NR305 Week 5 Discussion

NR305 Week 5 Discussion | chamberlain university

Week 5 Discussion: Debriefing of Week 4 iHuman Neurovascular Assessment (Graded)

Purpose

The purpose of this debriefing is to re-examine the experience completing the Week 4 iHuman Neurovascular Assessment assignment while engaging in dialogue with faculty and peers. In the debriefings, students:

• Reflect on the simulation activity
• Share what went well and consider alternative actions
• Engage in meaningful dialogue with classmates
• Express opinions clearly and logically, in a professional manner

Course Outcomes

This debriefing enables the student to meet the following course outcomes:

CO 2: Differentiate between normal and abnormal health assessment findings. (PO 4)

CO 3: Describe physical, psychosocial, cultural, and spiritual influences on an individual's health status. (PO 1)

CO 4: Demonstrate effective communication skills during health assessment and documentation. (PO 3)

Due Date

• During the assigned week (Sunday the start of the assigned week through Sunday the end of the assigned week):
• Posts in the discussion at least two times, and
• Posts in the discussion on two different days

Points Possible

Directions

• Debriefing is an activity that involves thinking critically about your own experiences related to the virtual simulation you completed. In debriefings students:
• Demonstrate understanding of concepts for the week
• Engage in meaningful dialogue with classmates and/or instructor
• Express opinions clearly and logically, in a professional manner
• Use the rubric on this page as you compose your answers.
• Scholarly sources are NOT required for this debriefing
• Best Practices include:
• Participation early in the week is encouraged to stimulate meaningful discussion among classmates and instructor.
• Enter the debriefing often during the week to read and learn from posts.
• Select different classmates for your reply each week.

Debriefing

Use the following format to reflect on the Week 4 iHuman Neurovascular Assessment assignment. This was the Athena Washington case.

• Paragraph One: What went well for you in the simulation? Provide examples of when you felt knowledgeable and confident in your skills. Do you feel the scenario was realistic? Why or why not?
• Paragraph Two: What would you do differently next time? Describe at least one area you identified where improvements could be made. Were you surprised by any of the feedback you were provided by iHuman? If yes, please explain.
• Paragraph Three: What did you learn from this simulation? Or, what did this simulation reinforce that you found valuable? Do you have any questions related to the scenario?

Grading

To view the grading criteria/rubric, please click on the 3 dots in the box at the end of the solid gray bar above the discussion board title and then Show Rubric. See Syllabus for Grading Rubric Definitions.

This topic is closed for comments.