researchers must build into
    their studies a science-based imple-
    mentation strategy, as well as philan-
    thropic organizations, to ensure that
    their efforts reach the point of intend-
    ed impact (Easterling & Metz, 2016).

    DEGREES OF IMPLEMENTATION
    A highly recommended resource

    for professional development educa-
    tors is the work of Fixsen, Naoom,
    Blase, Friedman, and Wallace (2005),
    which provided a useful synthesis of
    implementation science research.
    Their summary reflects that imple-
    mentation takes place with differ-
    ing levels of engagement, similarly
    to the letting it change, helping it
    change, and making it happen levels
    mentioned earlier. Paper implementa-
    tion—often required by regulators—
    refers to changes that result from the
    adoption of policies and procedures,
    where a needed paper trail documents
    change. Organizational leaders should
    be competent in preparing policies,
    procedures, algorithms, and protocols
    to give direction and insight into prac-
    tice.

    Process implementation advances
    paper implementation. Educators
    play a pivotal role as leaders who pro-
    vide training as the backdrop for spec-
    ifying the rationale for change, the
    expectations linked to innovations,
    and simulation or competency expec-
    tations to ensure that the client system
    affected by the change is able to per-
    form, without the guarantee that they
    will perform or change their practice.
    Process implementation eliminates
    the variable relating to knowing what
    to do, as it has been measured and
    evaluated.

    The third level of implementa-
    tion is where the change is actually
    implemented and takes hold in the
    organization, known as performance
    implementation. This is where the
    consolidated framework for imple-
    mentation research model developed
    by Damschroder et al. (2009) is a use-
    ful reference for educators and leaders.
    This model depicts the variables at play
    during the implementation of innova-
    tions with supportive evidence being
    generated by implementation scien-
    tists. Implementation is influenced by
    (a) intervention characteristics, which
    vary in factors such as adaptability, ad-
    vantage, and complexity; (b) the outer
    settings, with factors such as patient ex-
    perience and expectations, incentives,
    and pressure from peer organizations;
    (c) the inner setting, with its unique
    structural characteristics and networks;
    (d) the characteristics of the individuals
    involved, such as their knowledge and
    identification with the organization;
    and (e) the process of implementation,
    such as how it was planned, executed,
    and other factors. When taken com-
    pletely, it immediately becomes clear
    that multiple and often confound-
    ing variables are required for effective
    change management, offering a par-
    tial explanation for the often dismally
    slow uptake of innovations in health
    care settings. As the Doctor of Nurs-
    ing Practice enters the workforce in
    expanding roles, it should be with the
    ability to discern and lead innovations
    and change, from paper to practice.

    SUMMARY
    The professional development

    educator, whether in the practice
    or academic setting, who is teach-

    ing implementation science content
    should move beyond the comfort
    zone of the process implementation
    described above. Yes, education at the
    process level is key to the implementa-
    tion of innovations—it can incentiv-
    ize and motivate learners to take heed
    of answering the “what” and “why” of
    change needed. However, widespread
    change that takes hold organization-
    wide is the skill and competency set
    needed by leaders. Novice leaders may
    not possess awareness of all the vari-
    ables to consider in driving change
    that must happen. Offering leaders
    training in the models and resources
    presented in this article is a starting
    point for advancing their competence
    in implementation science.

    REFERENCES
    Bauer, M.S., Damschroder, L., Hagendorn, H.,

    Smith, J., & Kilbourne, A.M. (2015). An
    introduction to implementation science for
    the non-specialist. Retrieved from https://
    bmcpsychology.biomedcentral.com/track/
    pdf/10.1186/s40359-015-0089-9

    Damschroder, L.J., Aron, D.C., Keith, R.E.,
    Kirsh, S.R., Alexander, J.A., & Lowery,
    J.C. (2009). Fostering implementation of
    health services research findings into prac-
    tice: A consolidated framework for advanc-
    ing implementation science. Implementation
    Science, 4(50).

    Easterling, D., & Metz, A. (2016). Getting real
    with strategy: Insights from implementation
    science. The Foundation Review, 8, 97-115.

    Fixsen, D. (2019, February 4). The science of im-
    plementation—Dr. Dean Fixsen—episode 11
    [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.
    youtube.com/watch?v=t4k8pk9Bgps

    Fixsen, D.L., Naoom, S.F., Blase, K.A., Fried-
    man, R.M., & Wallace, F. (2005). Imple-
    mentation research: A synthesis of the litera-
    ture. Retrieved from https://nirn.fpg.unc.
    edu/sites/nirn.fpg.unc.edu/files/resources/
    NIRN-MonographFull-01-2005.pdf

    Reproduced with permission of copyright owner. Further reproduction
    prohibited without permission.

    **wk6assignmetEBP.docx**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/wk6assignmetebp-docx)

    **templatewk6SON_Writing_Template_with_Instructions_.docx**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/templatewk6son-writing-template-with-instructions-docx)

    **wk6A-student-nurse-in-the-MICU–Leveraging-unexpected-leadership_2020_Nursing-O.pdf**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/wk6a-student-nurse-in-the-micu-leveraging-unexpected-leadership-2020-nursing-o-pdf)

    **wk6rubrics.docx**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/wk6rubrics-docx-10474117)

    **wk6An-integrated-model-of-multimorbidity-and-symptom-scienc_2020_Nursing-Outloo.pdf**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/wk6an-integrated-model-of-multimorbidity-and-symptom-scienc-2020-nursing-outloo-pdf)

    **wk6A-mapping-review-of-clinical-nurse-leader-and-nurse-educator-t_2020_Nursing-.pdf**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/wk6a-mapping-review-of-clinical-nurse-leader-and-nurse-educator-t-2020-nursing-pdf)

    – 1
    – 2
    – 3
    – 4
    – 5
    – 6
    – 7
    – 8
    – 9

  • [Solved] please hurry

    ✓ Verified Academic Solution Available

    Executive Solution Overview

    respond to this post using citations and references . post: In epidemiology, randomized trials are commonly used to evaluate the effectiveness of preventive strategies, treatments, and public health interventions. Examples include vaccine trials, medication studies, and trials assessing behavioral o…

    Instant Solution Download

    $6.99

    Immediate access to the full model answer, formatted citations, and rubric breakdown.

    Need a Fresh Custom Paper?

    Have this question answered from scratch according to your specific instructions and deadline.

    Order on TutorsGallery →

    Assignment Prompt & Instructions

    respond to this post using citations and references .
    post: In epidemiology, randomized trials are commonly used to evaluate the effectiveness of preventive strategies, treatments, and public health interventions. Examples include vaccine trials, medication studies, and trials assessing behavioral or lifestyle interventions. By prospectively following participants and systematically measuring outcomes, randomized trials can estimate measures such as risk reduction, relative risk, and efficacy with high internal validity. Blinding of participants, investigators, or outcome assessors further strengthens the reliability of findings by reducing measurement and performance bias.

  • [Solved] Examine leadership competencies and foundations essential for the field of nursing?

    ✓ Verified Academic Solution Available

    Executive Solution Overview

    In-depth study guidance and analytical solution covering Examine leadership competencies and foundations essential for the field of nursing?.

    Instant Solution Download

    $6.99

    Immediate access to the full model answer, formatted citations, and rubric breakdown.

    Need a Fresh Custom Paper?

    Have this question answered from scratch according to your specific instructions and deadline.

    Order on TutorsGallery →

    Assignment Prompt & Instructions

    Full assignment prompt and step-by-step guidance are included in the downloadable solution file.

  • [Solved] Strategic Improvement Planning in Healthcare Organizations

    ✓ Verified Academic Solution Available

    Executive Solution Overview

    Strategic Improvement Planning in Healthcare Organizations

    Instant Solution Download

    $6.99

    Immediate access to the full model answer, formatted citations, and rubric breakdown.

    Need a Fresh Custom Paper?

    Have this question answered from scratch according to your specific instructions and deadline.

    Order on TutorsGallery →

    Assignment Prompt & Instructions

    Strategic Improvement Planning in Healthcare Organizations

  • [Solved] Nursing homework

    ✓ Verified Academic Solution Available

    Executive Solution Overview

    In-depth study guidance and analytical solution covering Nursing homework.

    Instant Solution Download

    $6.99

    Immediate access to the full model answer, formatted citations, and rubric breakdown.

    Need a Fresh Custom Paper?

    Have this question answered from scratch according to your specific instructions and deadline.

    Order on TutorsGallery →

    Assignment Prompt & Instructions

    Full assignment prompt and step-by-step guidance are included in the downloadable solution file.

  • [Solved] Describe how advanced practice nurses can collaborate with other healthcare professionals and community stakeholders to address the needs of populations.

    ✓ Verified Academic Solution Available

    Executive Solution Overview

    In-depth study guidance and analytical solution covering Describe how advanced practice nurses can collaborate with other healthcare professionals and community stakeholders to address the needs of populations..

    Instant Solution Download

    $6.99

    Immediate access to the full model answer, formatted citations, and rubric breakdown.

    Need a Fresh Custom Paper?

    Have this question answered from scratch according to your specific instructions and deadline.

    Order on TutorsGallery →

    Assignment Prompt & Instructions

    Full assignment prompt and step-by-step guidance are included in the downloadable solution file.

