DNP 805 Week 8 Evaluation of Health Care Technology GCU

DNP 805 Week 8 Evaluation of Health Care Technology GCU

DNP 805 Week 8 Evaluation of Health Care Technology GCU

DNP 805 Week 8 Evaluation of Health Care Technology GCU

Assessment Description

For this assignment, you will utilize content from the study materials as well as additional qualified resources to synthesize new information that you can apply towards your DPI Project, your future work area, or your clinical practice as a DNP-prepared nurse.

Online Nursing Essays

Struggling to Meet Your Deadline?

Get your assignment on DNP 805 Week 8 Evaluation of Health Care Technology GCU done on time by medical experts. Don’t wait – ORDER NOW!

General Guidelines:

Use the following information to ensure successful completion of the assignment:

  • This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
  • Doctoral learners are required to use APA style for their writing assignments. The APA Style Guide is located in the Student Success Center.
  • Use primary sources published within the last 5 years. Provide citations and references for all sources used.
  • You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. A link to the LopesWrite technical support articles is located in Class Resources if you need assistance.
  • Learners will submit this assignment using the assignment dropbox in the learning management system. In addition, learners must upload this deliverable to the Learner Dissertation Page (LDP) in the DNP PI Workspace for later use.

Directions:

For this assignment, write a 1,000-1,250 word paper in which you:

  1. Select a technology that has been explored in the course.
  2. Using the technology you have selected, define and describe how the element would be measured or evaluated.
  3. Using the content in the textbook and other readings, list three elements that will be used to evaluate the user-technology interface.
  4. Perform an assessment using elements of user-technology interface or human factors methods to determine functionality.
  5. For each element, propose practicable suggestions for improvement using support from the literature.
  1. Evaluation of Health Care Technology – Rubric
  2. Collapse All Evaluation Of Health Care Technology – RubricCollapse All
  3. Selection of a Specific Technology Explored in This Course

    DNP 805 Week 8 Evaluation of Health Care Technology GCU
    DNP 805 Week 8 Evaluation of Health Care Technology GCU
  4. 11 points
  5. Criteria Description
  6. Selection of a Specific Technology Explored in This Course
  7. Excellent
  8. 11 points
  9. Selection of a specific technology explored in this course is present. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.
  10. Good
  11. 12 points
  12. Selection of a specific technology explored in this course is present. Discussion is convincing. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: DNP 805 Week 8 Evaluation of Health Care Technology GCU

