Healthcare & Multidisciplinary

Healthcare & Multidisciplinary

A. Summarize (suggested length of 1/2–1 page) evidence-based practice, relevant national standards, or current literature to support the need for interdisciplinary teams.

B. Summarize (suggested length of 1–2 pages) your initial meeting with the nurse manager and your experiences during the three different interdisciplinary team meetings you attended as either an observer and/or an active participant.

C. Discuss the roles of three interdisciplinary team members who participated in the interdisciplinary team meetings you attended.

1. Explain how nurses play an important role in interdisciplinary team interactions.

D. Evaluate your interdisciplinary team interactions by doing the following:

1. Discuss how effective the leadership was during the team meetings, based on your observations.

2. Discuss two goals from any of the interdisciplinary teams you observed.

a. Discuss how you participated or could have participated in achieving the goal(s) of one of the teams.

3. Discuss the benefits of having a cohesive interdisciplinary team, based on your observations, for the following:

• client or patient

• healthcare organization

• nursing staff

• group dynamic

4. Assess the group dynamic for one interdisciplinary team you observed or participated with, including the effectiveness of the group.

a. Discuss the method you used to evaluate the group dynamic.

b. Discuss whether any personal or professional conflicts arose during the team interactions.

E. Identify two potential issues that may arise in the future within any of the interdisciplinary teams, based on your evaluation of the groups’ dynamics.

1. Compare two methods for dealing with difficult group dynamics (e.g., negotiation, conflict management).

a. Discuss how you could implement one of these methods.

b. Discuss how individual members of the interdisciplinary team could affect the function or dysfunction of the group.

2. Discuss two factors that could make it difficult for change to occur in your clinical setting, based on the meetings you observed.

a. Discuss why nurses, as leaders, are instrumental for leading change.

F. Discuss how the meeting outcomes for any one of the interdisciplinary teams were communicated throughout the practice setting.

1. Discuss whether the interdisciplinary team’s recommendations and action items were implemented.

G. Reflect on how your observations or participation in the interdisciplinary meetings shaped your views about the role of the nurse in an interdisciplinary team.

1. Discuss your observations of nursing leadership in action.

2. Discuss how you, as a nurse, could function as a leader in your clinical setting.

H. Acknowledge sources, using APA-formatted in-text citations and references, for content that is quoted, paraphrased, or summarized.

I. Demonstrate professional communication in the content and presentation of your submission.

File Restrictions

File name may contain only letters, numbers, spaces, and these symbols: ! – _ . * ‘ ( )
File size limit: 200 MB
File types allowed: doc, docx, rtf, xls, xlsx, ppt, pptx, odt, pdf, txt, qt, mov, mpg, avi, mp3, wav, mp4, wma, flv, asf, mpeg, wmv, m4v, svg, tif, tiff, jpeg, jpg, gif, png, zip, rar, tar, 7z

Rubric


A:Need for Interdisciplinary Teams

Not Evident

A summary of the need for interdisciplinary teams is not provided.

Approaching Competence

The summary addresses the need for interdisciplinary teams, but the summary is not supported with evidence-based practice, relevant national standards, or current literature. Or the summary is poorly reasoned.

Competent

The summary addresses the need for interdisciplinary teams and is supported with evidence-based practice, relevant national standards, or current literature. The summary is well reasoned.

B:Summary of Meeting and Experiences

Not Evident

A summary of the initial meeting with the nurse manager and experiences during interdisciplinary team meetings is not provided.

Approaching Competence

The summary is missing the initial meeting with the nurse manager, or the summary does not include experiences as an observer or an active participant during 3 different interdisciplinary team meetings. Or the summary is missing key details about the meeting or experiences.

Competent

The summary includes both the initial meeting with the nurse manager and experiences as an observer or an active participant during 3 different interdisciplinary team meetings. The summary includes key details about the meeting or experiences.

C:Roles of Interdisciplinary Team Members

Not Evident

A discussion of the roles of interdisciplinary teams members is not provided.

Approaching Competence

The discussion addresses the roles of 3 interdisciplinary team members who participated in the interdisciplinary team meetings, but the roles are inaccurately assigned. Or the discussion does not include the roles of 3 separate interdisciplinary team members. Or the discussion is vague or poorly supported.

Competent

The discussion addresses the roles of 3 interdisciplinary team members who participated in the interdisciplinary team meetings, and the roles are accurately assigned. The discussion is sufficiently detailed and supported with specific examples.

C1:Importance of Nursing Role

Not Evident

An explanation of the role nurses play is not provided.