  • [Solved] respond to these posts

    ✓ Verified Academic Solution Available

    Executive Solution Overview

    please respond to these 2 posts following the instructions and the rubric: post 1: **Bias, Confounding, and Practice Gaps in Rural Diabetes Management** A significant practice gap in rural health settings is the underutilization of diabetes self‑management education (DSME) and digital health tools a…

    Instant Solution Download

    $6.99

    Immediate access to the full model answer, formatted citations, and rubric breakdown.

    Need a Fresh Custom Paper?

    Have this question answered from scratch according to your specific instructions and deadline.

    Order on TutorsGallery →

    Assignment Prompt & Instructions

    please respond to these 2 posts following the instructions and the rubric:
    post 1: **Bias, Confounding, and Practice Gaps in Rural Diabetes Management**
        A significant practice gap in rural health settings is the underutilization of diabetes self‑management education (DSME) and digital health tools among adults with type 2 diabetes. Rural communities often experience limited broadband access, reduced digital literacy, transportation barriers, and fewer local diabetes educators, all of which contribute to poorer glycemic outcomes and delayed detection of complications (CDC, 2022; Hale et al., 2020). Despite compelling evidence supporting DSME and digital interventions, these services remain underused in many rural regions.
    **Awareness of Bias and Confounding in Treating This Population**
        Awareness of selection bias, information bias, and confounding is essential when interpreting epidemiological literature and applying it to rural diabetes care.
        Selection bias may occur when DSME or tele-health studies disproportionately include urban, motivated, or digitally literate participants. This can make interventions appear more effective than they may be for rural adults who face greater access barriers (Rothman et al., 2021). Recognizing this helps clinicians avoid overestimating the feasibility of digital interventions in low‑resource settings.
        Information bias such as inaccurate self‑reported diet, glucose monitoring, or incomplete EHR data can distort associations between DSME participation and glycemic control (Friis & Sellers, 2021). Awareness of this bias encourages clinicians to prioritize objective measures and ensure accurate documentation in their own practice.
        Confounding variables such as socioeconomic status, comorbidities, or access to care may falsely strengthen or weaken observed associations if not properly controlled (Gerstman, 2022). Understanding confounding helps clinicians tailor interventions to the specific needs and barriers of rural populations rather than assuming uniform effectiveness across settings.
    **Strengthen Study Design to Reduce Selection Bias**
        Researchers can minimize selection bias by using population‑based sampling, random sampling, or stratified sampling to ensure representation across geographic and socioeconomic groups. Recruiting participants from multiple rural and urban settings improves generalizability and reduces systematic differences between those included and excluded (Rothman et al., 2021).
    **Use Analytical Methods to Control Confounding**
    Confounding can be minimized through multivariable regression, propensity score matching, or stratified analyses. These methods adjust for variables such as income, comorbidities, or access to care, allowing researchers to isolate the true effect of DSME or digital health interventions (Gerstman, 2022).
    **Effects of Bias if Not Minimized**
        If selection bias, information bias, or confounding are not addressed, study results may be misleading. Interventions may appear more effective or less effective than they truly are, leading to inappropriate clinical decisions. Poorly controlled bias can also reduce generalizability, resulting in interventions that do not translate well to rural populations. Ultimately, unaddressed bias can contribute to misallocation of resources and worsening health disparities, particularly for rural adults with type 2 diabetes (Friis & Sellers, 2021; Rothman et al., 2021).
    **References**
    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2022). National diabetes statistics report, 2022. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. https://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/data/statistics-report/index.html
    Friis, R. H., & Sellers, T. A. (2021). Epidemiology for public health practice (6th ed.). Jones & Bartlett Learning.
    Gerstman, B. B. (2022). Epidemiology kept simple (4th ed.). Wiley.
    Hale, N. L., Bennett, K. J., & Probst, J. C. (2020). Diabetes care and outcomes in rural populations: A review. Journal of Rural Health, 36(2), 180–188. https://doi.org/10.1111/jrh.12345
    Rothman, K. J., Greenland, S., & Lash, T. L. (2021). Modern epidemiology (4th ed.). Wolters Kluwer.
    post 2: **Blog 6 Epidemiology**
    The selected practice gap is centered on the lack of accessible and equitable care for individuals with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), representing minority and/or marginalized communities. This gap presents itself through inadequate continuity of care, underdiagnosis, delayed diagnostics, and limited accessibility to specialty mental health services (Cenat et al., 2021). Disparities in ADHD assessment and treatment are now enabled by structural barriers, such as cultural stigma, provider bias, socioeconomic limitations, limited insurance coverage, etc. (Baweja et al., 2021). Thus, epidemiologic data should guide nursing practice and inform professionals and decision-makers about persisting inequities in care delivery.
    Awareness of bias is important for conducting research and applying evidence-based interventions to develop relevant interventions to care for marginalized ADHD individuals (McKenna et al., 2023). With the lack of awareness comes disproportionate inclusion of marginalized individuals into ADHD studies, resulting in interventions mostly targeting people with better-accessible care, the majority populations, and those with higher socioeconomic status, leading to underrepresentation of minority individuals with ADHD (Curley, 2024; Enzenbach et al., 2019). Information bias is also essential for ADHD diagnoses and outcomes based on caregiver reports and self-reported data because ADHD and the associated behaviors can be misclassified due to the impaired reporting accuracy affected by cultural differences, mistrust in the healthcare system, and stigma (Friis & Sellers, 2021; Khalili et al., 2021). It is important to control such issues as social outcomes, trauma exposure, poverty, comorbid mental and physical health conditions, and educational inequities because they may affect ADHD and interfere with the interpretation of results.
    Minimization of bias and confounding bias is addressed through well-developed analytic approaches and study design. Representativeness can be improved by engaging underserved communities, addressing participation-related barriers, and using multiple recruitment sites in the population-based studies (Curley, 2024; Enzenbach et al., 2019; Mathur & VanderWeele, 2022). Control for confounders could be enabled by stratification and multivariable regression techniques, whereas measurement accuracy can be enhanced by the use of standardized, culturally sensitive diagnostic tools and corroborated self-reported data (Friis & Sellers, 2021; Khalili et al., 2021). Without bias minimization, findings can be invalid and misleading, resulting in underestimated ADHD prevalence, incidence, and severity in marginalized populations, with the consequent reinforcement of false ideas and assumptions about ADHD in marginalized populations.
    **References**
    Baweja, R., Soutullo, C. A., & Waxmonsky, J. G. (2021). Review of barriers and interventions to promote treatment engagement for pediatric attention deficit hyperactivity disorder care. _World Journal of Psychiatry, 11_(12), 1206–1227. [https://doi.org/10.5498/wjp.v11.i12.1206Links to an external site.](https://doi.org/10.5498/wjp.v11.i12.1206)
    Cenat, J. M., Blais-Rochetter, C., Morse, C., Vandette, M.-P., Noorishad, P.-G., Kogan, C., Ndengeyingoma, A., & Labelle, P. R. (2021). Prevalence and risk factors associated with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder among US Black individuals. _JAMA Psychiatry, 78_(1), 21–28. [https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2020.2788Links to an external site.](https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2020.2788)
    Curley, A. L. C. (2024). _Population-based nursing: Concepts and competencies for advanced practice_ (4th ed.). Springer.
    Enzenbach, C., Wicklein, B., Wirkner, K., & Loeffler, M. (2019). Evaluating selection bias in a population-based cohort study with low baseline participation: The LIFE-Adult-Study. _BMC Medical Research Methodology, 19_(1), Article 135. [https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-019-0779-8Links to an external site.](https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-019-0779-8)
    Friis, R. H., & Sellers, T. A. (2021). _Epidemiology for public health practice_ (6th ed.). Jones & Bartlett.
    Khalili, P., Nadimi, A. E., Baradaran, H. R., Janani, L., Rahimi-Movaghar, A., Rajabi, Z., Rahmani, A., Hojati, Z., Khalagi, K., & Motevalian, S. A. (2021). Validity of self-reported substance use: Research setting versus primary health care setting. _Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy, 16_(1), Article 66. [https://doi.org/10.1186/s13011-021-00398-3Links to an external site.](https://doi.org/10.1186/s13011-021-00398-3)
    Mathur, M. B., & VanderWeele, T. J. (2022). Methods to address confounding and other biases in meta-analyses: Review and recommendations. _Annual Review of Public Health, 43_, 19–35. [https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-publhealth-051920-114020Links to an external site.](https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-publhealth-051920-114020)
    McKenna, K., Dona, S. W. A., Gold, L., Dew, A., & Le, H. N. D. (2023). Barriers and enablers of service access and utilization for children and adolescents with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: A systematic review. _Journal of Attention Disorders, 28_(3), 259–278. [https://doi.org/10.1177/10870547231214002Links to an external site.](https://doi.org/10.1177/10870547231214002)
    Instructions: Ask a probing question, substantiated with additional background information, evidence, or research.
    – Share an insight from having read your colleagues’ postings, synthesizing the information to provide new perspectives.
    – Offer and support an alternative perspective using readings from the classroom or from your own research in the Walden Library.
    – Validate an idea with your own experience and additional research.
    – Make a suggestion based on additional evidence drawn from readings or after synthesizing multiple postings.
    – Expand on your colleagues’ postings by providing additional insights or contrasting perspectives based on readings and evidence.
    Rubric: First Response: (30 points) Post to classmate’s main blog post shows evidence of insight, understanding, or reflective thought about the topic.
    **30** **to >21.0** **ptsExcellent• Presents a focused and cohesive viewpoint in addressing this response. • Response includes focused questions or examples related to classmate’s post. • Response stimulates dialogue and commentary. • Posts on separate day.**
    **21** **to >12.0** **ptsGood• Presents a specific viewpoint that is focused and cohesive. • Response includes at least one focused question or example related to classmate’s post. • There is some attempt to stimulate dialogue and commentary. • Posts on separate day.**
    **12** **to >4.0** **ptsFair• Presents a specific viewpoint but lacks supporting examples or focused questions related to classmate’s post. • The posting is brief and reflects minimal effort to connect with classmate. • Posts on separate day.**
    **4** **to >0** **ptsPoor• Response lacks a specific viewpoint and supporting examples or focused questions related to classmate’s post. • The post does not stimulate dialogue or connect with the classmate. • Posts on same day.**
    30 pts
    This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSecond Response: (30 points) Post to second classmate’s blog post shows evidence of insight, understanding, or reflective thought about the topic.
    **30** **to >21.0** **ptsExcellent• Presents a focused and cohesive viewpoint in addressing this response. • Response includes focused questions or examples related to classmate’s post. • Response stimulates dialogue and commentary. • Posts on separate day.**
    **21** **to >12.0** **ptsGood• Presents a specific viewpoint that is focused and cohesive. • Response includes at least one focused question or example related to classmate’s post. • There is some attempt to stimulate dialogue and commentary. • Posts on separate day.**
    **12** **to >4.0** **ptsFair• Presents a specific viewpoint but lacks supporting examples or focused questions related to classmate’s post. • The posting is brief and reflects minimal effort to connect with classmate. • Posts on separate day.**
    **4** **to >0** **ptsPoor• Response lacks a specific viewpoint and supporting examples or focused questions related to classmate’s post. • The does not stimulate dialogue or connect with the classmate. • Posts on same day.**
    30 pts

