Week 4 Assignment: System Development Life Cycle – NURS 8210
Week 4 Assignment: System Development Life Cycle – NURS 8210
This week, you examine a popular planning framework—the Systems Development Life Cycle (SDLC)—as you begin your Major Assessment for this course: investigating a health information technology system or health information application. You also explore how leaders facilitate the implementation of HIT projects and consider strategies for garnering support from key stakeholders and decision makers.
Learning Objectives for Week 4 Assignment: System Development Life Cycle – NURS 8210Students will:
- Analyze how HIT projects are identified and moved forward within an organization
- Evaluate the impact of leaders and key decision makers on implementing HIT projects within an organization
- Critically analyze the development and implementation of a health information technology system or application
Discussion: Welcome to the Week 4 Discussion area! Week 4 Assignment: System Development Life Cycle – NURS 8210
Post your responses to the Discussion based on the course requirements.
Your Discussion postings should be written in standard edited English and follow APA guidelines as closely as possible given the constraints of the online platform. Be sure to support your work with specific citations from this week’s Learning Resources and additional scholarly sources as appropriate. Refer to the Essential Guide to APA Style for Walden Students to ensure your in-text citations and reference list are correct. Initial postings must be 250–350 words (not including references).
Week 9 Assignment: Health Information Technology Project [Major Assessment 5]
In previous Discussions and Assignments, you have explored various aspects of health information technology systems: the historic development of HIT, how data flows across HIT systems, and standards and interoperability requirements including specific terminologies used in your practice setting. In this Assignment, you will have the opportunity to further develop your analysis skills by closely examining the implementation of a health information technology system. As a doctorally prepared nurse, you may find yourself in the position of leading a HIT project team; to be an effective leader and move health information technology projects forward in your organization, you must be able to logically and critically analyze the many aspects and challenges of implementing such a system and then present your insights in a succinct and professional manner. This exercise provides an opportunity to hone those skills.
Carefully review the project requirements below and plan your time accordingly. Be sure to refer to the standards of nursing informatics practice as you develop this Assignment, which serves as your Major Assessment for this course. Week 4 Assignment: System Development Life Cycle – NURS 8210.
To prepare:
- Investigate a health information technology system or health information technology application in your area of interest. The health information technology system/application may be in any setting where health care information is developed or managed. You may choose your system or application from any organization or virtual environment.
- Examples of health information technology systems or health information technology applications that are acceptable include but are not limited to:
- Consumer health applications
- Clinical information systems
- Electronic medical record (EMR) systems in hospitals or provider offices
- Home health care applications
- School health applications
- Patient portal/personal health record
- Public health information systems
- Telehealth (i.e., from facility to home)
- Simulation laboratories
- Health care informatics research and development centers
- Examples of health information technology systems or health information technology applications that are acceptable include but are not limited to:
- Discuss your proposed health information technology system/application with your Instructor before proceeding with your final selection. You may visit a health care organization in person or virtually in order to make your final choice about the health information technology system or health information technology application of interest.
- Choose the best strategy to gain information about your selected information technology system/application. Some ways to gather information include virtual visits; vendor demonstrations; on-site visits; interviews via face-to-face, phone, or teleconference. You must conduct at least one interview for this project.
- Complete a literature search to gather information about your selected information technology system.
Rubric Detail – Week 4 Assignment: System Development Life Cycle – NURS 8210
Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.
| Excellent | Good | Fair | Poor | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RESPONSIVENESS TO DISCUSSION QUESTION
Discussion post minimum requirements: *The original posting must be completed by Wednesday, Day 3, at 11:59pm MST. Two response postings to two different peer original posts, on two different days, are required by Saturday, Day 6, at 11:59pm MST. Faculty member inquiries require responses, which are not included in the minimum number of posts. Your Discussion Board postings should be written in standard edited English and follow APA style for format and grammar as closely as possible given the constraints of the online platform. Be sure to support the postings with specific citations from this week’s Learning Resources as well as resources available through the Walden University online databases. Refer to the Essential Guide to APA Style for Walden Students to ensure your in-text citations and reference list are correct. |
8 (26.67%) – 8 (26.67%)
Discussion postings and responses exceed the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: Respond to the question being asked or the prompt provided; – Go beyond what is required in some meaningful way (e.g., the post contributes a new dimension, unearths something unanticipated); -Are substantive, reflective, with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence. – Demonstrate significant ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning -Resources as well as additional resources and has read, viewed, or considered a sampling of colleagues’ postings; -Exceed the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.
|
7 (23.33%) – 7 (23.33%)
Discussion postings and responses meet the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: -Respond to the question being asked or the prompt provided; -Are substantive, reflective, with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence.re -Demonstrate ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning Resources and has read, viewed, or considered a sampling of colleagues’ postings -Meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.
