Relates to the question “CLC – Health Care Organization Evaluation”
The purpose of this assignment is to reflect on your collaborative practice within the CLC Health Organization Evaluation assignment.
In 250-500 words, answer the following:
- Describe the communication tools and techniques used by your team. What were the strengths and weaknesses of the group when collaborating to complete this project?
- What strategy, or approach, would improve your collaborative practice in future projects?
- When working in a health care setting, how would interprofessional collaboration work to support quality and the improvement of patient outcomes?
While APA style is not required for the body of this assignment, solid academic writing is expected, and documentation of sources should be presented using APA formatting guidelines, which can be found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.
This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assigning to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
American Association of Colleges of Nursing Core Competencies for Professional Nursing Education
This assignment aligns to AACN Core Competencies 6.1, 6.2.
Personal Reflection – Rubric
CLC Team Collaboration 9 points
Criteria Description
Describe the CLC team collaboration, including strengths and weaknesses of the
group.
5. Target 9 points
A description of the CLC team collaboration, including strengths and weaknesses of
the group, is thorough.
4. Acceptable 8.01 points
A description of the CLC team collaboration, including strengths and weaknesses of
the group, is detailed.
3. Approaching 7.11 points
A description of the CLC team collaboration, including strengths and weaknesses of
the group, is included but lacks detail.
2. Insufficient 6.75 points
A description of the CLC team collaboration, including strengths and weaknesses of
the group, is incomplete or incorrect.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
A description of the CLC team collaboration, including strengths and weaknesses of
the group, is not included.
Collapse All
© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
Interprofessional Collaboration 9 points
Criteria Description
Describe how interprofessional collaboration helps support the improvement of
quality and patient outcomes.
5. Target 9 points
A description of how interprofessional collaboration helps support the
improvement of quality and patient outcomes is thorough.
4. Acceptable 8.01 points
A description of how interprofessional collaboration helps support the
improvement of quality and patient outcomes is detailed.
3. Approaching 7.11 points
A description of how interprofessional collaboration helps support the
improvement of quality and patient outcomes is included but lacks detail.
2. Insufficient 6.75 points
A description of how interprofessional collaboration helps support the
improvement of quality and patient outcomes is incomplete or incorrect.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
A description of how interprofessional collaboration helps support the
improvement of quality and patient outcomes is not included.
© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
Strategy to Improve Collaboration 9 points
Criteria Description
Discuss a strategy or approach to improve collaborative practice.
5. Target 9 points
A discussion of a strategy or approach to improve collaborative practice is
thorough.
4. Acceptable 8.01 points
A discussion of a strategy or approach to improve collaborative practice is detailed.
3. Approaching 7.11 points
A discussion of a strategy or approach to improve collaborative practice is included
but lacks detail.
2. Insufficient 6.75 points
A discussion of a strategy or approach to improve collaborative practice is
incomplete or incorrect.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
A discussion of a strategy or approach to improve collaborative practice is not
included.
© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
Mechanics of Writing 1.8 points
Criteria Description
Includes spelling, capitalization, punctuation, grammar, language use, sentence
structure, etc.
5. Target 1.8 points
No mechanical errors are present. Appropriate language choice and sentence
structure are used throughout.
4. Acceptable 1.6 points
Few mechanical errors are present. Suitable language choice and sentence
structure are used.
3. Approaching 1.42 points
Occasional mechanical errors are present. Language choice is generally
appropriate. Varied sentence structure is attempted.
2. Insufficient 1.35 points
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors are present. Inconsistencies in language
choice or sentence structure are recurrent.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Errors in grammar or syntax are pervasive and impede meaning. Incorrect language
choice or sentence structure errors are found throughout.
© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
Format/Documentation 1.2 points
Criteria Description
Uses appropriate style, such as APA, MLA, etc., for college, subject, and level;
documents sources using citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc.,
appropriate to assignment and discipline.
5. Target 1.2 points
No errors in formatting or documentation are present.
4. Acceptable 1.07 points
Appropriate format and documentation are used with only minor errors.
3. Approaching 0.95 points
Appropriate format and documentation are used, although there are some obvious
errors.
2. Insufficient 0.9 points
Appropriate format is attempted, but some elements are missing. Frequent errors
in documentation of sources are evident.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Appropriate format is not used. No documentation of sources is provided.
Total 30 points
© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
Last Completed Projects
| topic title | academic level | Writer | delivered |
|---|