  • [Solved] Journal Response MODULE 1

    ✓ Verified Academic Solution Available

    Executive Solution Overview

    Evidence-Innovation-Leadership Framework – ## Module1Journal_1.docx – ## Module1Journal-Rubric.docx **## Module1Journal_1.docx** Drawing on what you have learned from your readings, research, and life experiences, how would you use the Evidence-Innovation-Leadership Framework to identify significa…

    Instant Solution Download

    $6.99

    Immediate access to the full model answer, formatted citations, and rubric breakdown.

    Need a Fresh Custom Paper?

    Have this question answered from scratch according to your specific instructions and deadline.

    Order on TutorsGallery →

    Assignment Prompt & Instructions

    Evidence-Innovation-Leadership Framework

    – ## Module1Journal_1.docx

    – ## Module1Journal-Rubric.docx

    **## Module1Journal_1.docx**

    Drawing on what you have learned from your readings, research, and life experiences, how would you use the Evidence-Innovation-Leadership Framework to identify significant challenges facing healthcare organizations, and how can healthcare managers, leaders, or directors use new knowledge to build upon and navigate within, to drive evidence-based practice, innovation efforts, and leadership development.

    **Each short-answer Journal response will be a minimum of 300 words.**

    **No citation, reference, or APA style is necessary.**

    Required Resources:

    Borkowski, N. & Meese, K.A. (2021).
    _Organizational behavior in healthcare_ (4th ed.). Jones & Bartlett Learning. ISBN: 9781284183245.
    **Read chapter 1.**

    Weberg, D. & Davidson, S. (2019).
    _Leadership for evidence-based innovation in nursing and health professions_ (2nd ed.). Jones & Bartlett Learning. ISBN: 9781284171365. Read
    **chapters 1 & 15.**

    **## Module1Journal-Rubric.docx**

    12/31/25, 9:37 AM Preview Rubric: Graduate Journal Question Rubric v1 – DNP855 Sect1 Organizational Leadership and Systems-Based Practice – Aspen University Classroom

    12/31/25, 9:37 AM Preview Rubric: Graduate Journal Question Rubric v1 – DNP855 Sect1 Organizational Leadership and Systems-Based Practice – Aspen University Classroom

    Graduate Journal Question Rubric v1

    Course: DNP855 Sect1 Organizational Leadership and Systems-Based Practice

    Criteria

    **Does Not Meet**

    **Expectations**

    **Approaches**

    **Expectations**

    **Meets Expectations**

    **Exceeds Expectations**

    **Criterion Score**

    Claim/Quality of

    Information

    Weight: 40%

    / 8

    0

    points

    **pts**

    **)**

    **(0**

    Response to quiz

    question is missing

    or inaccurate.

    Answer is inaccurate

    and does not ad

    –

    dress the prompt.

    2.5

    points

    **(5.6**

    **pts**

    **)**

    Response to quiz

    question is missing

    key elements.

    Answer is partially

    inaccurate and

    misses elements in

    the prompt. Claims

    are lacking informa

    –

    tion to be fully

    thought out.

    6.4

    points

    **)**

    **pts**

    **(6.4**

    Response to quiz

    question is appropri

    –

    ate and accurate.

    Answer is appropri

    –

    ate and responses

    to the prompt.

    Claims are

    appropriate.

    8

    points

    **(8**

    **pts**

    **)**

    Response to quiz

    question is thorough

    and detailed.

    Answer is clear and

    concise and re

    –

    sponses to all as

    –

    pects of the prompt.

    Claims are justified

    and plausible.

    ![](https://www.sweetstudy.com/questions/journal-response-module-1)

    **Overall Score**

    **Level 1**

    0

    points minimum

    **Level 2**

    14

    points minimum

    **Level 3**

    16

    points minimum

    **Level 4**

    20

    points minimum

    https://classroom.aspen.edu/d2l/le/content/117064/viewContent/6175195/View 1/3

    https://classroom.aspen.edu/d2l/le/content/117064/viewContent/6175195/View 1/3

    1/3

    ## image1.png

    **## Module1Journal-Rubric.docx**

    12/31/25, 9:37 AM Preview Rubric: Graduate Journal Question Rubric v1 – DNP855 Sect1 Organizational Leadership and Systems-Based Practice – Aspen University Classroom

    12/31/25, 9:37 AM Preview Rubric: Graduate Journal Question Rubric v1 – DNP855 Sect1 Organizational Leadership and Systems-Based Practice – Aspen University Classroom

    Graduate Journal Question Rubric v1

    Course: DNP855 Sect1 Organizational Leadership and Systems-Based Practice

    Criteria

    **Does Not Meet**

    **Expectations**

    **Approaches**

    **Expectations**

    **Meets Expectations**

    **Exceeds Expectations**

    **Criterion Score**

    Claim/Quality of

    Information

    Weight: 40%

    / 8

    0

    points

    **pts**

    **)**

    **(0**

    Response to quiz

    question is missing

    or inaccurate.

    Answer is inaccurate

    and does not ad

    –

    dress the prompt.

    2.5

    points

    **(5.6**

    **pts**

    **)**

    Response to quiz

    question is missing

    key elements.

    Answer is partially

    inaccurate and

    misses elements in

    the prompt. Claims

    are lacking informa

    –

    tion to be fully

    thought out.

    6.4

    points

    **)**

    **pts**

    **(6.4**

    Response to quiz

    question is appropri

    –

    ate and accurate.

    Answer is appropri

    –

    ate and responses

    to the prompt.

    Claims are

    appropriate.

    8

    points

    **(8**

    **pts**

    **)**

    Response to quiz

    question is thorough

    and detailed.

    Answer is clear and

    concise and re

    –

    sponses to all as

    –

    pects of the prompt.

    Claims are justified

    and plausible.

    ![](https://www.sweetstudy.com/questions/journal-response-module-1)

    **Overall Score**

    **Level 1**

    0

    points minimum

    **Level 2**

    14

    points minimum

    **Level 3**

    16

    points minimum

    **Level 4**

    20

    points minimum

    https://classroom.aspen.edu/d2l/le/content/117064/viewContent/6175195/View 1/3

    https://classroom.aspen.edu/d2l/le/content/117064/viewContent/6175195/View 1/3

    1/3

    ## image1.png

    **## Module1Journal_1.docx**

    Drawing on what you have learned from your readings, research, and life experiences, how would you use the Evidence-Innovation-Leadership Framework to identify significant challenges facing healthcare organizations, and how can healthcare managers, leaders, or directors use new knowledge to build upon and navigate within, to drive evidence-based practice, innovation efforts, and leadership development.

