Running head ASSIGNMENT1ASSIGNMENT5.docx

Running head: ASSIGNMENT
1
ASSIGNMENT
5
Annotated Bibliography
Alesix Tieku
Writing 112 Assignment 2
September 14th, 2019
How internet search is affecting the effectiveness of research
methods and plagiarism free students research paper
Currently, the availability of the internet, as well as vast
information, can be found ready to be copied. This process just
involves typing the keywords to search through using a search
engine. This, therefore, implies that the internet has
significantly led to an increase in the students’ attempts to
plagiarize work. Such practices are therefore influencing the
outcome of the research methods and plagiarism on the students'
research papers. This discussion involves the annotation of
bibliography related to the topic of the discussion above.
Torres-Diaz, C. J., Duart, J. M., & Hinojosa-Becerra, M.
(2018). Plagiarism, Internet and Academic Success at the
University. Journal of New Approaches in Educational
Research, 7 (2), 89-104.
In this article, the authors determined the degree to which

the students relied on internet and technologies and how this
practice influenced their academic achievements. They also
determined the rates of interactions and the experiences on the
level at which students egage in plagiarism practices at the
university level. A total of 10, 952 students were used as study
participants and their classification in the study was based on
the level of their experience, the interaction level with
educators and coursemates, and how they apply technologies in
education. Based on this study, it is clear that internet usage for
research work does not necessarily mean that there will be
plagiarism on the student work. However, the level of
plagiarism is determined by the manner or how perfect the
student is using internet technology. This study is therefore
useful for this research topic since it shows that research
methods of students and plagiarism on the student paper is
influenced by hours required by the learners to look for facts
from the internet and total academic videos watched by the
students. The quality of work and plagiarism-free paper is
influenced by the dedication and hours used by the students
while looking for facts from the internet.
Anney, N. V., & Mosha, A. M. (2015). Student’s Plagiarisms in
Higher Learning Institutions in the Era of Improved Internet
Access: Case Study of Developing Countries. Journal of
Education and Practice, 6 (13), 203-216.
The objective of the authors of this article was to
investigate the student practices in Tanzania collges and
universities. The university used in the study had established
codes and policies to guide against plagiarism practices and
how they can be detected. Nevertheless, these learning
institutions failed to use software to guide in checking
plagiarism made by the learners. Authors used qualitative
research strategy which included interpretive model. According
to this study, it was evident that is becoming a major concern
and the majority of the student were aware of the issue of
plagiarism as being academic dishonesty. In this study, it is
clear that some of the factors affecting the students' research

methods and increase in the possibilities of plagiarism in their
paper are related to the shortage of books, being lazy, poor
academic writing techniques, and easy process of accessing the
internet. Therefore, this study is important since it also helps in
revealing more information about factors that affect student
research methods and plagiarism issues while using internet
sources.
Ennam, A. (2017). Systematic Analysis of the Effects of Digital
Plagiarism on Scientific Research: Investigating the Moroccan
Context-Ibn Tofail University as a Case Study. Journal of
This article was aimed at making contributing to severe
issue related to the digital plagiarism in Moroccan Universities
which is affecting the undergraduate, masters, and doctoral
candidates. The authors also aimed at establishing a genuine
academic culture of research performance. According to this
article, e-plagiarism is becoming a common practice in most of
the learning institutions in Morocco. Some of these practices
occur due to the ignorance of the students since some students
are not well informed regarding the impact of direct copying
from the internet. This study indicates that even though there
are increased cases of students’ research paper being rejected
due to the poor research methods and increased cases of
plagiarism, majority of them are not well informed on how to
avoid it. Therefore, this research article is important for the
selected topic since it shows that there is a need for
conceptualization and efforts to operationalize more rigorous
methods of learning as well as training of students in research
methodology. It also shows that it is important to consolidate
internet literacy and computer-mediated research methodology.
Hussein, N., Rusdi, D. S., & Mohamad, S. S. (2016). Academic
Dishonesty Among Business Students: A Descriptive Study of
Plagiarism Behavior. In 7th International Conference on
University Learning and Teaching (InCULT 2014) Proceedings,
639-648.
Authors of this article aimed at investigating the reasons

