Data Collection Plan (100 points) and Discussion Board (50 points)
Custom Essay Writers for Hire
Purpose: To assess ability to synthesize key course concepts and the ability to design and implement a data
collection and analysis plan (Objectives 1 – 5).
Due date: Sunday of Week 5 (draft and initial discussion participation is due by Wednesday)
Submitted: Blackboard
Throughout the course, students should be thinking about their clinical scholarly projects and how key concepts
are generally or specifically related to the project. The signature assignment in this course is a draft of the
metholdology chapter of the clinical scholarly project which will explain the expected data collection and
analysis. This Week 5 assignment is a PowerPoint presentation of your intended data collection and analysis
plan. The goal of the assignment is to assess students’ readiness to do the final assignment in the course and the
oral defense of the clinical scholarly project. The focus of the assignment is on developing a clear vision of (a)
what should be done in a clinical scholarly project to collect, analyze and interpret data appropriately.
This assignment must be submitted by Sunday, end of Week 5. Students must use the assignment template
provided in and attach a PowerPoint file.
Students are expected to use the feedback they got from their instructor on previous assignments as they prepare
for this assignment. Students are encouraged to work with classmates, instructors, and mentors/chairs when
preparing the assignment. However, this assignment is not group work. Each student’s final presentation file
should be unique to the student and reflect his/her background, experience, expertise, integrity, and specific
doctoral project.
The assignment consists of two parts:
Part I. PowerPoint Presentation (100 Points)
The student should prepare a PowerPoint presentation, including slides and presenter notes (not a narrated or
video presentation). It should be organized in the format shown below. Students should choose the most
important quantitative outcome of the clinical scholarly project as the topic of the Analysis Plan. Students
should make sure that the audience will understand what change in practice s/he will be evaluating, why it is an
important problem, why s/he is predicting the results s/he is predicting, and how the results will impact nursing
practice if s/he achieves them. The project will draw heavily on the project proposal developed in DNPU 706.
Slide 1 – Title and Author
Slide 2 – Problem statement (brief explanation of the background and significance of the clinical scholarly
project)
Slide 3 – Claim (predicted result of the clinical scholarly project)
Slide 4 – Evidence (statistical evidence from the literature review to support the claim)
Slide 5 – Reasoning (explanation of how the evidence supports the claim; include a clear statement of the
analysis planned and the predicted result)
Slide 6 – Implications (what are the implications of your study on EBP?)
Slide 7 – Sample (describe your sample and the population it is drawn from)
Slide 8 – Variables (Identify your primary outcome and predictor variable(s))
Slide 9 – Collection Plan and Timeline (Briefly describe the data collection plan – may use up to two slides)
Slide 10 – References (alphabetical list of citations in APA format)
Part II. Draft Feedback and Discussion
You will post a DRAFT of this plan to the class discussion by Wednesday of Week 5 along with a 1-2
paragraph CER Summary of your plan (typed into the discussion). Your classmates will have an opportunity to
provide feedback by Saturday, and you will submit a final draft of this plan by Sunday, midnight.
Student work will be graded with a rubric and individual feedback from instructors will be posted. Students are
expected to use the feedback in preparing for the final assignment.
The Data Collection Plan (100) will be graded using the rubric below.
Still looking for Academic writing help? Get it here.
| Exemplary 4 | Proficient 3 | Developing 2 | Emerging 1 | |
| Problem (2.5) | Clear and concise explanation of the significance of the problem | Adequate explanation of the significance of the problem | Explanation of the significance of the problem lacks focus | Nature of the problem is not clear |
| Organization/CER (5) | Insightful, clear, and thorough use of CER approach evident in presentation | Adequate use of CER approach evident in presentation | Attempt to use CER approach in presentation | CER approach not used in presentation |
| Implications (5) | Synthesizes data to provide a clearly appropriate justification to the audience | Provides a clear justification to the audience | Provides a poorly explained justification to the audience | Does not provide a justification to the audience |
| Sample and Variables (5) | Clearly defines sample, recruitment strategy, and the population it is drawn from (AND) Appropriately identifies variables. | Defines sample, and recruitment strategy, but relationship to population is unclear (OR) Not all variables are appropriately identified. | Sample poorly defined and recruitment strategy or relationship to population is unclear (AND) Not all variables are appropriately defined. | No definition of sample or explanation of variables. |
| Plan and Timeline (3.75) | Collection plan is appropriate and CSP benchmarks (CSP Handbook), identifies collection tool, and is realistic | Collection plan is appropriate but may not include benchmarks, (OR) does not clearly identify collection tool (OR) timeline may be unrealistic. | Data collection plan isn’t fully developed or does not align with CSP benchmarks. (AND/OR) Tool not clearly identified. (OR) No timeline discussed. | No discussion of data collection plan, tools, or timeline. |
| Expression (3.75) | Presentation is engaging, and communicates clearly using appropriate professional tone, grammar, spelling, and punctuation. No errors in APA format. | Presentation communicates clearly with few errors in professional tone, grammar, spelling, or punctuation. Few errors in APA. | Presentation has many distracting errors in professional tone, grammar, spelling, or punctuation. Many errors in APA format. | Presentation does not communicate clearly. (OR) APA not used. |
Presentation Feedback Discussion (50) will be graded with the following rubric (deadline is Saturday):
| Exemplary 4 | Proficient 3 | Developing 2 | Emerging 1 | |
| Original post (3.75) | Fully responds to all questions in DB Prompt with insightful appraisal of evidence | Responds to all questions, but lacks development (AND) Clear statement of evidence and conclusion | Does not respond to all questions (OR) Response not in appropriate format. | Does not respond to all questions. (AND) Response not in appropriate format. |
| Timeliness of original posts (1.25) | Initial post by Wednesday of the assigned week. | Initial post by Thursday of the assigned week | Initial post by Friday of the assigned week | Initial post after Friday of the assigned week. |
| Comments on Others’ Posts (3.75) | Provides relevant and helpful feedback with insightful, clear, and thorough use of CER approach in discussions with classmates. | Provides relevant and helpful feedback with use of CER approach in discussions with classmates. | Responses lack substance and attempt to use CER approach in discussions with classmates. | Poor response quality |
| Engagement (1.25) | Responses to at least three classmates (AND) Responses spread over more than two days | Responds to fewer than three classmates (OR) Responses on two days. | Responds to two classmates on two days (OR) all responses on one day | Responds to one classmate on one day (OR) does not respond to classmates. |
| Expression and Format (2.5) | Writing is graduate level and engaging. (AND) Written responses communicate clearly using appropriate professional tone, grammar, spelling, and punctuation. | Writing is graduate level and engaging. (AND) Written responses may not communicate clearly, use appropriate professional tone, or there may be a few errors grammar, spelling, and punctuation without detracting from readability. | Writing may not be graduate level. (OR) Written responses do not communicate clearly, use appropriate professional tone, or there are several errors grammar, spelling, and punctuation, detracting from overall readability. | Poor writing quality, poor communication and unprofessional tone. (OR) Extensive errors in spelling, grammar, or punctuation that detract from the readability. |
Still looking for Academic writing help? Get it here.
Sample Draft Analysis Plan