    **Each short-answer Journal response will be a minimum of 300 words.**

    **No citation, reference, or APA style is necessary.**

    Required Resources:

    Borkowski, N. & Meese, K.A. (2021).
    _Organizational behavior in healthcare_ (4th ed.). Jones & Bartlett Learning. ISBN: 9781284183245.
    **Read chapter 1.**

    Weberg, D. & Davidson, S. (2019).
    _Leadership for evidence-based innovation in nursing and health professions_ (2nd ed.). Jones & Bartlett Learning. ISBN: 9781284171365. Read
    **chapters 1 & 15.**

    **## Module1Journal-Rubric.docx**

    12/31/25, 9:37 AM Preview Rubric: Graduate Journal Question Rubric v1 – DNP855 Sect1 Organizational Leadership and Systems-Based Practice – Aspen University Classroom

    12/31/25, 9:37 AM Preview Rubric: Graduate Journal Question Rubric v1 – DNP855 Sect1 Organizational Leadership and Systems-Based Practice – Aspen University Classroom

    Graduate Journal Question Rubric v1

    Course: DNP855 Sect1 Organizational Leadership and Systems-Based Practice

    Criteria

    **Does Not Meet**

    **Expectations**

    **Approaches**

    **Expectations**

    **Meets Expectations**

    **Exceeds Expectations**

    **Criterion Score**

    Claim/Quality of

    Information

    Weight: 40%

    / 8

    0

    points

    **pts**

    **)**

    **(0**

    Response to quiz

    question is missing

    or inaccurate.

    Answer is inaccurate

    and does not ad

    –

    dress the prompt.

    2.5

    points

    **(5.6**

    **pts**

    **)**

    Response to quiz

    question is missing

    key elements.

    Answer is partially

    inaccurate and

    misses elements in

    the prompt. Claims

    are lacking informa

    –

    tion to be fully

    thought out.

    6.4

    points

    **)**

    **pts**

    **(6.4**

    Response to quiz

    question is appropri

    –

    ate and accurate.

    Answer is appropri

    –

    ate and responses

    to the prompt.

    Claims are

    appropriate.

    8

    points

    **(8**

    **pts**

    **)**

    Response to quiz

    question is thorough

    and detailed.

    Answer is clear and

    concise and re

    –

    sponses to all as

    –

    pects of the prompt.

    Claims are justified

    and plausible.

    ![](https://www.sweetstudy.com/questions/journal-response-module-1)

    **Overall Score**

    **Level 1**

    0

    points minimum

    **Level 2**

    14

    points minimum

    **Level 3**

    16

    points minimum

    **Level 4**

    20

    points minimum

    https://classroom.aspen.edu/d2l/le/content/117064/viewContent/6175195/View 1/3

    https://classroom.aspen.edu/d2l/le/content/117064/viewContent/6175195/View 1/3

    1/3

    ## image1.png

    **## Module1Journal_1.docx**

    Drawing on what you have learned from your readings, research, and life experiences, how would you use the Evidence-Innovation-Leadership Framework to identify significant challenges facing healthcare organizations, and how can healthcare managers, leaders, or directors use new knowledge to build upon and navigate within, to drive evidence-based practice, innovation efforts, and leadership development.

    **Each short-answer Journal response will be a minimum of 300 words.**

    **No citation, reference, or APA style is necessary.**

    Required Resources:

    Borkowski, N. & Meese, K.A. (2021).
    _Organizational behavior in healthcare_ (4th ed.). Jones & Bartlett Learning. ISBN: 9781284183245.
    **Read chapter 1.**

    Weberg, D. & Davidson, S. (2019).
    _Leadership for evidence-based innovation in nursing and health professions_ (2nd ed.). Jones & Bartlett Learning. ISBN: 9781284171365. Read
    **chapters 1 & 15.**

    **## Module1Journal-Rubric.docx**

    12/31/25, 9:37 AM Preview Rubric: Graduate Journal Question Rubric v1 – DNP855 Sect1 Organizational Leadership and Systems-Based Practice – Aspen University Classroom

    12/31/25, 9:37 AM Preview Rubric: Graduate Journal Question Rubric v1 – DNP855 Sect1 Organizational Leadership and Systems-Based Practice – Aspen University Classroom

    Graduate Journal Question Rubric v1

    Course: DNP855 Sect1 Organizational Leadership and Systems-Based Practice

    Criteria

    **Does Not Meet**

    **Expectations**

    **Approaches**

    **Expectations**

    **Meets Expectations**

    **Exceeds Expectations**

    **Criterion Score**

    Claim/Quality of

    Information

    Weight: 40%

    / 8

    0

    points

    **pts**

    **)**

    **(0**

    Response to quiz

    question is missing

    or inaccurate.

    Answer is inaccurate

    and does not ad

    –

    dress the prompt.

    2.5

    points

    **(5.6**

    **pts**

    **)**

    Response to quiz

    question is missing

    key elements.

    Answer is partially

    inaccurate and

    misses elements in

    the prompt. Claims

    are lacking informa

    –

    tion to be fully

    thought out.

    6.4

    points

    **)**

    **pts**

    **(6.4**

    Response to quiz

    question is appropri

    –

    ate and accurate.

    Answer is appropri

    –

    ate and responses

    to the prompt.

    Claims are

    appropriate.

    8

    points

    **(8**

    **pts**

    **)**

    Response to quiz

    question is thorough

    and detailed.

    Answer is clear and

    concise and re

    –

    sponses to all as

    –

    pects of the prompt.

    Claims are justified

    and plausible.

    ![](https://www.sweetstudy.com/questions/journal-response-module-1)

    **Overall Score**

    **Level 1**

    0

    points minimum

    **Level 2**

    14

    points minimum

    **Level 3**

    16

    points minimum

    **Level 4**

    20

    points minimum

    https://classroom.aspen.edu/d2l/le/content/117064/viewContent/6175195/View 1/3

    https://classroom.aspen.edu/d2l/le/content/117064/viewContent/6175195/View 1/3

    1/3

    ## image1.png

    – 1
    – 2

  • [Solved] Nursing Module 1 Assignment 1.2

    ✓ Verified Academic Solution Available

    Executive Solution Overview

    the future to support innovative ways of care, practice, and leadership – ## Module1Assignment1.2.docx – ## Module1Assignment1.2-RUBRIC.docx **## Module1Assignment1.2.docx** **Module 1 Assignment 1.2** Write a 1250-word essay addressing each of the following points/questions as described below. Sepa…

    Instant Solution Download

    $6.99

    Immediate access to the full model answer, formatted citations, and rubric breakdown.

    Need a Fresh Custom Paper?

    Have this question answered from scratch according to your specific instructions and deadline.

    Order on TutorsGallery →

    Assignment Prompt & Instructions

    the future to support innovative ways of care, practice, and leadership

    – ## Module1Assignment1.2.docx

    – ## Module1Assignment1.2-RUBRIC.docx

    **## Module1Assignment1.2.docx**

    **Module 1 Assignment 1.2**

    Write a 1250-word essay addressing each of the following points/questions as described below. Separate each section in your paper with a clear heading that allows your professor to know which bullet you are addressing in that section of your paper. Support your ideas with at least
    **three (3) sources in** your essay. Make sure to reference the citations using the APA writing style for the essay. The cover page and reference page do not count toward the minimum word amount. Review the rubric criteria for this assignment.

    This week, you will create the context that may be used in the future to support innovative ways of care, practice, and leadership in your healthcare environment by writing an APA-style essay. After reviewing the five competencies
    **located in Chapter 1 of your Weberg & Davidson text:**

    · Select at least five of the bulleted components of the Evidence-Innovation-Leadership Framework to
    **Create Change found on page 15 in your text to use to develop an outline** that demonstrates how you may lead healthcare transformation.

    · Be sure to discuss the significance of organizational behaviors and how organizational behaviors can impact healthcare organizations. Include examples of innovative partnerships that inform healthcare change.

    **Start by reading and following these instructions:**

    1. Study the required chapter(s) of the textbook and any additional recommended resources. Some answers may require you to do additional research online or in other reference sources. Choose your sources carefully.

    2. Consider the discussion and any insights you gained from it.

    3. Review the rubric and the specifications below to ensure that your response aligns with all assignment expectations.

    4. Create your assignment submission and be sure to cite your sources, use APA style as required, check your spelling, and review the rubric.

    **The following specifications are required for this assignment:**

    ·
    **Length:** 1250 words; answers must thoroughly address the questions in a clear, concise manner.

    ·
    **Structure: Include a title page and reference page in 7th edition APA style. These do not count toward the minimum word amount for this assignment**.

    ·
    **References:** Use the appropriate APA style in-text citations and references for all resources utilized to answer the questions. Include at least three (3) peer-reviewed scholarly sources to support your evidence-based intervention.

    · scholarly articles
    **from**
    **2021 to 2026 only. (Within the last five years) Please review your spelling and the rubric.** **Please use North American peer-reviewed journals ONLY.DO NOT use any European Journal.**

    Required Resources:

    Borkowski, N. & Meese, K.A. (2021).
    _Organizational behavior in healthcare_ (4th ed.). Jones & Bartlett Learning. ISBN: 9781284183245.
    **Read chapter 1.**

    Weberg, D. & Davidson, S. (2019).
    _Leadership for evidence-based innovation in nursing and health professions_ (2nd ed.). Jones & Bartlett Learning. ISBN: 9781284171365.
    **Read chapters 1 & 15.**

    **Additional Resources**

    GreggU. (2019).
    _Organizational behavior_[Video]. YouTube

    [https://youtu.be/QJAv6674_Sw(29:15mins)](https://youtu.be/QJAv6674_Sw(29:15mins))

    GreggU. (2019).
    _Organizational behavior_ [Video]. YouTube
    [https://youtu.be/QJAv6674_Sw](https://youtu.be/QJAv6674_Sw)  (29:15 mins)

    **The following can be found in the Aspen Library**

    André, B., & Sjøvold, E. (2017). What characterizes the work culture at a hospital unit that successfully implements change – a correlation study.
    _BMC Health Services Research_,
    _17_, 1–7.

