Assignment Prompt & Instructions
**files (1)**
– ## Wk1instruc.docx
**## Wk1instruc.docx**
**To prepare:**
Watch a video of two providers interviewing a patient.
· Video demonstrates example of
_standard interviewing_ techniques versus example of
_motivational interviewing (MI)_ using
_The Process of MI framework_:
· Engage – Build rapport, use open-ended questions, uncover values/hopes, and offer compassionate reflections.
· Focus – Bring the discussion to the health concern at hand, eliciting symptoms, concerns, and wellness indicators.
· Evoke – Explore reasons for and against change; use readiness rulers, double-sided reflections, and pros/cons.
· Plan – Collaboratively set attainable goals and elicit patient commitment to specific next steps.
**Assignment (1–2 pages)**
Compare the efficacy of each provider's approach to patient interviewing in regard to effect on patient behavior. Which approach is more effective in helping patients achieve health-related behavioral changes?
· Explain how motivational interviewing (MI) differs in tone, structure, and patient engagement compared to traditional interviewing.
· Reflect on how you might use MI techniques in your own advanced practice role to promote patient-centered outcomes.
· Consider how principles of autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice apply to patient interviewing and communication practices.
Use at least 3 scholarly resources that are less than 5 years old. Cite all sources in APA format.
**NURS_6512_Module1_Assignment1_Rubric**
| | | |
| — | — | — |
| NURS_6512_Module1_Assignment1_Rubric |
| **Criteria** | **Ratings** | **Pts** |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCompare the efficacy of each provider's approach to patient interviewing regarding the effect on patient behavior. Which approach is more effective in helping patients achieve health-related behavioral changes? | **20 to >17.88 ptsExcellent** Provides a fully developed comparison of the efficacy of each provider's approach to patient interviewing regarding the effect on patient behavior. Thoroughly explains which approach is more effective in helping patients achieve health-related behavioral changes.<br> <br>**17.88 to >15.88 ptsGood** Provides an adequately developed comparison of the efficacy of each provider's approach to patient interviewing regarding the effect on patient behavior. Adequately explains which approach is more effective in helping patients achieve health-related behavioral changes.<br> <br>**15.88 to >13.88 ptsFair** Provides a minimally developed comparison of the efficacy of each provider's approach to patient interviewing regarding the effect on patient behavior. Minimal or undeveloped explanation of which approach is more effective in helping patients achieve health-related behavioral changes.<br> <br>**13.88 to >0 ptsPoor** Does not provide a comparison of the efficacy of each provider's approach to patient interviewing regarding effect on patient behavior; comparison is vague, unclear, or inaccurate. | 20 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeExplain how motivational interviewing (MI) differs in tone, structure, and patient engagement compared to traditional interviewing. | **20 to >17.88 ptsExcellent** Provides a fully developed explanation of how motivational interviewing (MI) differs in tone, structure, and patient engagement compared to traditional interviewing.<br> <br>**17.88 to >15.88 ptsGood** Provides an adequately developed reflection on how they might use MI techniques in their own advanced practice role to promote patient-centered outcomes.<br> <br>**15.88 to >13.88 ptsFair** Provides a minimally developed reflection on how they might use MI techniques in their own advanced practice role to promote patient-centered outcomes.<br> <br>**13.88 to >0 ptsPoor** Does not provide a reflection on how they might use MI techniques in their own advanced practice role to promote patient-centered outcomes; reflection is vague, unclear, or inaccurate. | 20 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeReflect on how you might use MI techniques in your own advanced practice role to promote patient-centered outcomes. | **20 to >17.88 ptsExcellent** Provides a fully developed reflection on how they might use MI techniques in their own advanced practice role to promote patient-centered outcomes.<br> <br>**17.88 to >15.88 ptsGood** Provides an adequately developed reflection on how they might use MI techniques in their own advanced practice role to promote patient-centered outcomes.<br> <br>**15.88 to >13.88 ptsFair** Provides a minimally developed reflection on how they might use MI techniques in their own advanced practice role to promote patient-centered outcomes.<br> <br>**13.88 to >0 ptsPoor** Does not provide a reflection on how they might use MI techniques in their own advanced practice role to promote patient-centered outcomes; reflection is vague, unclear, or inaccurate. | 20 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeConsider how principles of autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice apply to patient interviewing and communication practices. | **20 to >17.88 ptsExcellent** Provides a fully developed analysis of how principles of autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice apply to patient interviewing and communication practices.