Concept Analysis Paper
Assignment Guidelines
Identify a concept (usually one or two words) you are interested in. Ideally, this concept will be the focus of your DNP Project. Utilize specific scholarly sources, including books or peer-reviewed articles from scholarly journals. You can use a reference book such as an encyclopedia, thesaurus, or dictionary, but limit yourself to only one of each.
Write a brief paper (three to four pages) in APA (7th edition) format addressing the following items:
Alternative definitions—these must be referenced
Defining attributes
Antecedents
Consequences
Model, borderline, and contrary cases
Empirical referents
These items should be the headings for your paper but should be no more than a paragraph or two each. The paper should include a title page and reference page (not included in total paper length) and use of appropriate scholarly sources cited throughout.
You will submit the assignment via Turnitin; a Turnitin score less than 20% is expected. Turnitin is an online service that highlights matching text in written work. It indexes Internet sources, databases of subscription services, and written work submitted through its website. Assignments sent through Turnitin are scanned against all of its sources, and a report is generated that summarizes and highlights matching text and where it was found. It is up to instructors and students to interpret the report to determine if plagiarism occurred.
You may submit your assignment to Turnitin prior to its due date once to assess your work against Turnitin’s database. You may use the Originality Report’s results to address any originality concerns in your work, and then resubmit your assignment for grading. You may only resubmit once until the assignment’s due date. Any work that has been submitted at the time the assignment is due will be considered your final submission, and this will be the submission used for grading.
For additional information, visit Plagiarism Detection: Students.Links to an external site.
The assignment will be evaluated using the Assignment 3.1: Concept Analysis Paper Rubric found in your syllabus.
please ensure the reference:
Smith, M. C. (2020). Nursing theories and nursing practice (5th ed.). F.A. Davis
rubric:
Assignment 3.1: Concept Analysis Paper Rubric
Criteria Ratings Pts
Alternative definitions
view longer description
10 to >9 pts
Fully Meets Expectations
Thoroughly defines the concept and provides appropriate citations for the definitions.
9 to >6 pts
Nearly Meets Expectations
Provides some definitions of the concept and sources for the definitions.
6 to >3 pts
Barely Meets Expectations
Defines the concept but definitions not appropriately cited.
3 to >0 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
Concept not appropriately defined and/or cited.
/ 10 pts
Defining Attributes
view longer description
10 to >9 pts
Fully Meets Expectations
Defining attributes are identified and thoroughly explained.
9 to >6 pts
Nearly Meets Expectations
Defining attributes are identified but explanation may not be thorough.
6 to >3 pts
Barely Meets Expectations
Some defining attributes are identified and may be explained.
3 to >0 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
Defining attributes are missing or not clearly explained.
/ 10 pts
Antecedents
view longer description
10 to >9 pts
Fully Meets Expectations
Antecedents are thoroughly explained.
9 to >6 pts
Nearly Meets Expectations
Antecedents are provided but explanations may not be thorough.
6 to >3 pts
Barely Meets Expectations
Some antecedents are provided and may be explained.
3 to >0 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
Antecedents may be missing or not clearly explained.
/ 10 pts
Consequences
view longer description
10 to >9 pts
Fully Meets Expectations
Consequences are thoroughly explained.
9 to >6 pts
Nearly Meets Expectations
Consequences are provided but explanations may not be thorough.
6 to >3 pts
Barely Meets Expectations
Some consequences are provided and may be explained.
3 to >0 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
Consequences may be missing or not clearly explained.
/ 10 pts
Model, borderline, and contrary cases
view longer description
10 to >9 pts
Fully Meets Expectations
Describes each case thoroughly with clear, concise examples.
9 to >6 pts
Nearly Meets Expectations
Describes each case somewhat clearly with examples of each.
6 to >3 pts
Barely Meets Expectations
Describes each case with some details and /or examples of each.
3 to >0 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
Describes cases but either unclear or lacking examples.
/ 10 pts
Empirical referents
view longer description
10 to >9 pts
Fully Meets Expectations
Clearly and concisely describes empirical referents in a manner that explains the presence of the concept.
9 to >6 pts
Nearly Meets Expectations
Describes empirical referents in a manner that explains the presence of the concept.
6 to >3 pts
Barely Meets Expectations
Attempts to describe empirical referents in order to explain the presence of the concept.
3 to >0 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
Does not describe empirical referents well.
/ 10 pts
APA and Writing Scholarship
view longer description
0 pts
(0% deduction) Fully Meets Expectations
APA format, references, and appendices (as appropriate) are correct. Professional written communication and correct grammar are used.
0 pts
(05% deduction) Nearly Meets Expectations
APA format, references, and appendices (as appropriate) have some errors. Some errors in written communication and grammar.
0 pts
(08% deduction) Barely Meets Expectations
APA format, references, and appendices (as appropriate) have frequent errors. Frequent errors in written communication and grammar.
0 pts
(10% deduction) Does Not Meet Expectations
APA format, references, and appendices (as appropriate) have numerous and distracting errors. Written communication and grammar lack professionalism.
/ 0 pts