    **My DNP project**

    **“The purpose of this quality improvement project is to implement an evidence-based, community-based diabetes self-management and food-access support program to improve diabetes self-care behaviors and reduce food insecurity among adults with type 2 diabetes, measured using the USDA 2-Item Food Insecurity Screening Tool.”**

    **## Module1Assignment1.2-RUBRIC.docx**

    12/31/25, 9:47 AM Preview Rubric: Graduate Simple Essay Rubric v1 – DNP855 Sect1 Organizational Leadership and Systems-Based Practice – Aspen University Classroom

    12/31/25, 9:47 AM Preview Rubric: Graduate Simple Essay Rubric v1 – DNP855 Sect1 Organizational Leadership and Systems-Based Practice – Aspen University Classroom

    Graduate Simple Essay Rubric v1

    Course: DNP855 Sect1 Organizational Leadership and Systems-Based Practice

    Criteria

    **Does Not Meet 0%**

    **Approaches 70%**

    **Meets 80%**

    **Exceeds 100%**

    **Criterion Score**

    Content Weight:

    30

    %

    / 30

    0

    points

    Topic is inappropri

    –

    ate to assignment,

    inaccurate under

    –

    standing of con

    –

    cepts, unclear and

    difficult to under

    –

    stand; does not ad

    –

    dress many assign

    –

    ment requirements.

    Information has

    weak or no connec

    –

    tion to the assign

    –

    ment topic.

    21

    points

    Topic is mostly cov

    –

    ered and appropri

    –

    ate to assignment,

    but does not ade

    –

    quately demonstrate

    accurate under

    –

    standing of con

    –

    cepts; mostly clear

    and understandable;

    lacks some of the

    requirements of the

    assignment descrip

    –

    tion and/or provides

    little detail;

    Information relates

    to the main topic,

    but few details

    and/or examples are

    given.

    points

    24

    Topic is covered

    completely and ap

    –

    propriate to assign

    –

    ment; overview of

    key concept dimen

    –

    sions is evident;

    clear and under

    –

    standable; ad

    –

    dresses all of the re

    –

    quirements of the

    assignment descrip

    –

    tion, with adequate

    attention to detail.

    30

    points

    In-depth coverage

    of topic; outstand

    –

    ing clarity and ex

    –

    planation of con

    –

    cepts demonstrated

    in information pre

    –

    sented; approaches

    assignment with

    depth and breadth,

    without redundancy,

    using clear and fo

    –

    cused details.

    | | | | | | |
    | — | — | — | — | — | — |
    | Organization<br>Weight: 25% | 0 points<br>Organization is confusing and interferes with reader’s ability to follow ideas.<br>Weak or no introduction of topic or purpose is unclear, weak, or missing. Conclusion lacks a summary of topic, or is missing or irrelevant. | 17.5 points<br>Ideas are sometimes disorganized or irrelevant; Flow is sometimes choppy; somewhat clear organization. Basic introduction that states topic but is presented in an uninteresting way. Conclusion contains basic summary of topic without final concluding ideas, may inappropriately introduces new information. | 20 points<br>Structures ideas in a coherent, organized order that has good flow and an obvious framework.<br>Proficient introduction that is interesting and states topic. Conclusion contains good summary of topic with credible concluding ideas and introduces no new information. | 25 points<br>Exceptionally clear, logical, mature, and thorough organization permitting smooth flow of ideas; Introduction that grabs interest of reader and states topic in clear, unambiguous terms.<br>Excellent concluding summary with succinct and precise ideas that impact reader. | / 25 |
    | Logic/Argument<br>Weight: 15% | 0 points<br>Demonstrates little logical reasoning for the claims and thoughts within assignment; Many claims are weak or illogical. | 10.5 points<br>Lacks some logical reasoning for the claims and thoughts within the assignment; Some claims are weak. | 12 points<br>Uses solid logical reasoning for the claims and thoughts within the assignment. | 15 points<br>Provides exemplary logical reasoning for the claims and thoughts within the assignment. | / 15 |

    | | | | | | |
    | — | — | — | — | — | — |
    | Support Weight:<br>20% | 0 points<br>Lacks support; Uses poor sources for references; Citations lack credibility, relevance, or academic quality or are not current; Does not meet the minimum number of required citations in assignment description.<br>APA format and style are not evident. | 14 points<br>Provides weak support or not enough support; Citations are not consistently credible, current, relevant or academic; Meets the minimum number of required citations in assignment description Missing APA elements; in-text citations, where necessary, are used but formatted inaccurately and not referenced. | 16 points<br>Provides sufficient support with credible, current, relevant academic citations; Meets the minimum number of required citations in assignment description. ; In-text citations and a reference page are present with few format errors. Mechanics of writing are reflective of APA style. | 20 points<br>Provides very strong support from credible, current, relevant, academic citations; Meets or exceeds the minimum number of required citations in assignment description.<br>Accurate citations and references are presented. No APA errors are evident. | / 20 |

    Total

    / 100

    Quality of

    Written

    Communication

    Weight: 10%

    / 10

    0

    points

    Style and voice inap

    –

    propriate or do not

    address given audi

    –

    ence, purpose, etc.

    Word choice is ex

    –

    cessively redundant,

    clichéd, and unspe

    –

    cific. Inconsistent

    grammar, spelling,

    punctuation, and

    paragraphing.

    Surface errors are

    pervasive enough

    that they impede

    communication of

    meaning.

    points

    7

    Style and voice are

    somewhat appropri

    –

    ate to given audi

    –

    ence and purpose.

    Word choice is of

    –

    ten unspecific,

    generic, redundant,

    and clichéd.

    Repetitive mechani

    –

    cal errors distract

    the reader.

    Inconsistencies in

    language, sentence

    structure, and/or

    word choice are

    present.

    8

    points

    Style and voice are

    appropriate to the

    given audience and

    purpose. Word

    choice is specific

    and purposeful, and

    somewhat varied

    throughout. Minimal

    mechanical or typo

    –

    graphical errors are

    present, but are not

    overly distracting to

    the reader. Correct

    sentence structure

    and audience-appro

    –

    priate language are

    used.

    points

    10

    Style and voice are

    not only appropriate

    to the given audi

    –

    ence and purpose,

    but also show origi

    –

    nality and creativity.

    Word choice is spe

    –

    cific, purposeful, dy

    –

    namic and varied.

    Free of mechanical

    and typographical

    errors. A variety of

    sentence structures

    and effective figures

    of speech are used.

    Writer is clearly in

    command of stan

    –

    dard, written, aca

    –

    demic English.

    12/31/25, 9:47 AM Preview Rubric: Graduate Simple Essay Rubric v1 – DNP855 Sect1 Organizational Leadership and Systems-Based Practice – Aspen University Classroom

    Criteria

    **Does Not Meet 0%**

    **Approaches 70%**

    **Meets 80%**

    **Exceeds 100%**

    **Criterion Score**

    12/31/25, 9:47 AM

    Criteria

    **Does Not Meet 0%**

    **Approaches 70%**

    **Meets 80%**

    **Exceeds 100%**

    **Criterion Score**

    1/5

    https://classroom.aspen.edu/d2l/le/content/117064/viewContent/6175217/View 1/5

    1/5

    **Overall Score**

    **Level 1**

    0

    points minimum

    **Level 2**

    70

    points minimum

    **Level 3**

    80

    points minimum

    **Level 4**

    100

    points minimum

    https://classroom.aspen.edu/d2l/le/content/117064/viewContent/6175217/View 1/5

    https://classroom.aspen.edu/d2l/le/content/117064/viewContent/6175217/View 1/5

    1/5

    **## Module1Assignment1.2-RUBRIC.docx**

    12/31/25, 9:47 AM Preview Rubric: Graduate Simple Essay Rubric v1 – DNP855 Sect1 Organizational Leadership and Systems-Based Practice – Aspen University Classroom

    12/31/25, 9:47 AM Preview Rubric: Graduate Simple Essay Rubric v1 – DNP855 Sect1 Organizational Leadership and Systems-Based Practice – Aspen University Classroom

    Graduate Simple Essay Rubric v1

    Course: DNP855 Sect1 Organizational Leadership and Systems-Based Practice

    Criteria

    **Does Not Meet 0%**

    **Approaches 70%**

    **Meets 80%**

    **Exceeds 100%**

    **Criterion Score**

    Content Weight:

    30

    %

    / 30

    0

    points

    Topic is inappropri

    –

    ate to assignment,

    inaccurate under

    –

    standing of con

    –

    cepts, unclear and

    difficult to under

    –

    stand; does not ad

    –

    dress many assign

    –

    ment requirements.

    Information has

    weak or no connec

    –

    tion to the assign

    –

    ment topic.