for the engagement of students in plagiarism as well as the
learners’ degree of awareness concerning plagiarism activities.
According to this article, technology has helped in reshaping
how people live, works, and how they make communicate. The
technology is also being adopted and implemented in colleges
and universities. With increased cases of technology adoption
and internet use, concerns have been raised especially on issues
related to academic dishonesty. According to the outcome of
article, it was clear that learners were much aware of the issue
of plagiarism. Despite being aware of this issue, these students
further engage in plagiarism activity since they can easily
access the internet for the information they need. It is clear
from these results that students are not prepared to such rules
controlling the plagiarism practices. Therefore, this calls for
strict rules such as suspension or dismissal from the universities
to help in dealing with the issue. This article is important since
it shows there is no negative direct effects of using internet on
the research methods and plagiarism issues on the research
paper of a student, but it is the dedication of the students that
matters a lot while looking for facts from the internet for their
research work to reduce the possibilities of their works being
plagiarized.
References
Anney, N. V., & Mosha, A. M. (2015). Student’s Plagiarisms in
Higher Learning Institutions in the Era of Improved Internet
Access: Case Study of Developing Countries. Journal of
Ennam, A. (2017). Systematic Analysis of the Effects of Digital
Plagiarism on Scientific Research: Investigating the Moroccan
Context-Ibn Tofail University as a Case Study. Journal of
Hussein, N., Rusdi, D. S., & Mohamad, S. S. (2016). Academic
Dishonesty Among Business Students: A Descriptive Study of
Plagiarism Behavior. In 7th International Conference on

University Learning and Teaching (InCULT 2014) Proceedings,
639-648.
Torres-Diaz, C. J., Duart, J. M., & Hinojosa-Becerra, M.
(2018). Plagiarism, Internet and Academic Success at the
University. Journal of New Approaches in Educational
Research, 7 (2), 89-104.
Walden University
Manual for
STAFF
EDUCATION
Doctor of Nursing Practice
(DNP) Scholarly Project
May 2019
Prior to beginning the work of any DNP scholarly project,
Walden students will complete
the steps of prospectus development and approval. Once the
prospectus is approved the
committee will be formed, proposal developed and oral proposal
defense completed per
the DNP Project Process Guide. The ethics approval process

begins during proposal
development but can only be finalized after the proposal
defense is entered into
MyDR/Taskstream.
Principles of Staff Education
There is no single model for development and delivery of Staff
Education, as clinical
needs, organizational structures and budget will guide the
concepts and processes.
-developed framework for
effective
programming and evaluation for the adult learners within the
context of the
setting.
iterative in nature, with
ongoing evaluation occurring throughout the planning stages.
impact evaluation must be
included that demonstrates
outcomes related to the identified Staff Education program
objectives.
change as an
outcome.
Definition of Staff Education Projects
Staff education may include nurse residencies, orientation, in-

service education, and
continuing education of professional staff. Walden requires that
a partner
organization oversee the staff education activities. Walden is
able to oversee the
evaluation data collection, if the site wishes (see IRB steps
below). Programs may be
multi-disciplinary in nature, meaning that other professional
healthcare clinicians may
attend and benefit from the content. Staff education is usually
developed to meet a need
identified by an organization or clinical practice setting to
improve patient care, achieve
standards of practice or to meet regulatory guidelines.
DNP students may not develop Scholarly Projects that involve
patients, families, or pre-
professional students as their target population..
It is important to understand the expectations for accomplishing
a Staff Education Project
in the context of the DNP Scholarly Project.
Scholarly Projects related to Staff Education are aligned with
the DNP Essentials.
Doctor of Nursing Program Capstone Resources
https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/researchcenter/osra/dnp
Purpose of Staff Education
May 2019

For the DNP Nurse, Staff Education is often used to help inform
and improve knowledge
and skills using current evidence-based practices.
Steps for Developing a Staff Education Project
There are numerous instructional design models available for
developing education
programs. One of the most common is the ADDIE model
(Analysis, Design,
Development, Implementation, and Evaluation). The ADDIE
model is discussed in
chapter 2 of the Jeffery, Longo, & Nienaber required staff
education textbook under
required resources in this document.
Planning
• Meet with committee chair to explore topic and narrow down
focus to select a
project that meets the requirements of a DNP staff education
module
• Analyze need and establish the criteria for the Staff Education
program using
available existing data from site, literature, or theoretical
support.
• Discuss needs and staff education program goals with
organizational leadership
(via informal conversation rather than survey/interview)
• Obtain a commitment of support from organizational
leadership
• Identify (and confirm) content expert(s) to review educational

