Rubric for wk 1 discussion EBP Excellent Good Fair Poor Main Posting 45 (45%) - 50 (50%) Answers all parts of the discussion question(s) expectations with reflective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources. Supported by at least three current, credible sources. Written clearly and concisely with no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. 40 (40%) - 44 (44%) Responds to the discussion question(s) and is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. At least 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth. Supported by at least three credible sources. Written clearly and concisely with one or no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. 35 (35%) - 39 (39%) Responds to some of the discussion question(s). One or two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed. Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis. Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. Post is cited with two credible sources. Written somewhat concisely; may contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors. Contains some APA formatting errors. 0 (0%) - 34 (34%) Does not respond to the discussion question(s) adequately. Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria. Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis. Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. Contains only one or no credible sources. Not written clearly or concisely. Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors. Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style. Main Post: Timeliness 10 (10%) - 10 (10%) Posts main post by day 3. 0 (0%) - 0 (0%) 0 (0%) - 0 (0%) 0 (0%) - 0 (0%) Does not post by day 3. First Response 17 (17%) - 18 (18%) Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings. Responds fully to questions posed by faculty. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources. Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives. Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed. Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. 15 (15%) - 16 (16%) Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings. Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources. Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. 13 (13%) - 14 (14%) Response is on topic and may have some depth. Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication. Respons ...

1. Rubric for wk 1 discussion EBP
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Main Posting
45 (45%) - 50 (50%)
Answers all parts of the discussion question(s) expectations
with reflective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge
gained from the course readings for the module and current
credible sources.
Supported by at least three current, credible sources.
Written clearly and concisely with no grammatical or spelling
errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules
and style.
40 (40%) - 44 (44%)
Responds to the discussion question(s) and is reflective with
critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the
course readings for the module.
At least 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth.
Supported by at least three credible sources.
Written clearly and concisely with one or no grammatical or
spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing
rules and style.
35 (35%) - 39 (39%)
Responds to some of the discussion question(s).
One or two criteria are not addressed or are superficially

2. addressed.
Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and
synthesis.
Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course
readings for the module.
Post is cited with two credible sources.
Written somewhat concisely; may contain more than two
spelling or grammatical errors.
Contains some APA formatting errors.
0 (0%) - 34 (34%)
Does not respond to the discussion question(s) adequately.
Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria.
Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.
Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings
for the module.
Contains only one or no credible sources.
Not written clearly or concisely.
Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors.
Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style.
Main Post: Timeliness
10 (10%) - 10 (10%)
Posts main post by day 3.
0 (0%) - 0 (0%)
0 (0%) - 0 (0%)

3. 0 (0%) - 0 (0%)
Does not post by day 3.
First Response
17 (17%) - 18 (18%)
Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application
to practice settings.
Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by
at least two scholarly sources.
Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning
objectives.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.
15 (15%) - 16 (16%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice
settings.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by
two or more credible sources.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.
13 (13%) - 14 (14%)
Response is on topic and may have some depth.
Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective

4. professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if
posed.
Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few
or no credible sources are cited.
0 (0%) - 12 (12%)
Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional
communication.
Responses to faculty questions are missing.
No credible sources are cited.
Second Response
16 (16%) - 17 (17%)
Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application
to practice settings.
Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by
at least two scholarly sources.
Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning
objectives.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.
14 (14%) - 15 (15%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice

5. settings.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by
two or more credible sources.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.
12 (12%) - 13 (13%)
Response is on topic and may have some depth.
Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective
professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if
posed.
Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few
or no credible sources are cited.
0 (0%) - 11 (11%)
Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional
communication.
Responses to faculty questions are missing.
No credible sources are cited.
Participation
5 (5%) - 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for participation by posting on three
different days.
0 (0%) - 0 (0%)
0 (0%) - 0 (0%)

6. 0 (0%) - 0 (0%)
Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3
different days.
Total Points: 100
Discussion: Where in the World Is Evidence-Based Practice?
March 21, 2010, was not EBP’s date of birth, but it may be the
date the approach “grew up” and left home to take on the world.
When the Affordable Care Act was passed, it came with a
requirement of empirical evidence. Research on EBP increased
significantly. Application of EBP spread to allied health
professions, education, healthcare technology, and more. Health
organizations began to adopt and promote EBP.
In this Discussion, you will consider this adoption. You will
examine healthcare organization websites and analyze to what
extent these organizations use EBP.
To Prepare:
· Review the Resources and reflect on the definition and goal of
EBP.
· Choose a professional healthcare organization’s website (e.g.,
a reimbursing body, an accredited body, or a national
initiative).
· Explore the website to determine where and to what extent
EBP is evident.
By Day 3 of Week 1
Post a description of the healthcare organization website you
reviewed. Describe where, if at all, EBP appears (e.g., the
mission, vision, philosophy, and/or goals of the healthcare
organization, or in other locations on the website). Then,
explain whether this healthcare organization’s work is grounded
in EBP and why or why not. Finally, explain whether the
information you discovered on the healthcare organization’s
website has changed your perception of the healthcare
organization. Be specific and provide examples.

7. RESOURCES
Crabtree, E., Brennan, E., Davis, A., & Coyle, A. (2016).
Improving patient care through nursing engagement in
evidence-based practice. Worldviews on Evidence-Based
Nursing, 13(2), 172–175. doi:10.1111/wvn.12126.
Boller, J. (2017). Nurse educators: Leading health care to the
quadruple aim sweet spot. Journal of Nursing Education,
56(12), 707–708. doi:10.3928/01484834-20171120-01.
Melnyk, B. M., & Fineout-Overholt, E. (2018). Evidence-based
practice in nursing & healthcare: A guide to best practice (4th
ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Wolters Kluwer.
· Chapter 1, “Making the Case for Evidence-Based Practice and
Cultivating a Spirit of Inquiry” (pp. 7–32)
Kim, S. C., Stichler, J. F., Ecoff, L., Brown, C. E., Gallo, A.-
M., & Davidson, J. E. (2016). Predictors of evidence-based
practice implementation, job satisfaction, and group cohesion
among regional fellowship program participants. Worldviews on
Evidence-Based Nursing, 13(5), 340–348.
doi:10.1111/wvn.12171.
http://download.lww.com/wolterskluwer_vitalstream_com/Perm
aLink/NCNJ/A/NCNJ_165_516_2010_08_23_DGSODKGNM_1
651_SDC516.pdf.
Melnyk, B. M., Gallagher-Ford, L., Long, L. E., & Fineout-
Overholt, E. (2014). The establishment of evidence-based
practice competencies for practicing registered nurses and
advanced practice nurses in real-world clinical settings:
Proficiencies to improve healthcare quality, reliability, patient
outcomes, and costs. Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing,
11(1), 5–15. doi:10.1111/wvn.12021. Retrieved from
https://sigmapubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/wvn
.12021.
Sikka, R., Morath, J. M., & Leape, L. (2015). The Quadruple
Aim: Care, health, cost and meaning in work. BMJ Quality &
Safety, 24, 608–610. doi:10.1136/bmjqs-2015-004160.
Retrieved from

8. https://qualitysafety.bmj.com/content/qhc/24/10/608.full.pdf