    21

    points

    Topic is mostly cov

    –

    ered and appropri

    –

    ate to assignment,

    but does not ade

    –

    quately demonstrate

    accurate under

    –

    standing of con

    –

    cepts; mostly clear

    and understandable;

    lacks some of the

    requirements of the

    assignment descrip

    –

    tion and/or provides

    little detail;

    Information relates

    to the main topic,

    but few details

    and/or examples are

    given.

    points

    24

    Topic is covered

    completely and ap

    –

    propriate to assign

    –

    ment; overview of

    key concept dimen

    –

    sions is evident;

    clear and under

    –

    standable; ad

    –

    dresses all of the re

    –

    quirements of the

    assignment descrip

    –

    tion, with adequate

    attention to detail.

    30

    points

    In-depth coverage

    of topic; outstand

    –

    ing clarity and ex

    –

    planation of con

    –

    cepts demonstrated

    in information pre

    –

    sented; approaches

    assignment with

    depth and breadth,

    without redundancy,

    using clear and fo

    –

    cused details.

    | | | | | | |
    | — | — | — | — | — | — |
    | Organization<br>Weight: 25% | 0 points<br>Organization is confusing and interferes with reader’s ability to follow ideas.<br>Weak or no introduction of topic or purpose is unclear, weak, or missing. Conclusion lacks a summary of topic, or is missing or irrelevant. | 17.5 points<br>Ideas are sometimes disorganized or irrelevant; Flow is sometimes choppy; somewhat clear organization. Basic introduction that states topic but is presented in an uninteresting way. Conclusion contains basic summary of topic without final concluding ideas, may inappropriately introduces new information. | 20 points<br>Structures ideas in a coherent, organized order that has good flow and an obvious framework.<br>Proficient introduction that is interesting and states topic. Conclusion contains good summary of topic with credible concluding ideas and introduces no new information. | 25 points<br>Exceptionally clear, logical, mature, and thorough organization permitting smooth flow of ideas; Introduction that grabs interest of reader and states topic in clear, unambiguous terms.<br>Excellent concluding summary with succinct and precise ideas that impact reader. | / 25 |
    | Logic/Argument<br>Weight: 15% | 0 points<br>Demonstrates little logical reasoning for the claims and thoughts within assignment; Many claims are weak or illogical. | 10.5 points<br>Lacks some logical reasoning for the claims and thoughts within the assignment; Some claims are weak. | 12 points<br>Uses solid logical reasoning for the claims and thoughts within the assignment. | 15 points<br>Provides exemplary logical reasoning for the claims and thoughts within the assignment. | / 15 |

    | | | | | | |
    | — | — | — | — | — | — |
    | Support Weight:<br>20% | 0 points<br>Lacks support; Uses poor sources for references; Citations lack credibility, relevance, or academic quality or are not current; Does not meet the minimum number of required citations in assignment description.<br>APA format and style are not evident. | 14 points<br>Provides weak support or not enough support; Citations are not consistently credible, current, relevant or academic; Meets the minimum number of required citations in assignment description Missing APA elements; in-text citations, where necessary, are used but formatted inaccurately and not referenced. | 16 points<br>Provides sufficient support with credible, current, relevant academic citations; Meets the minimum number of required citations in assignment description. ; In-text citations and a reference page are present with few format errors. Mechanics of writing are reflective of APA style. | 20 points<br>Provides very strong support from credible, current, relevant, academic citations; Meets or exceeds the minimum number of required citations in assignment description.<br>Accurate citations and references are presented. No APA errors are evident. | / 20 |

    Total

    / 100

    Quality of

    Written

    Communication

    Weight: 10%

    / 10

    0

    points

    Style and voice inap

    –

    propriate or do not

    address given audi

    –

    ence, purpose, etc.

    Word choice is ex

    –

    cessively redundant,

    clichéd, and unspe

    –

    cific. Inconsistent

    grammar, spelling,

    punctuation, and

    paragraphing.

    Surface errors are

    pervasive enough

    that they impede

    communication of

    meaning.

    points

    7

    Style and voice are

    somewhat appropri

    –

    ate to given audi

    –

    ence and purpose.

    Word choice is of

    –

    ten unspecific,

    generic, redundant,

    and clichéd.

    Repetitive mechani

    –

    cal errors distract

    the reader.

    Inconsistencies in

    language, sentence

    structure, and/or

    word choice are

    present.

    8

    points

    Style and voice are

    appropriate to the

    given audience and

    purpose. Word

    choice is specific

    and purposeful, and

    somewhat varied

    throughout. Minimal

    mechanical or typo

    –

    graphical errors are

    present, but are not

    overly distracting to

    the reader. Correct

    sentence structure

    and audience-appro

    –

    priate language are

    used.

    points

    10

    Style and voice are

    not only appropriate

    to the given audi

    –

    ence and purpose,

    but also show origi

    –

    nality and creativity.

    Word choice is spe

    –

    cific, purposeful, dy

    –

    namic and varied.

    Free of mechanical

    and typographical

    errors. A variety of

    sentence structures

    and effective figures

    of speech are used.

    Writer is clearly in

    command of stan

    –

    dard, written, aca

    –

    demic English.

    12/31/25, 9:47 AM Preview Rubric: Graduate Simple Essay Rubric v1 – DNP855 Sect1 Organizational Leadership and Systems-Based Practice – Aspen University Classroom

    Criteria

    **Does Not Meet 0%**

    **Approaches 70%**

    **Meets 80%**

    **Exceeds 100%**

    **Criterion Score**

    12/31/25, 9:47 AM

    Criteria

    **Does Not Meet 0%**

    **Approaches 70%**

    **Meets 80%**

    **Exceeds 100%**

    **Criterion Score**

    1/5

    https://classroom.aspen.edu/d2l/le/content/117064/viewContent/6175217/View 1/5

    1/5

    **Overall Score**

    **Level 1**

    0

    points minimum

    **Level 2**

    70

    points minimum

    **Level 3**

    80

    points minimum

    **Level 4**

    100

    points minimum

    https://classroom.aspen.edu/d2l/le/content/117064/viewContent/6175217/View 1/5

    https://classroom.aspen.edu/d2l/le/content/117064/viewContent/6175217/View 1/5

    1/5

    **## Module1Assignment1.2.docx**

    **Module 1 Assignment 1.2**

    Write a 1250-word essay addressing each of the following points/questions as described below. Separate each section in your paper with a clear heading that allows your professor to know which bullet you are addressing in that section of your paper. Support your ideas with at least
    **three (3) sources in** your essay. Make sure to reference the citations using the APA writing style for the essay. The cover page and reference page do not count toward the minimum word amount. Review the rubric criteria for this assignment.

    This week, you will create the context that may be used in the future to support innovative ways of care, practice, and leadership in your healthcare environment by writing an APA-style essay. After reviewing the five competencies
    **located in Chapter 1 of your Weberg & Davidson text:**

    · Select at least five of the bulleted components of the Evidence-Innovation-Leadership Framework to
    **Create Change found on page 15 in your text to use to develop an outline** that demonstrates how you may lead healthcare transformation.

    · Be sure to discuss the significance of organizational behaviors and how organizational behaviors can impact healthcare organizations. Include examples of innovative partnerships that inform healthcare change.

    **Start by reading and following these instructions:**

    1. Study the required chapter(s) of the textbook and any additional recommended resources. Some answers may require you to do additional research online or in other reference sources. Choose your sources carefully.

    2. Consider the discussion and any insights you gained from it.

    3. Review the rubric and the specifications below to ensure that your response aligns with all assignment expectations.

    4. Create your assignment submission and be sure to cite your sources, use APA style as required, check your spelling, and review the rubric.

    **The following specifications are required for this assignment:**

    ·
    **Length:** 1250 words; answers must thoroughly address the questions in a clear, concise manner.

    ·
    **Structure: Include a title page and reference page in 7th edition APA style. These do not count toward the minimum word amount for this assignment**.

    ·
    **References:** Use the appropriate APA style in-text citations and references for all resources utilized to answer the questions. Include at least three (3) peer-reviewed scholarly sources to support your evidence-based intervention.

    · scholarly articles
    **from**
    **2021 to 2026 only. (Within the last five years) Please review your spelling and the rubric.** **Please use North American peer-reviewed journals ONLY.DO NOT use any European Journal.**

    Required Resources:

    Borkowski, N. & Meese, K.A. (2021).
    _Organizational behavior in healthcare_ (4th ed.). Jones & Bartlett Learning. ISBN: 9781284183245.
    **Read chapter 1.**

    Weberg, D. & Davidson, S. (2019).
    _Leadership for evidence-based innovation in nursing and health professions_ (2nd ed.). Jones & Bartlett Learning. ISBN: 9781284171365.
    **Read chapters 1 & 15.**

    **Additional Resources**

    GreggU. (2019).
    _Organizational behavior_[Video]. YouTube

    [https://youtu.be/QJAv6674_Sw(29:15mins)](https://youtu.be/QJAv6674_Sw(29:15mins))

    GreggU. (2019).
    _Organizational behavior_ [Video]. YouTube
    [https://youtu.be/QJAv6674_Sw](https://youtu.be/QJAv6674_Sw)  (29:15 mins)

    **The following can be found in the Aspen Library**

    André, B., & Sjøvold, E. (2017). What characterizes the work culture at a hospital unit that successfully implements change – a correlation study.
    _BMC Health Services Research_,
    _17_, 1–7.