materials.
• Research the literature for relevant teaching materials or
content that address the
program goals. Unless literature has historical relevance, all
literature should be
within fives years of date of completion.
• Formulate specific learning objectives that are measurable and
reasonable for the
project selected
• Develop the Staff Education program, including the content
and the delivery
strategy using appropriate instructional methods and theoretical
framework
(teaching/learning, adult education, and nursing theories)
Currently adopted
educational materials may be adapted for use in this project
with the
permission of the author/s.
• Seek appropriate ethics approval at the site and through
Walden IRB (see below).
Implementation
• Verify the Staff Education program plan with organizational
leadership and end-
users via formative or iterative review
• Revise the Staff Education program plan based on formative
or iterative review
• Present the revised Staff Education Program to organizational
leadership and
end-users/key stakeholders and discuss to validate content and

ensure usability
• Secure evidence-based resources to implement the Staff
Education program
• Finalize development of the Staff Education program
including a second
anonymous questionnaire review with organizational leadership
and end-users
• Support the organization in the recruitment of staff for the
education program,
unless the program is required by the organization. Note that the
site, not Walden,
will be overseeing the education program so all recruitment
materials must reflect
that.
Evaluation
May 2019
• Review chapters 5 and 6 of the Jeffery, Longo, & Nienaber
required staff education
textbook to develop evaluation methods and materials
• Have the participants complete a summative or impact
evaluation (pre and post-test)
of their learning based on an anonymous paper-based or online
questionnaire that is
directly related to the identified learning objectives. If a
validated questionnaire is
available, that should be used, as opposed to the student

creating a new questionnaire.
• When possible, it is recommended that the student apply for,
and receive
approval for continuing education credits from an approved
provider.
• If providing continuing education credits utilize evaluation
methods provided by the
provider.
• Determine the effectiveness of the Staff Education program
through analysis of the
summative or impact evaluation (pre and post-test).
• Analysis procedures used should be aligned with practice-
focused
question(s) (e.g., descriptive statistics or inferential statistics to
determine
the difference between the two means ).If inferential statistics
are utilized
limitations must be noted.
• Communicate the results and recommendations to
organizational leadership and
program stakeholders
• Present findings through DNP final project following DNP
template and Checklist
which are submitted with the paper in MyDR/Taskstream.
The doctoral project is grounded in a focused application of
related concepts,
models, and/or theories consistent with the DNP Checklist.

Obtaining ethics approval in compliance with Institutional
Review Board (IRB)
requirements
All doctoral projects are required to have ethics approval from
the university’s IRB, even
those that might not be considered “research.” The DNP
program has set up a blanket
ethics pre-approval for Staff Education Doctoral Projects falling
within the parameters
described in the blue table below, as per the pre-approved Site
Approval Form (Appendix
A) and the Consent Form for Anonymous Questionnaires
(Appendix B). Only Staff
Education projects involving public data, the literature,
anonymous questionnaires from
site staff, and archival data from the organization(s) are eligible
for the blanket pre-
approval.
Edits to Appendices A and B are not permitted. If a student
needs to customize anything
about either of the two appendices or add more data points
(such as observations, or
interviews), then the blanket approval cannot be utilized (and
the student should follow
the standard IRB approval steps in the DNP Project Process
Guide.
Steps for ethics approval:
These steps can be completed any time after (a) the chair has
uploaded the proposal into
MyDR for URR review, and (b) the student has identified a site.

May 2019
Step 1: To quality for pre-approved status, each doctoral student
completing a
Staff Education project is responsible for completing the web-
based Form A
(the same form that all DNP students use to start the ethics
approval process). In
the first page of Form A, the student needs to indicate that s/he
will be conducting
a project that falls within the pre-approved parameters for a
Staff Education
project and this will cause the form to skip the questions that
are not applicable.
The student will also need to enter the details for the partner
site(s). The final
page in Form A will provide instructions for next steps, based
on the responses
the student enters into Form A.
Step 2: For Staff Education projects on the pre-approved track,
the instructions on
the final page of Form A will indicate that the student can either
upload the
signed Site Approval Form (Appendix A) into the form or email
it to
[email protected] at a later date. Note that the Consent Form
(Appendix B)
doesn’t need to be sent to IRB because it has already been pre-
approved and
doesn’t need to be signed.