Approaching Competence

The explanation addresses the importance of the nursing role in interdisciplinary team interactions, but the explanation is trivial, vague, or not supported with examples.

Competent

The explanation addresses the importance of the nursing role in interdisciplinary team interactions, and the explanation is meaningful, sufficiently detailed, and supported with examples.

D1:Effective Leadership

Not Evident

A discussion of the effectiveness of leadership during meetings is not provided.

Approaching Competence

The discussion addresses the effectiveness of leadership in the team meetings, but the evaluation of the effectiveness of leadership is incongruent with the description of the team meetings. The discussion includes some observations as support, but the observations are irrelevant to the effectiveness of the leadership during the meetings. Or the discussion does not include observations to support the discussion.

Competent

The discussion addresses the effectiveness of leadership in the team meetings, and the evaluation of the effectiveness of leadership is congruent with the description of the team meetings. The discussion includes relevant observations to support the claim of the effectiveness of the leadership during the team meetings.

D2:Goals

Not Evident

A discussion of goals is not provided.

Approaching Competence

The discussion addresses 2 goals from the observed interdisciplinary teams, but 1 of the goals is not effective or the discussion only addresses 1 goal.

Competent

The discussion addresses 2 goals from the observed interdisciplinary teams, and they are effective.

D2a:Participation in Goals

Not Evident

A discussion of participation in goals is not provided.

Approaching Competence

The discussion addresses participation in achieving at least 1 goal of 1 of the teams, but the discussion is vague or trivial.

Competent

The discussion addresses participation in achieving at least 1 goal of 1 of the teams, and the discussion is sufficiently detailed and meaningful.

D3:Benefits

Not Evident

A discussion of the benefits of having a cohesive interdisciplinary team is not provided.

Approaching Competence

The discussion ineffectively addresses the benefits of having a cohesive interdisciplinary team. Or the discussion is missing at least 1 of the given points, or the discussion is not supported with specific examples.

Competent

The discussion effectively addresses the benefits of having a cohesive interdisciplinary team. The discussion includes all of the given points, and the discussion is well supported with specific examples.

D4:Group Dynamic

Not Evident

An assessment of the group dynamic or the effectiveness of the group is not provided.

Approaching Competence

The assessment demonstrates a limited understanding of the group dynamic for 1 of the observed interdisciplinary team. Or the discussion inaccurately assesses either the group dynamic or the effectiveness of the observed group, or the assessment is illogical or is not supported with specific examples.

Competent

The assessment demonstrates a proficient understanding of the group dynamic for 1 of the observed interdisciplinary team. The discussion accurately assesses the group dynamic and the effectiveness of the observed group, and the assessment is logical and supported with specific examples.

D4a:Method of Evaluation

Not Evident

The method used to evaluate the group dynamic is not provided.

Approaching Competence

The method used to evaluate the group dynamic is inappropriate, illogical, or ineffective for evaluation purposes.

Competent

The method used to evaluate the group dynamic is appropriate, logical, and effective for the purposes of evaluation.

D4b:Conflicts

Not Evident

A discussion of conflicts is not provided.

Approaching Competence

The discussion of any personal or professional conflicts that arose during the team interactions is vague or not supported with examples. Or the conflicts discussed are trivial to team interactions.

Competent

The discussion of any personal or professional conflicts that arose during the team interactions is sufficiently detailed and supported with examples. The conflicts discussed are meaningful to team interactions.

E:Potential Issues

Not Evident

Potential issues are not identified.

Approaching Competence

Fewer than 2 potential issues are identified. Or the identified potential issues are not relevant to the interdisciplinary teams, or they are not based on the evaluation of the groups’ dynamics.

Competent

2 potential issues are identified. The issues are relevant to the interdisciplinary teams, and they are based on the evaluation of the groups’ dynamics.

E1:Difficult Group Dynamics

Not Evident

A comparison of methods is not provided.

Approaching Competence

The comparison of 2 methods for dealing with difficult group dynamics is vague or illogical. The comparison is unbalanced or poorly supported.

Competent

The comparison of the 2 methods for dealing with difficult group dynamics is sufficiently detailed and logical. The comparison is balanced and well supported.

E1a:Method Implementation

Not Evident

A discussion of implementation of methods is not provided.

Approaching Competence

The discussion of the implementation of a method for dealing with difficult group dynamics is vague or illogical. The implementation method is inaccurate or inappropriate for the scope.

Competent

The discussion of the implementation of a method for dealing with difficult group dynamics is sufficiently detailed and logical. The implementation method is accurate and appropriate for the scope.