    **My DNP project**

    **“The purpose of this quality improvement project is to implement an evidence-based, community-based diabetes self-management and food-access support program to improve diabetes self-care behaviors and reduce food insecurity among adults with type 2 diabetes, measured using the USDA 2-Item Food Insecurity Screening Tool.”**

    **## Module1Assignment1.2-RUBRIC.docx**

    12/31/25, 9:47 AM Preview Rubric: Graduate Simple Essay Rubric v1 – DNP855 Sect1 Organizational Leadership and Systems-Based Practice – Aspen University Classroom

    12/31/25, 9:47 AM Preview Rubric: Graduate Simple Essay Rubric v1 – DNP855 Sect1 Organizational Leadership and Systems-Based Practice – Aspen University Classroom

    Graduate Simple Essay Rubric v1

    Course: DNP855 Sect1 Organizational Leadership and Systems-Based Practice

    Criteria

    **Does Not Meet 0%**

    **Approaches 70%**

    **Meets 80%**

    **Exceeds 100%**

    **Criterion Score**

    Content Weight:

    30

    %

    / 30

    0

    points

    Topic is inappropri

    –

    ate to assignment,

    inaccurate under

    –

    standing of con

    –

    cepts, unclear and

    difficult to under

    –

    stand; does not ad

    –

    dress many assign

    –

    ment requirements.

    Information has

    weak or no connec

    –

    tion to the assign

    –

    ment topic.

    21

    points

    Topic is mostly cov

    –

    ered and appropri

    –

    ate to assignment,

    but does not ade

    –

    quately demonstrate

    accurate under

    –

    standing of con

    –

    cepts; mostly clear

    and understandable;

    lacks some of the

    requirements of the

    assignment descrip

    –

    tion and/or provides

    little detail;

    Information relates

    to the main topic,

    but few details

    and/or examples are

    given.

    points

    24

    Topic is covered

    completely and ap

    –

    propriate to assign

    –

    ment; overview of

    key concept dimen

    –

    sions is evident;

    clear and under

    –

    standable; ad

    –

    dresses all of the re

    –

    quirements of the

    assignment descrip

    –

    tion, with adequate

    attention to detail.

    30

    points

    In-depth coverage

    of topic; outstand

    –

    ing clarity and ex

    –

    planation of con

    –

    cepts demonstrated

    in information pre

    –

    sented; approaches

    assignment with

    depth and breadth,

    without redundancy,

    using clear and fo

    –

    cused details.

    | | | | | | |
    | — | — | — | — | — | — |
    | Organization<br>Weight: 25% | 0 points<br>Organization is confusing and interferes with reader’s ability to follow ideas.<br>Weak or no introduction of topic or purpose is unclear, weak, or missing. Conclusion lacks a summary of topic, or is missing or irrelevant. | 17.5 points<br>Ideas are sometimes disorganized or irrelevant; Flow is sometimes choppy; somewhat clear organization. Basic introduction that states topic but is presented in an uninteresting way. Conclusion contains basic summary of topic without final concluding ideas, may inappropriately introduces new information. | 20 points<br>Structures ideas in a coherent, organized order that has good flow and an obvious framework.<br>Proficient introduction that is interesting and states topic. Conclusion contains good summary of topic with credible concluding ideas and introduces no new information. | 25 points<br>Exceptionally clear, logical, mature, and thorough organization permitting smooth flow of ideas; Introduction that grabs interest of reader and states topic in clear, unambiguous terms.<br>Excellent concluding summary with succinct and precise ideas that impact reader. | / 25 |
    | Logic/Argument<br>Weight: 15% | 0 points<br>Demonstrates little logical reasoning for the claims and thoughts within assignment; Many claims are weak or illogical. | 10.5 points<br>Lacks some logical reasoning for the claims and thoughts within the assignment; Some claims are weak. | 12 points<br>Uses solid logical reasoning for the claims and thoughts within the assignment. | 15 points<br>Provides exemplary logical reasoning for the claims and thoughts within the assignment. | / 15 |

    | | | | | | |
    | — | — | — | — | — | — |
    | Support Weight:<br>20% | 0 points<br>Lacks support; Uses poor sources for references; Citations lack credibility, relevance, or academic quality or are not current; Does not meet the minimum number of required citations in assignment description.<br>APA format and style are not evident. | 14 points<br>Provides weak support or not enough support; Citations are not consistently credible, current, relevant or academic; Meets the minimum number of required citations in assignment description Missing APA elements; in-text citations, where necessary, are used but formatted inaccurately and not referenced. | 16 points<br>Provides sufficient support with credible, current, relevant academic citations; Meets the minimum number of required citations in assignment description. ; In-text citations and a reference page are present with few format errors. Mechanics of writing are reflective of APA style. | 20 points<br>Provides very strong support from credible, current, relevant, academic citations; Meets or exceeds the minimum number of required citations in assignment description.<br>Accurate citations and references are presented. No APA errors are evident. | / 20 |

    Total

    / 100

    Quality of

    Written

    Communication

    Weight: 10%

    / 10

    0

    points

    Style and voice inap

    –

    propriate or do not

    address given audi

    –

    ence, purpose, etc.

    Word choice is ex

    –

    cessively redundant,

    clichéd, and unspe

    –

    cific. Inconsistent

    grammar, spelling,

    punctuation, and

    paragraphing.

    Surface errors are

    pervasive enough

    that they impede

    communication of

    meaning.

    points

    7

    Style and voice are

    somewhat appropri

    –

    ate to given audi

    –

    ence and purpose.

    Word choice is of

    –

    ten unspecific,

    generic, redundant,

    and clichéd.

    Repetitive mechani

    –

    cal errors distract

    the reader.

    Inconsistencies in

    language, sentence

    structure, and/or

    word choice are

    present.

    8

    points

    Style and voice are

    appropriate to the

    given audience and

    purpose. Word

    choice is specific

    and purposeful, and

    somewhat varied

    throughout. Minimal

    mechanical or typo

    –

    graphical errors are

    present, but are not

    overly distracting to

    the reader. Correct

    sentence structure

    and audience-appro

    –

    priate language are

    used.

    points

    10

    Style and voice are

    not only appropriate

    to the given audi

    –

    ence and purpose,

    but also show origi

    –

    nality and creativity.

    Word choice is spe

    –

    cific, purposeful, dy

    –

    namic and varied.

    Free of mechanical

    and typographical

    errors. A variety of

    sentence structures

    and effective figures

    of speech are used.

    Writer is clearly in

    command of stan

    –

    dard, written, aca

    –

    demic English.

    12/31/25, 9:47 AM Preview Rubric: Graduate Simple Essay Rubric v1 – DNP855 Sect1 Organizational Leadership and Systems-Based Practice – Aspen University Classroom

    Criteria

    **Does Not Meet 0%**

    **Approaches 70%**

    **Meets 80%**

    **Exceeds 100%**

    **Criterion Score**

    12/31/25, 9:47 AM

    Criteria

    **Does Not Meet 0%**

    **Approaches 70%**

    **Meets 80%**

    **Exceeds 100%**

    **Criterion Score**

    1/5

    https://classroom.aspen.edu/d2l/le/content/117064/viewContent/6175217/View 1/5

    1/5

    **Overall Score**

    **Level 1**

    0

    points minimum

    **Level 2**

    70

    points minimum

    **Level 3**

    80

    points minimum

    **Level 4**

    100

    points minimum

    https://classroom.aspen.edu/d2l/le/content/117064/viewContent/6175217/View 1/5

    https://classroom.aspen.edu/d2l/le/content/117064/viewContent/6175217/View 1/5

    1/5

    **## Module1Assignment1.2.docx**

    **Module 1 Assignment 1.2**

    Write a 1250-word essay addressing each of the following points/questions as described below. Separate each section in your paper with a clear heading that allows your professor to know which bullet you are addressing in that section of your paper. Support your ideas with at least
    **three (3) sources in** your essay. Make sure to reference the citations using the APA writing style for the essay. The cover page and reference page do not count toward the minimum word amount. Review the rubric criteria for this assignment.

    This week, you will create the context that may be used in the future to support innovative ways of care, practice, and leadership in your healthcare environment by writing an APA-style essay. After reviewing the five competencies
    **located in Chapter 1 of your Weberg & Davidson text:**

    · Select at least five of the bulleted components of the Evidence-Innovation-Leadership Framework to
    **Create Change found on page 15 in your text to use to develop an outline** that demonstrates how you may lead healthcare transformation.

    · Be sure to discuss the significance of organizational behaviors and how organizational behaviors can impact healthcare organizations. Include examples of innovative partnerships that inform healthcare change.

    **Start by reading and following these instructions:**

    1. Study the required chapter(s) of the textbook and any additional recommended resources. Some answers may require you to do additional research online or in other reference sources. Choose your sources carefully.

    2. Consider the discussion and any insights you gained from it.

    3. Review the rubric and the specifications below to ensure that your response aligns with all assignment expectations.

    4. Create your assignment submission and be sure to cite your sources, use APA style as required, check your spelling, and review the rubric.

    **The following specifications are required for this assignment:**

    ·
    **Length:** 1250 words; answers must thoroughly address the questions in a clear, concise manner.

