Work Place and Health Environment Discussion
Work Place and Health Environment Discussion
You may think your current organization operates seamlessly, or you may feel it has many issues. You may experience or even observe things that give you pause. Yet, much as you wouldn’t try to determine the health of a patient through mere observation, you should not attempt to gauge the health of your work environment based on observation and opinion. Often, there are issues you perceive as problems that others do not; similarly, issues may run much deeper than leadership recognizes. Work Place and Health Environment Discussion
There are many factors and measures that may impact organizational health. Among these is civility. While an organization can institute policies designed to promote such things as civility, how can it be sure these are managed effectively? In this Discussion, you will examine the use of tools in measuring workplace civility.
To Prepare:
- Review the Resources and examine the Clark Healthy Workplace Inventory, found on page 20 of Clark (2015).
- Review and complete the Work Environment Assessment Template in the Resources.
BY DAY 3 OF WEEK 7
Post a brief description of the results of your Work Environment Assessment. Based on the results, how civil is your workplace? Explain why your workplace is or is not civil. Then, describe a situation where you have experienced incivility in the workplace. How was this addressed? Be specific and provide examples.
BY DAY 6 OF WEEK 7
Respond to at least two of your colleagues on two different days by sharing ideas for how shortcomings discovered in their evaluations and/or their examples of incivility could have been managed more effectively
Â
Rubric Detail
A rubric lists grading criteria that instructors use to evaluate student work. Your instructor linked a rubric to this item and made it available to you. Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.
Content
Name: NURS_6053_Module04_Week07_Discussion_Rubric
Grid View
List View
Show Descriptions
Show Feedback
Main Posting–
Levels of Achievement:
Excellent
45 (45.00%) – 50 (50.00%)
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.
Good
40 (40.00%) – 44 (44.00%)
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.
Fair
35 (35.00%) – 39 (39.00%)
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.
Poor
0 (0.00%) – 34 (34.00%)
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–
Levels of Achievement:
Excellent
10 (10.00%) – 10 (10.00%)
Posts main post by day 3.
Good
0 (0.00%) – 0 (0.00%)
Fair
0 (0.00%) – 0 (0.00%)
Poor
0 (0.00%) – 0 (0.00%)
Does not post by day 3.
First Response–
Levels of Achievement:
Excellent
17 (17.00%) – 18 (18.00%)
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.
Good
15 (15.00%) – 16 (16.00%)
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.
Fair
13 (13.00%) – 14 (14.00%)
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.
Poor
0 (0.00%) – 12 (12.00%)
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–
Levels of Achievement:
Excellent
16 (16.00%) – 17 (17.00%)
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.
Good
14 (14.00%) – 15 (15.00%)
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.
Fair
12 (12.00%) – 13 (13.00%)
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.
Poor
0 (0.00%) – 11 (11.00%)
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–
Levels of Achievement:
Excellent
5 (5.00%) – 5 (5.00%)
Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days.
Good
0 (0.00%) – 0 (0.00%)
Fair
0 (0.00%) – 0 (0.00%)
Poor
0 (0.00%) – 0 (0.00%)
Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days. Work Place and Health Environment Discussion
Name:NURS_6053_Module04_Week07_Discussion_Rubric