Step 3: Once Form A is received by the IRB, an IRB staff
member will respond
within 10 business days to the student and chair with either (a)
an email
confirmation that the ethical standards have been met (i.e., the
data collection
procedures fall within the pre-approved parameters), or (b) a
request for more
information. For certain sites (within Department of Defense,
international
contexts, universities, or research hospital systems), additional
documentation and
compliance steps may be required by the site, so the IRB staff
will work with the
student to meet all of the site’s requirements. The IRB would
continue to
correspond with the student until all ethical issues are
addressed. Once (a) occurs,
the student can focus on working toward proposal approval.
Doctoral students
with project data falling outside the pre-approved parameters
will be directed to
obtain IRB approval in the standard manner, which is likely to
take a minimum of
4 weeks longer.
Step 4: At this point, to finalize ethics approval, a student just
needs to have the
project design approved via the proposal defense. Thus, once
the student
successfully defends the proposal, the MyDR system will
automatically copy the
IRB on the proposal approval notice and that will trigger the
IRB to reach out to
the student via email to confirm whether/how the data collection
plan might

have changed as a result of the proposal defense. If changes to
the data collection
plan were made, then the IRB will need updated versions of the
ethics application
materials. If the student confirms no changes were made, then
the IRB will
email the student and chair a formal ethics approval notification
which
signifies that the student may begin collecting data.
The doctoral student must be actively enrolled in the doctoral
project course to
receive final IRB approval notification and must remain
enrolled while completing
May 2019
the project, including data collection. IRB approval is not valid
if a student is on a
leave of absence or otherwise not enrolled.
A Staff Education project is also required to adhere to the
following ethical
requirements:
change the name of
any partner organizations and generalize the location(s) so that
the organizations
are not identifiable. It is important that the doctoral student
redact any information
that could lead a reader to identify an organization’s identity. If

the organization
itself wishes to publicize the project, that will be the
organization’s judgment call.
However, it is not appropriate for a doctoral student to make the
partner site’s
name known in the doctoral project document that will be
published in ProQuest.
The doctoral student is required to change the name of the
organization in all
materials (including drafts shared with peers and faculty
members) to protect the
organization’s identity. In some cases, it might be appropriate
for the doctoral
student to maintain confidentiality by removing key pieces of
evidence/data that
might give away the organization’s identity. The doctoral
student should direct
questions to [email protected] when these situations arise.
the organization’s
policies. This includes, but is not limited to, site IRB policies
and site resource
use policies (pertaining to copying/ printing materials, etc.).
patients or patients’
family members for this type of project. If at some point the
doctoral student
wishes to pursue that type of data collection, s/he will need to
follow the standard
university procedures to obtain prior approval from the Walden

University IRB.
approval can result
in invalidation of the data and dismissal from the program.
proprietary, sensitive, or
confidential information is disclosed in the doctoral project
document. The
doctoral student is responsible for learning about the
organization’s policies on
use of the organization’s resources (including email addresses,
printing materials,
etc.) for individual projects. Many organizations have
restrictions on use of
company resources for educational projects.
Other student obligations will be outlined in the final page of
Form A. Faculty
supervision requirements for Staff Education projects include
the following:
properly requests any
project design changes by emailing [email protected]
May 2019

promptly reports any
unexpected or otherwise significant adverse events and general
problems within 1
week by emailing [email protected]
noncompliance on the
part of the student by emailing [email protected]
as long as the
student remains enrolled in the present course with the faculty
member.
Data Sources that have been Pre-approved by IRB
for Staff Education Doctoral Projects
Public data:
Reports, websites
Media coverage, publicly disseminated reports, public websites,
any information that is available to the public
Literature as Data Books, peer-reviewed articles, and other
bodies of written
knowledge that communicate theories and findings about
practices that are relevant to the student’s doctoral project
Anonymous
Questionnaires from
Staff
Using the pre-approved Consent Form for Anonymous
Questionnaires in Appendix B, students may conduct paper

or online surveys of staff members as long as they are
anonymous. If pre and post testing is used, then a coding
system may be used (instead of names) to link a person’s
pretest and posttest score.
May 2019
Partner
organization’s
internal data*:
operational records
and other artifacts
Partner organization’s de-identified records* including:
aggregate** patient records, operational records pertaining to
staff training and delivery of care, meeting minutes,
digital/audio/video recordings created by site, training
materials, protocols, manuals, reports, agreements,
questionnaires that were administered under auspices of site
as part of quality improvement (QI) operations, and other
internal documents that the site has released to the student for
use in the doctoral project
*as the partner organization’s leadership deems fit to
share with student (as per confidentiality terms in this
guide)
**Students are only pre-approved to analyze patient
records that have been aggregated via asking a site
contact for high level summary data (without the
student actually looking at patient records). Examples:

iting rates of certain diagnoses: “Before the
new protocol was implemented, 20% of asthma
cases were readmitted within 30 days. After the
protocol was implemented, re-admissions went
down to 10%.”
males are twice as likely to be admitted for [X
diagnosis] than females.”
The table below includes those data tools that do NOT fall
under the IRB’s pre-
approval. Any student wishing to analyze one of the data
sources below must
go through the standard IRB process to gain formal IRB
approval
independently.
Data Sources that are NOT Pre-approved by IRB
for Staff Education Doctoral Projects
(These all require the student to obtain IRB review/approval
independently via the
standard process.)
Patient Records with
identifiers
While students may in some cases access patient records during

the practicum in support of patient care, the IRB pre-approval
does not cover students accessing patient records for the
purpose of the doctoral project analysis.
May 2019
Interviews or Focus
Groups
The pre-approval does not cover interviews or focus groups.
Data Collection from
Patients
The pre-approval does not cover posing questions to patients
via any method (questionnaires, interviews, focus groups).
Video as Data
The pre-approval does not cover filming of events to observe
behaviors, study environments and processes, or capture
products and/or outcomes.
Observations of
specific individuals
The pre-approval does not include collection of observational
data.

References
Required
Jeffery, A.D., Longo, M.A, & Nienaber, A. (2015). Staff
educator’s guide to professional
development: Assessing and enhancing nursing competency.
Indianapolis: IN: Sigma
Theta Tau International.
Recommended
Abruzzese, R. S. (1992). Nursing staff development: Strategies
for success. St. Louis:
Mosby Year Book.
American Nurses Association. (1976). Guidelines for staff
development: continuing
education in nursing. The Journal of Continuing Education in
Nursing, 7(2), 37-
46. doi: 10.3928/0022-0124-19760301-09
Boone, E. J., Safrit, R. D., & Jones, J. (2002). Developing
programs in adult education: A
conceptual programming model. Prospect Heights, IL:
Waveland Press.
Branch, R. M. (2009). Instructional design: The ADDIE
approach. New York: Springer.

Dirksen, J. (2016). Design for how people learn. Berkeley, CA:
New Riders.
Donato, E., Lightfoot, N., Carter, L., & Macewan, L. (2016).
Interprofessional education
in Canadian nursing programs and implications for continuing
education. Journal
of Professional, Continuing, and Online Education, 1. doi:
http://dx.doi.org/10.18741/P9MW20
Duteau, J. (2012). Making a difference: The value of
preceptorship programs in nursing
education. The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing
43(1), 37-43. doi:
10.3928/00220124-20110615-01
May 2019
Fisher, C. A., Rietschel, M. J., & O'Neil, C. A. (2014).
Developing Online Learning
Environments in Nursing Education. Springer.
Gormley, D. (2013). Considerations when developing online
continuing education
programs in nursing. Journal for Nurses in Professional
Development, 29(3), 149-
151. doi: 10.1097/NND.0b013e318291c47d
Iwasiw, C., Goldenberg, D., & Andrusyszyn, M. (2008).
Curriculum development in

nursing education. Jones & Bartlett.
Jones-Schenk J. (2016). Think competencies, not hours, when
planning your next
education initiative. The Journal of Continuing Education in
Nursing, 47(8), 350-
352. doi: 10.3928/00220124-20160715-04
Keating, S. B. (2015). Curriculum development and evaluation
in nursing.
Kemp, J. E., Smellie, D. C., & Kemp, J. E. (1989). Planning,
producing, and using
instructional media. New York: Harper & Row.
Knowles, M., Holton, E. F., & Swanson, R. A. (2005). The adult
learner: The definitive
classic in adult education and human resource development. San
Diego: Elsevier.
Merriam, S. B. (2008). Third update on adult learning theory.
San Francisco: Jossey-
Bass.
Rossi, P. H., Lipsey, M. W., & Freeman, H. E. (2004).
Evaluation: A systematic
approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Schindler J. (2016). Meeting education needs of flexible
staffing: Begin with the end in
mind. The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 47(9),
390-392. doi:
10.3928/00220124-20160817-03