  1. Satisfactory
  2. 68 points
  3. Selection of a specific technology explored in this course is perfunctory.

Also Read:  MAT 2051 Discrete Mathematics Unit 7 Assignment 1

  1. Less Than Satisfactory
  2. 8 points
  3. Selection of a specific technology explored in this course is marginal or incomplete.
  4. Unsatisfactory
  5. 0 points
  6. Selection of a specific technology explored in this course is not present.
  7. Assessment Performed Using Elements of User-Technology Interface or Human Factor Methods to Determin
  8. 5 points
  9. Criteria Description
  10. Assessment Performed Using Elements of User-Technology Interface or Human Factor Methods to Determine Existing Functionality of the Specified Technology
  11. Excellent
  12. 5 points
  13. An assessment using elements of user-technology interface or human factor methods to determine existing functionality of the specified technology is present in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.
  14. Good
  15. 18 points
  16. An assessment using elements of user-technology interface or human factor methods to determine existing functionality of the specified technology is present in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.
  17. Satisfactory
  18. 52 points
  19. An assessment using elements of user-technology interface or human factor methods to determine existing functionality of the specified technology is present but at a perfunctory level.
  20. Less Than Satisfactory
  21. 2 points
  22. An assessment using elements of user-technology interface or human factor methods to determine existing functionality of the specified technology is marginal or incomplete.
  23. Unsatisfactory
  24. 0 points
  25. An assessment using elements of user-technology interface or human factor methods to determine existing functionality of the specified technology is not present.
  26. List With Support for Three Elements of the Specified Technology That Will Be Used to Evaluate the U
  27. 5 points
  28. Criteria Description
  29. List With Support for Three Elements of the Specified Technology That Will Be Used to Evaluate the User-Technology Interface Using the Course Content
  30. Excellent
  31. 5 points
  32. A list with support of three elements of the specified technology that will be used to evaluate the user-technology interface using the course content is present in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.
  33. Good
  34. 18 points
  35. A list with support of three elements of the specified technology that will be used to evaluate the user-technology interface using the course content is present in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.
  36. Satisfactory
  37. 52 points
  38. A list with support of three elements of the specified technology that will be used to evaluate the user-technology interface using the course content is present but at a perfunctory level.
  39. Less Than Satisfactory
  40. 2 points
  41. A list with support of three elements of the specified technology that will be used to evaluate the user-technology interface using the course content is present but is marginal or incomplete.
  42. Unsatisfactory
  43. 0 points
  44. A list with support of three elements of the specified technology that will be used to evaluate the user-technology interface using the course content is not present.
  45. Definition of Each Element of the Specified Technology Identified and Description of How Each Elemen
  46. 5 points
  47. Criteria Description
  48. Definition of Each Element of the Specified Technology Identified and Description of How Each Element Would Be Measured or Evaluated
  49. Excellent
  50. 5 points
  51. A definition of each element of the specified technology identified and a description of how each element would be measured or evaluated are present in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.
  52. Good
  53. 18 points
  54. A definition of each element of the specified technology identified and a description of how each element would be measured or evaluated are present in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.
  55. Satisfactory
  56. 52 points
  57. A definition of each element of the specified technology identified and a description of how each element would be measured or evaluated are present but at a perfunctory level.
  58. Less Than Satisfactory
  59. 2 points
  60. A definition of each element of the specified technology identified and a description of how each element would be measured or evaluated are present but are marginal or incomplete.
  61. Unsatisfactory
  62. 0 points
  63. A definition of each element of the specified technology identified and a description of how each element would be measured or evaluated are not present.
  64. Proposal That Employs Support From the Literature to Provide Practicable Suggestions for Improvement
  65. 5 points
  66. Criteria Description
  67. Proposal That Employs Support From the Literature to Provide Practicable Suggestions for Improvement in the Use of Each Element of the Specified Technology
  68. Excellent
  69. 5 points
  70. A proposal that employs support from the literature to provide practicable suggestions for improvement in the use of each element of the specified technology is present in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.
  71. Good
  72. 18 points
  73. A proposal that employs support from the literature to provide practicable suggestions for improvement in the use of each element of the specified technology is present in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.
  74. Satisfactory
  75. 52 points
  76. A proposal that employs support from the literature to provide practicable suggestions for improvement in the use of each element of the specified technology is present but at a perfunctory level.
  77. Less Than Satisfactory
  78. 2 points
  79. A proposal that employs support from the literature to provide practicable suggestions for improvement in the use of each element of the specified technology is present but is marginal or incomplete.
  • Unsatisfactory
  1. 0 points
  2. A proposal that employs support from the literature to provide practicable suggestions for improvement in the use of each element of the specified technology is not present.
  3. Purpose
  4. 7 points
  5. Criteria Description
  6. Purpose
  • Excellent
  1. 7 points
  2. Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.
  • Good
  1. 08 points
  2. Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.
  • Satisfactory
  1. 78 points
  2. Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.
  • Less Than Satisfactory
  1. 16 points
  2. Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.
  • Unsatisfactory
  1. 0 points
  2. Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.
  3. Argument Logic and Construction
  4. 8 points
  5. Criteria Description
  6. Argument Logic and Construction
  • Excellent
  1. 8 points
  2. Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.
  • Good
  1. 1 points
  2. Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.
  • Satisfactory
  1. 74 points
  2. Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.
  • Less Than Satisfactory
  1. 04 points
  2. Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.
  • Unsatisfactory
  1. 0 points
  2. Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.
  3. Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)
  4. 5 points
  5. Criteria Description
  6. Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)
  • Excellent
  1. 5 points
  2. Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
  • Good
  1. 06 points
  2. Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.
  • Satisfactory
  1. 84 points
  2. Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.
  • Less Than Satisfactory
  1. 4 points
  2. Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.
  • Unsatisfactory
  1. 0 points
  2. Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.
  3. Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)
  4. 5 points
  5. Criteria Description
  6. Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)
  • Excellent
  1. 5 points
  2. All format elements are correct.
  • Good
  1. 06 points
  2. Template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style.
  • Satisfactory
  1. 84 points
  2. Template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.
  • Less Than Satisfactory
  1. 4 points
  2. Template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent.
  • Unsatisfactory
  1. 0 points
  2. Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.
  3. Documentation of Sources
  4. 5 points
  5. Criteria Description
  6. Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)
  • Excellent
  1. 5 points
  2. Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.
  • Good
  1. 06 points
  2. Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.
  • Satisfactory
  1. 84 points
  2. Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.
  • Less Than Satisfactory
  1. 4 points
  2. Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.
  • Unsatisfactory
  1. 0 points
  2. Sources are not documented.
  3. Total 110 points

 

Don’t wait until the last minute

Fill in your requirements and let our experts deliver your work asap.