E1b:Function of the Team

Not Evident

A discussion of how team members affect the function of the group is not provided.

Approaching Competence

The discussion of how individual members of the interdisciplinary team could affect the function or dysfunction of the group is illogical or inaccurate. Or the discussion is not supported with specific examples.

Competent

The discussion of how individual members of the interdisciplinary team could affect the function or dysfunction of the group is logical and accurate. The discussion is well supported with specific examples.

E2:Factors for Change

Not Evident

A discussion of the factors for change is not provided.

Approaching Competence

The discussion addresses 2 factors that make it difficult for change to occur in the clinical setting, but the discussion is illogical or not based on meeting observations. Or at least 1 of the factors is irrelevant to the clinical setting. Or the discussion does not include 2 factors.

Competent

The discussion addresses 2 factors that make it difficult for change to occur in the clinical setting, and the discussion is logical and based on meeting observations. Both factors are relevant to the clinical setting.

E2a:Leading Change

Not Evident

A discussion of nurses as instruments for leading change is not provided.

Approaching Competence

The discussion of why nurses, as leaders, are instrumental for leading change is vague, trivial, or poorly supported.

Competent

The discussion of why nurses, as leaders, are instrumental for leading change is sufficiently detailed, meaningful, and well supported with specific examples.

F:Communication of Meeting Outcomes

Not Evident

A discussion of communication of meeting outcomes is not provided.

Approaching Competence

The discussion addresses how meeting outcomes for 1 of the interdisciplinary teams were communicated throughout the practice setting, but the discussion is illogical or cursory.

Competent

The discussion addresses how the meeting outcomes for 1 of the interdisciplinary teams were communicated throughout the practice setting, and the discussion is logical and thorough.

F1:Recommendation and Action Items

Not Evident

A discussion of whether recommendations and action items were implemented is not provided.

Approaching Competence

The discussion of whether the interdisciplinary team’s recommendations and action items were implemented is vague or is not supported with specific examples.

Competent

The discussion of whether the interdisciplinary team’s recommendations and action items were implemented is sufficiently detailed and well supported with specific examples.

G:View of the Role of the Nurse

Not Evident

A reflection of how views about the role of the nurse were shaped is not provided.

Approaching Competence

The reflection of how views about the role of the nurse in an interdisciplinary team were shaped is vague or trivial. Or the reflection is not supported with specific examples from the observations or participation in the interdisciplinary meetings.

Competent

The reflection of how views about the role of the nurse in an interdisciplinary team were shaped is sufficiently detailed and meaningful. The reflection is supported with specific examples from the observations or participation in the interdisciplinary meetings.

G1:Leadership in Action

Not Evident

A discussion of observations of nursing leadership in action is not provided.

Approaching Competence

The discussion addresses the observations of nursing leadership in action, but the observations are vague or trivial. Or the discussion is not relevant to the role of the nurse.

Competent

The discussion addresses the observations of nursing leadership in action, and the observations are sufficiently detailed and meaningful. The discussion is relevant to the role of the nurse.

G2:Function as a Leader

Not Evident

A discussion of how a nurse could function as a leader is not provided.

Approaching Competence

The discussion addresses how a nurse could function as a leader in the clinical setting, but the discussion is vague or trivial. Or the leadership aspect is not supported with specific examples.

Competent

The discussion addresses how a nurse could function as a leader in the clinical setting, and the discussion is sufficiently detailed and meaning. The leadership aspect is well supported with specific examples.

H:APA Sources

Not Evident

The submission does not include in-text citations and references according to APA style for content that is quoted, paraphrased, or summarized.

Approaching Competence

The submission includes in-text citations and references for content that is quoted, paraphrased, or summarized but does not demonstrate a consistent application of APA style.

Competent

The submission includes in-text citations and references for content that is quoted, paraphrased, or summarized and demonstrates a consistent application of APA style.

I:Professional Communication

Not Evident

Content is unstructured, is disjointed, or contains pervasive errors in mechanics, usage, or grammar. Vocabulary or tone is unprofessional or distracts from the topic.

Approaching Competence

Content is poorly organized, is difficult to follow, or contains errors in mechanics, usage, or grammar that cause confusion. Terminology is misused or ineffective.

Competent

Content reflects attention to detail, is organized, and focuses on the main ideas as prescribed in the task or chosen by the candidate. Terminology is pertinent, is used correctly, and effectively conveys the intended meaning. Mechanics, usage, and grammar promote accurate interpretation and understanding

Support