Scope and standards of practice for nursing professional
development. (2000).
Washington, D.C.: American Nurses Association.
Sweeney, N. M., Saarmann, L., Flagg, J. & Seidman, R. (2008).
The keys to successful
online continuing education programs for nurses. The Journal of
Continuing
Education in Nursing, 39(1), 34-41. doi: 10.3928/00220124-
20080101-09
May 2019
Appendix A: Site Approval Form for Staff Education Doctoral
Project
Name of Doctoral Student:
_________________________________________________
Name of Doctoral Student’s Partner Organization:
______________________________
Date: ________
The doctoral student named above is involved in Staff
Education that will be

conducted under the auspices of the organization named above.
This form is the
student’s formal request to evaluate the staff education by
administering anonymous
staff questionnaires and analyzing internal, de-identified site
records that this form’s
signer deems appropriate to release for the student’s doctoral
project. This permission
to use the organization’s data pertains only to this doctoral
project and not to the
student’s future scholarly projects or research (which would
need a separate request
for approval).
As per DNP program requirements, the student will publish a
scholarly report of this
Staff Education project in ProQuest as a doctoral capstone (with
site and individual
identifiers withheld), as per the following ethical standards:
a. In all reports (including drafts shared with peers and faculty
members), the
student is required to maintain confidentiality by removing
names and key pieces
of evidence/data that might disclose the organization’s identity
or an individual’s
identity or inappropriately divulge proprietary details. If the
organization itself
wishes to publicize the findings of this project, that will be the
organization’s
judgment call.
b. The student will be responsible for complying with the
above-named
organization’s policies and requirements regarding data
collection (including the
need for the organization’s IRB review/approval, if applicable).

c. Via a Consent Form for Anonymous Questionnaires, the
student will describe
to staff members how the data will be used in the doctoral
project and how the
stakeholders’ autonomy and privacy will be protected.
Approval signature from site representative:
____________________________________
Name of signer (print legibly):
______________________________________________
Position of signer within organization (must be authorized by
the organization to approve
the questionnaires/data release described above):
_______________________________
Signer’s contact information:
_______________________________________________
May 2019
Appendix B: Consent Form for Anonymous Questionnaires
To be given to the staff member prior to collecting
questionnaire responses—obtaining a
“consent signature” is not appropriate for this type of
questionnaire and providing

respondents with anonymity is required.
You are invited to take part in an evaluation for the staff
education doctoral project that I
am conducting.
Questionnaire Procedures:
If you agree to take part, I will be asking you to provide your
responses anonymously, to
help reduce bias and any sort of pressure to respond a certain
way. Staff members’
questionnaire responses will be analyzed as part of my doctoral
project, along with any
archival data, reports, and documents that the organization’s
leadership deems fit to
share.
Voluntary Nature of the Project:
This project is voluntary. If you decide to join the project now,
you can still change your
mind later.
Risks and Benefits of Being in the Project:
Being in this project would not pose any risks beyond those of
typical daily professional
activities. This project’s aim is to provide data and insights to
support the organization’s
success.
Privacy:
I might know that you completed a questionnaire but I will not
know who provided
which responses. Any reports, presentations, or publications
related to this study will
share general patterns from the data, without sharing the
identities of individual

respondents or partner organization(s). The questionnaire data
will be kept for a period of
at least 5 years, as required by my university.
Contacts and Questions:
If you want to talk privately about your rights in relation to this
project, you can call my
university’s Advocate via the phone number 612-312-1210.
Walden University’s ethics
approval number for this study is (Student will need to complete
Form A in order to
obtain an ethics approval number).
Before you start the questionnaire, please share any questions or
concerns you might
have.
The following checklist provides a tool to develop the DNP
Doctoral Prospectus. The doctoral prospectus involves multiple
steps. Included in this prospectus checklist are the basic
expectations for completing the prospectus following the
annotated prospectus guide. For further detail on the content of
each section of the prospectus, please refer to the Prospectus
Guide. To understand how the prospectus is evaluated by the
committee and the Program Director of designee, use the
Prospectus Rubric as a guide.
· Instructions for students:
· Indicate on the checklist the page numbers (use the actual
document page number, not the MS Word pagination) where the

