NURS 6051 Inclusion of Nurses in Systems Development Life Cycle
NURS 6051 Inclusion of Nurses in Systems Development Life Cycle
https://customnursingwriting.com/nurs-6051-inclusion-of-nurses-in-systems-development-life-cycle/
In the media introduction to this module, it was suggested that you as a nurse have an important role in the Systems Development Life Cycle (SDLC). With a focus on patient care and outcomes, nurses may not always see themselves as contributors to the development of new systems. However, as you may have observed in your own experience, exclusion of nurse contributions when implementing systems can have dire consequences.
In this Discussion, you will consider the role you might play in systems development and the ramifications of not being an active participant in systems development.
To Prepare:
- Review the steps of the Systems Development Life Cycle (SDLC) as presented in the Resources.
- Reflect on your own healthcare organization and consider any steps your healthcare organization goes through when purchasing and implementing a new health information technology system.
- Consider what a nurse might contribute to decisions made at each stage of the SDLC when planning for new health information technology.
NURS 6051 Inclusion of Nurses in Systems Development Life Cycle
By Day 3 of Week 9
A healthcare organization’s lack of participation in the SDLC while procuring and implementing a new health information technology system might have serious ramifications. Explain how the participation of nurses in the SDLC might assist solve possible concerns at each level and provide specific examples. Then, talk about whether or not you had a say in the selection and planning of new health information technology systems in your nursing practice or healthcare organization, and discuss the possible consequences of your involvement or lack thereof. The more descriptive you are, the better.
By Day 6 of Week 9
Respond to at least two of your colleagues* on two different days, by offering additional thoughts regarding the examples shared, SDLC-related issues, and ideas on how the inclusion of nurses might have impacted the example described by your colleagues.
*Note: Throughout this program, your fellow students are referred to as colleagues.
Submission and Grading Information
Grading Criteria
To access your rubric:
Week 9 Discussion Rubric
Post by Day 3 and Respond by Day 6 of Week 9
To participate in this Discussion:
Week 9 Discussion
Module 5: The Nurse Leader and the System Development Life Cycle (Weeks 9-10)
Laureate Education (Producer). (2018). Systems Implementation [Video file]. Baltimore, MD: Author.
Learning Objectives
Students will:
- Analyze how inclusion of the nurse in the purchasing of health information technology systems impacts healthcare organizations
- Analyze the impact of nurse inclusion on each step of the systems development life cycle
| Due By | Assignment |
| Week 9, Days 1–2 | Read/Watch/Listen to the Learning Resources. Compose your initial Discussion post. |
| Week 9, Day 3 | Post your initial Discussion post. Begin to compose your Assignment. |
| Week 9, Days 4-5 | Review peer Discussion posts. Compose your peer Discussion responses. Continue to compose your Assignment. |
| Week 9, Day 6 | Post at least two peer Discussion responses on two different days (and not the same day as the initial post). |
| Week 9, Day 7 | Wrap up Discussion. |
| Week 10, Days 1-6 | Continue to compose your Assignment. |
| Week 10, Day 7 | Deadline to submit your Assignment. |
Learning Resources
Required Readings
McGonigle, D., & Mastrian, K. G. (2017). Nursing informatics and the foundation of knowledge (4th ed.). Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.
- Chapter 9, “Systems Development Life Cycle: Nursing Informatics and Organizational Decision Making” (pp. 175–187)
- Chapter 12, “Electronic Security” (pp. 229–242)
- Chapter 13, “Workflow and Beyond Meaningful Use” (pp. 245–261)
Required Media
Laureate Education (Producer). (2018). Interoperability, Standards, and Security [Video file]. Baltimore, MD: Author.
Laureate Education (Producer). (2018). Managing Health Information Technology [Video file]. Baltimore, MD: Author.
Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: NURS 6051 Inclusion of Nurses in Systems Development Life Cycle
Name: NURS_5051_Module05_Week09_Discussion_Rubric
| Excellent | Good | Fair | Poor | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Main Posting |
Points Range: 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. |
Points Range: 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. |
Points Range: 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. |
Points Range: 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 |
Points Range: 10 (10%) – 10 (10%)
Posts main post by day 3.
|
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
|
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
|
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not post by day 3.
|
| First Response |
Points Range: 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. |
Points Range: 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. |
Points Range: 13 (13%) – 14 (14%)
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. |
Points Range: 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 |
Points Range: 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. |
Points Range: 14 (14%) – 15 (15%)
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. |
Points Range: 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. |
Points Range: 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 |
Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days.
|
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
|
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
|
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days.
|
| Total Points: 100 |
|---|
Leave a Reply