The aim of this assessment task (part B) is to assist you with the application and consolidation of your clinical reasoning skills by demonstrating your capacity to think like a registered nurse
The aim of this assessment task (part B) is to assist you with the application and consolidation of your clinical reasoning skills by demonstrating your capacity to think like a registered nurse through each stage of the clinical reasoning cycle up to and including the ‘Evaluation’ stage. Directions: Choose a clinical encounter from professional experience placement (PEP) that you were actively involved in and apply to the clinical reasoning cycle using the template provided. A clinical encounter should be chosen that in some way directly challenged your clinical ability and highlighted to you the importance of being able to ‘think like a registered nurse’. Assessment criteria Criteria 1 Provides an overview of an appropriate clinical encounter for exploration. 10% Confidentiality/privacy has been considered. Clinical encounter is presented in a succinct and structured way that provides a clear indication of the situation to be explored and is in within scope of the assessment. Criteria 2 Demonstrates the capacity to apply clinical reasoning to gather cues, process information, identify problems, establish goals, take action and evaluate outcomes at a level expected of a beginning level registered nurse. 50% Demonstrates an exceptional understanding and application of all components of the clinical reasoning cycle to the encounter that indicates an emerging capacity to think like a registered nurse. Recalled and applied an outstanding level of insightful knowledge to substantiate processing of information provided Criteria 3 Appropriately utilises evidence-based literature /clinical guidelines /the Australian National Safety and Quality Health Service Standards (2017) to support evaluation of outcome/s from clinical encounter. 20% Use of evidence-based literature/clinical guidelines is outstanding. It substantiates thinking and arguments that closely considers the clinical encounter and its outcomes. Seamless and considered links to the Australian National Safety and Quality Health Service standards 2017. Criteria 4 Uses appropriate scholarly literature to substantiate findings throughout. Uses Harvard referencing style. 10% Accurately references all sources using the Harvard style. Outstanding use of appropriate academic literature that substantiates thinking and arguments that considers evidence-based practice relevant to the encounter. Criteria 5 Writes in a clear and concise academic style that is succinct, logical and coherent. 10% Communicates with a highly evolved academic writing style with strong evidence of planning. The paper is exceptionally logical, insightful and balanced and is consistently expressed in a clear and fluent manner with minimal or no spelling/grammar errors.