appropriate content is located.
· Respond to comments from the committee in the comment
history box. Do not delete previous commentsjust add your
response in the appropriate space.
· Instructions for the DNP Doctoral Project committee chair,
second member, and PhD Program Director/Designee.
· Provide specific feedback in the comment history column. Do
not delete previous commentsjust add your response and use
some means to clearly identify your remarks (e.g., colored,
bolded, or italicized text).
· If you made detailed comments on the draft (using track
changes and comments), you can make reference to such
comments in the draft rather than copy the text into the
checklist comment history section.
Student’s Name:
Student ID:
Date:
Committee Members
Chairperson:
Member:
Prospectus Checklist
The Prospectus Document includes a title page (page 1)
followed by pages containing the required elements. Title must
be 12 words or less, double-space if it is more than one line of
type, and center it at the top of the page.
Capitalize each major word.
Include your name, your program (Doctor of Nursing Practice)
and your Banner ID number – double spaced and centered under
the title. Please use the Prospectus template on the DNP
Resources page.
Note: Your doctoral project title will likely change as the
project evolves so allow yourself the flexibility to adapt your

title as necessary.
Chair comments: (click here)
Second Member comments: (click here)
Student comments: (click here)
☐Chair accepts items as complete.
Title
Start with “Prospectus” and a colon, and then include the title
as it appears on the title page.
Double space if it is more than one line and center at the top of
the page
Problem Statement
a) State the practice focused problem that your project will
address. Provide a 2-paragraphs statement that establishes the
relevance of this problem.
b) Summarize preliminary, supporting evidence that provides
justification that this problem is meaningful and relevant to the
local setting as well as the broader field of nursing practice,
citing key scholarly sources.
c) Explicitly state the gap in nursing practice or problem that

will be the focus of this doctoral project
d) Describe the problem as it relates to the target population for
this project.
Practice-Focused Question(s)
a) Describe the meaningful gap-in-practice that this doctoral
project addresses.
b) State the guiding practice-focused question(s) for this
doctoral project.
c) Briefly explain the practice focused question as it is relevant
to the identified gap in practice.
Note: PICO format is not required.
Social Change
a) Describe how this project will impact social change for
healthcare consumers, organizations and the profession

b) State how this project supports the mission of Walden
University to promote positive social change.
c) Specify who might benefit from the project and in what ways
the information from the project might result in positive social
change.
Context for the Doctoral Project
a) Briefly describe the intended setting for the doctoral project.
b) Explain how this project can be accomplished in the
identified setting or context.
Sources of Evidence
a) Include relevant evidence that supports the need to address
the identified problem at the local and broader context
(Examples: Current EBP guidelines, literature preferably from

the past 5 years, deidentified anecdotal data, (refer to DNP
manuals for IRB approved data sources for specific project
types).
b) Describe how the evidence justifies that this practice problem
is important to the nursing profession.
Approach or Procedural Steps
a) Identify your possible approach/procedural steps, summarize
possible strategies to obtain the data and resources needed to
complete the doctoral project. Examples may include
anonymous participant questionnaires (see DNP IRB approved
data types for each of the four DNP manuals for more
information)
b) Is this project from among the acceptable types listed on the
DNP Resources page?
Note: Evidence or data cannot be collected prior to approval of
the full committee and the IRB.

Ethical
a) Describe how this project will provide protection for human
subjects.
b) Describe the region of the data source(s) without stating the
specific location. Withhold descriptors of participants such as
titles, demographics, etc. to ensure that participants are not
identifiable. (Check with the IRB if unsure.)
c) State any potential ethical issues that may present problems
for the completion of this project. If none, clarify.
Note: See IRB section of the DNP manual to determine ethical
requirements.
Alignment
a) Do the various aspects of the prospectus align overall?
b) State what credible sources support the practice problem.

c) Describe how the practice-focused question/s and the
approach or procedural steps will address the practice problem
you describe in the problem statement.
References
Use APA format for this prospectus. Include a minimum of 15 -
20 APA-formatted peer-reviewed references to support intext
citations in the Doctoral Project Prospectus.
Note:References should be within most recent 5 years.
APA Form and Style Check

Running head ASSIGNMENT1ASSIGNMENT5.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Running head ASSIGNMENT1ASSIGNMENT5.docx

Similar to Running head ASSIGNMENT1ASSIGNMENT5.docx (20)

More from healdkathaleen

More from healdkathaleen (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Running head ASSIGNMENT1ASSIGNMENT5.docx