|
6 (20%) – 6 (20%)
Discussion postings and responses are minimally responsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: – do not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question or prompt; and/or -May (lack) lack in depth, reflection, analysis, or synthesis but rely more on anecdotal than scholarly evidence; and/or -Do not adequately demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning -Resources and/or a sampling of colleagues’ postings; and/or has posted by the due date at least in part. – Lack ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Do not meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.
|
0 (0%) – 5 (16.67%)
Discussion postings and responses are unresponsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: – do not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question or prompt; and/or – Lack in substance, reflection, analysis, or synthesis but rely more on anecdotal than scholarly evidence. – Lack ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Do not demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning Resources and/or a sampling of colleagues’ postings; and/or does not meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.
|
| CONTENT KNOWLEDGE |
8 (26.67%) – 8 (26.67%)
Discussion postings and responses: -demonstrate in-depth understanding and application of concepts and issues presented in the course (e.g., insightful interpretations including analysis, synthesis and/or evaluation of topic; – are well supported by pertinent research/evidence from a variety of and multiple peer- reviewed books and journals, where appropriate; -Demonstrate significant mastery and thoughtful/accurate application of content, applicable skills or strategies presented in the course.
|
7 (23.33%) – 7 (23.33%)
Discussion postings and responses: -demonstrate understanding and application of the concepts and issues presented in the course, presented with some understanding and application of concepts and issues presented in the course (e.g., insightful interpretations including analysis, synthesis and/or evaluation of topic; -are supported by research/evidence from peer-reviewed books and journals, where appropriate; and · demonstrate some mastery and application of content, applicable skills, or strategies presented in the course.
|
6 (20%) – 6 (20%)
Discussion postings and responses: – demonstrate minimal understanding of concepts and issues presented in the course, and, although generally accurate, display some omissions and/or errors; –lack support by research/evidence and/or the research/evidence is inappropriate or marginal in quality; and/or lack of analysis, synthesis or evaluation of topic – demonstrate minimal content, skills or strategies presented in the course. ——-Contain numerous errors when using the skills or strategies presented in the course
|
0 (0%) – 5 (16.67%)
Discussion postings and responses demonstrate: -A lack of understanding of the concepts and issues presented in the course; and/or are inaccurate, contain many omissions and/or errors; and/or are not supported by research/evidence; and/or lack of analysis, synthesis or evaluation of topic -Many critical errors when discussing content, applicable skills or strategies presented in the course.
|
| CONTRIBUTION TO THE DISCUSSION |
8 (26.67%) – 8 (26.67%)
Discussion postings and responses significantly contribute to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by: -providing Rich and relevant examples; discerning and thought-provoking ideas; and stimulating thoughts and probes; – -demonstrating original thinking, new perspectives, and extensive synthesis of ideas supported by the literature.
|
7 (23.33%) – 7 (23.33%)
Discussion postings and responses contribute to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by -providing relevant examples; thought-provoking ideas – Demonstrating synthesis of ideas supported by the literature
|
6 (20%) – 6 (20%)
Discussion postings and responses minimally contribute to the quality of discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by: – providing few and/or irrelevant examples; and/or – providing few if any thought- provoking ideas; and/or -. Information that is restated from the literature with no/little demonstration of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas.
|
0 (0%) – 5 (16.67%)
Discussion postings and responses do not contribute to the quality of interaction/discussion and thinking and learning as they do not: -Provide examples (or examples are irrelevant); and/or -Include interesting thoughts or ideas; and/or – Demonstrate of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas
|
| QUALITY OF WRITING |
6 (20%) – 6 (20%)
Discussion postings and responses exceed doctoral -level writing expectations. They: · Use grammar and syntax that is clear, concise, and appropriate to doctoral level writing; · Make few if any errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · Use original language and refrain from directly quoting original source materials; -provide correct APA · Are positive, courteous, and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints.
|
5 (16.67%) – 5 (16.67%)
Discussion postings and responses meet doctoral -level writing expectations. They: ·Use grammar and syntax that is clear and appropriate to doctoral level writing; ; · Make a few errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · paraphrase but refrain from directly quoting original source materials; Provide correct APA format · Are courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints;.
|
4 (13.33%) – 4 (13.33%)
Discussion postings and responses are minimally below doctoral-level writing expectations. They: · Make more than occasional errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · Directly quote from original source materials and/or paraphrase rather than use original language; lack correct APA format; and/or · Are less than courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.
|
0 (0%) – 3 (10%)
Discussion postings and responses are well below doctoral -level writing expectations. They: · Use grammar and syntax that is that is unclear · Make many errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; and –use incorrect APA format · Are discourteous and disrespectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.
|
| Total Points: 30 |
|---|