    ·
    **Structure: Include a title page and reference page in 7th edition APA style. These do not count toward the minimum word amount for this assignment**.

    ·
    **References:** Use the appropriate APA style in-text citations and references for all resources utilized to answer the questions. Include at least three (3) peer-reviewed scholarly sources to support your evidence-based intervention.

    · scholarly articles
    **from**
    **2021 to 2026 only. (Within the last five years) Please review your spelling and the rubric.** **Please use North American peer-reviewed journals ONLY.DO NOT use any European Journal.**

    Required Resources:

    Borkowski, N. & Meese, K.A. (2021).
    _Organizational behavior in healthcare_ (4th ed.). Jones & Bartlett Learning. ISBN: 9781284183245.
    **Read chapter 1.**

    Weberg, D. & Davidson, S. (2019).
    _Leadership for evidence-based innovation in nursing and health professions_ (2nd ed.). Jones & Bartlett Learning. ISBN: 9781284171365.
    **Read chapters 1 & 15.**

    **Additional Resources**

    GreggU. (2019).
    _Organizational behavior_[Video]. YouTube

    [https://youtu.be/QJAv6674_Sw(29:15mins)](https://youtu.be/QJAv6674_Sw(29:15mins))

    GreggU. (2019).
    _Organizational behavior_ [Video]. YouTube
    [https://youtu.be/QJAv6674_Sw](https://youtu.be/QJAv6674_Sw)  (29:15 mins)

    **The following can be found in the Aspen Library**

    André, B., & Sjøvold, E. (2017). What characterizes the work culture at a hospital unit that successfully implements change – a correlation study.
    _BMC Health Services Research_,
    _17_, 1–7.

    **My DNP project**

    **“The purpose of this quality improvement project is to implement an evidence-based, community-based diabetes self-management and food-access support program to improve diabetes self-care behaviors and reduce food insecurity among adults with type 2 diabetes, measured using the USDA 2-Item Food Insecurity Screening Tool.”**

    **## Module1Assignment1.2-RUBRIC.docx**

    12/31/25, 9:47 AM Preview Rubric: Graduate Simple Essay Rubric v1 – DNP855 Sect1 Organizational Leadership and Systems-Based Practice – Aspen University Classroom

    12/31/25, 9:47 AM Preview Rubric: Graduate Simple Essay Rubric v1 – DNP855 Sect1 Organizational Leadership and Systems-Based Practice – Aspen University Classroom

    Graduate Simple Essay Rubric v1

    Course: DNP855 Sect1 Organizational Leadership and Systems-Based Practice

    Criteria

    **Does Not Meet 0%**

    **Approaches 70%**

    **Meets 80%**

    **Exceeds 100%**

    **Criterion Score**

    Content Weight:

    30

    %

    / 30

    0

    points

    Topic is inappropri

    –

    ate to assignment,

    inaccurate under

    –

    standing of con

    –

    cepts, unclear and

    difficult to under

    –

    stand; does not ad

    –

    dress many assign

    –

    ment requirements.

    Information has

    weak or no connec

    –

    tion to the assign

    –

    ment topic.

    21

    points

    Topic is mostly cov

    –

    ered and appropri

    –

    ate to assignment,

    but does not ade

    –

    quately demonstrate

    accurate under

    –

    standing of con

    –

    cepts; mostly clear

    and understandable;

    lacks some of the

    requirements of the

    assignment descrip

    –

    tion and/or provides

    little detail;

    Information relates

    to the main topic,

    but few details

    and/or examples are

    given.

    points

    24

    Topic is covered

    completely and ap

    –

    propriate to assign

    –

    ment; overview of

    key concept dimen

    –

    sions is evident;

    clear and under

    –

    standable; ad

    –

    dresses all of the re

    –

    quirements of the

    assignment descrip

    –

    tion, with adequate

    attention to detail.

    30

    points

    In-depth coverage

    of topic; outstand

    –

    ing clarity and ex

    –

    planation of con

    –

    cepts demonstrated

    in information pre

    –

    sented; approaches

    assignment with

    depth and breadth,

    without redundancy,

    using clear and fo

    –

    cused details.

    | | | | | | |
    | — | — | — | — | — | — |
    | Organization<br>Weight: 25% | 0 points<br>Organization is confusing and interferes with reader’s ability to follow ideas.<br>Weak or no introduction of topic or purpose is unclear, weak, or missing. Conclusion lacks a summary of topic, or is missing or irrelevant. | 17.5 points<br>Ideas are sometimes disorganized or irrelevant; Flow is sometimes choppy; somewhat clear organization. Basic introduction that states topic but is presented in an uninteresting way. Conclusion contains basic summary of topic without final concluding ideas, may inappropriately introduces new information. | 20 points<br>Structures ideas in a coherent, organized order that has good flow and an obvious framework.<br>Proficient introduction that is interesting and states topic. Conclusion contains good summary of topic with credible concluding ideas and introduces no new information. | 25 points<br>Exceptionally clear, logical, mature, and thorough organization permitting smooth flow of ideas; Introduction that grabs interest of reader and states topic in clear, unambiguous terms.<br>Excellent concluding summary with succinct and precise ideas that impact reader. | / 25 |
    | Logic/Argument<br>Weight: 15% | 0 points<br>Demonstrates little logical reasoning for the claims and thoughts within assignment; Many claims are weak or illogical. | 10.5 points<br>Lacks some logical reasoning for the claims and thoughts within the assignment; Some claims are weak. | 12 points<br>Uses solid logical reasoning for the claims and thoughts within the assignment. | 15 points<br>Provides exemplary logical reasoning for the claims and thoughts within the assignment. | / 15 |

    | | | | | | |
    | — | — | — | — | — | — |
    | Support Weight:<br>20% | 0 points<br>Lacks support; Uses poor sources for references; Citations lack credibility, relevance, or academic quality or are not current; Does not meet the minimum number of required citations in assignment description.<br>APA format and style are not evident. | 14 points<br>Provides weak support or not enough support; Citations are not consistently credible, current, relevant or academic; Meets the minimum number of required citations in assignment description Missing APA elements; in-text citations, where necessary, are used but formatted inaccurately and not referenced. | 16 points<br>Provides sufficient support with credible, current, relevant academic citations; Meets the minimum number of required citations in assignment description. ; In-text citations and a reference page are present with few format errors. Mechanics of writing are reflective of APA style. | 20 points<br>Provides very strong support from credible, current, relevant, academic citations; Meets or exceeds the minimum number of required citations in assignment description.<br>Accurate citations and references are presented. No APA errors are evident. | / 20 |

    Total

    / 100

    Quality of

    Written

    Communication

    Weight: 10%

    / 10

    0

    points

    Style and voice inap

    –

    propriate or do not

    address given audi

    –

    ence, purpose, etc.

    Word choice is ex

    –

    cessively redundant,

    clichéd, and unspe

    –

    cific. Inconsistent

    grammar, spelling,

    punctuation, and

    paragraphing.

    Surface errors are

    pervasive enough

    that they impede

    communication of

    meaning.

    points

    7

    Style and voice are

    somewhat appropri

    –

    ate to given audi

    –

    ence and purpose.

    Word choice is of

    –

    ten unspecific,

    generic, redundant,

    and clichéd.

    Repetitive mechani

    –

    cal errors distract

    the reader.

    Inconsistencies in

    language, sentence

    structure, and/or

    word choice are

    present.

    8

    points

    Style and voice are

    appropriate to the

    given audience and

    purpose. Word

    choice is specific

    and purposeful, and

    somewhat varied

    throughout. Minimal

    mechanical or typo

    –

    graphical errors are

    present, but are not

    overly distracting to

    the reader. Correct

    sentence structure

    and audience-appro

    –

    priate language are

    used.

    points

    10

    Style and voice are

    not only appropriate

    to the given audi

    –

    ence and purpose,

    but also show origi

    –

    nality and creativity.

    Word choice is spe

    –

    cific, purposeful, dy

    –

    namic and varied.

    Free of mechanical

    and typographical

    errors. A variety of

    sentence structures

    and effective figures

    of speech are used.

    Writer is clearly in

    command of stan

    –

    dard, written, aca

    –

    demic English.

    12/31/25, 9:47 AM Preview Rubric: Graduate Simple Essay Rubric v1 – DNP855 Sect1 Organizational Leadership and Systems-Based Practice – Aspen University Classroom

    Criteria

    **Does Not Meet 0%**

    **Approaches 70%**

    **Meets 80%**

    **Exceeds 100%**

    **Criterion Score**

    12/31/25, 9:47 AM

    Criteria

    **Does Not Meet 0%**

    **Approaches 70%**

    **Meets 80%**

    **Exceeds 100%**

    **Criterion Score**

    1/5

    https://classroom.aspen.edu/d2l/le/content/117064/viewContent/6175217/View 1/5

    1/5

    **Overall Score**

    **Level 1**

    0

    points minimum

    **Level 2**

    70

    points minimum

    **Level 3**

    80

    points minimum

    **Level 4**

    100

    points minimum

    https://classroom.aspen.edu/d2l/le/content/117064/viewContent/6175217/View 1/5

    https://classroom.aspen.edu/d2l/le/content/117064/viewContent/6175217/View 1/5

    1/5

    – 1
    – 2