<br> <br>**17.88 to >15.88 ptsGood** Provides an adequately developed analysis of how principles of autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice apply to patient interviewing and communication practices.<br> <br>**15.88 to >13.88 ptsFair** Provides a minimally developed analysis of how principles of autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice apply to patient interviewing and communication practices.<br> <br>**13.88 to >0 ptsPoor** Does not provide an analysis of how principles of autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice apply to patient interviewing and communication practices; analysis is vague, unclear, or inadequate. | 20 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeUse at least 3 scholarly resources that are less than 5 years old. | **10 to >8.94 ptsExcellent** Uses 3 peer-reviewed scholarly sources published within the last 5 years.<br> <br>**8.94 to >7.94 ptsGood** Uses 2 peer-reviewed scholarly sources published within the last 5 years.<br> <br>**7.94 to >6.94 ptsFair** Uses 1 peer-reviewed scholarly source published within the last 5 years.<br> <br>**6.94 to >0 ptsPoor** Does not use peer-reviewed scholarly sources or sources used are older than 5 years. | 10 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSource Attribution and APA Formatting | **5 to >4.46 ptsExcellent** All sources are cited in APA format without any errors.<br> <br>**4.46 to >3.96 ptsGood** All sources are cited in APA format with some minor errors.<br> <br>**3.96 to >3.46 ptsFair** All sources are cited with frequent APA formatting errors.<br> <br>**3.46 to >0 ptsPoor** Missing source citations and/or minimal adherence to APA formatting rules. | 5 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeGrammar, Mechanics, and Punctuation | **5 to >4.46 ptsExcellent** Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors.<br> <br>**4.46 to >3.96 ptsGood** Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with few errors.<br> <br>**3.96 to >3.46 ptsFair** Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with frequent errors.<br> <br>**3.46 to >0 ptsPoor** Post contains frequent errors in grammar, spelling, and punctuation that interfere with comprehension. | 5 pts |
Total Points: 100
**## Wk1instruc.docx**
**To prepare:**
Watch a video of two providers interviewing a patient.
· Video demonstrates example of
_standard interviewing_ techniques versus example of
_motivational interviewing (MI)_ using
_The Process of MI framework_:
· Engage – Build rapport, use open-ended questions, uncover values/hopes, and offer compassionate reflections.
· Focus – Bring the discussion to the health concern at hand, eliciting symptoms, concerns, and wellness indicators.
· Evoke – Explore reasons for and against change; use readiness rulers, double-sided reflections, and pros/cons.
· Plan – Collaboratively set attainable goals and elicit patient commitment to specific next steps.
**Assignment (1–2 pages)**
Compare the efficacy of each provider's approach to patient interviewing in regard to effect on patient behavior. Which approach is more effective in helping patients achieve health-related behavioral changes?
· Explain how motivational interviewing (MI) differs in tone, structure, and patient engagement compared to traditional interviewing.
· Reflect on how you might use MI techniques in your own advanced practice role to promote patient-centered outcomes.
· Consider how principles of autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice apply to patient interviewing and communication practices.
Use at least 3 scholarly resources that are less than 5 years old. Cite all sources in APA format.
**NURS_6512_Module1_Assignment1_Rubric**
| | | |
| — | — | — |
| NURS_6512_Module1_Assignment1_Rubric |
| **Criteria** | **Ratings** | **Pts** |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCompare the efficacy of each provider's approach to patient interviewing regarding the effect on patient behavior. Which approach is more effective in helping patients achieve health-related behavioral changes? | **20 to >17.88 ptsExcellent** Provides a fully developed comparison of the efficacy of each provider's approach to patient interviewing regarding the effect on patient behavior. Thoroughly explains which approach is more effective in helping patients achieve health-related behavioral changes.<br> <br>**17.88 to >15.88 ptsGood** Provides an adequately developed comparison of the efficacy of each provider's approach to patient interviewing regarding the effect on patient behavior. Adequately explains which approach is more effective in helping patients achieve health-related behavioral changes.<br> <br>**15.88 to >13.88 ptsFair** Provides a minimally developed comparison of the efficacy of each provider's approach to patient interviewing regarding the effect on patient behavior. Minimal or undeveloped explanation of which approach is more effective in helping patients achieve health-related behavioral changes.<br> <br>**13.88 to >0 ptsPoor** Does not provide a comparison of the efficacy of each provider's approach to patient interviewing regarding effect on patient behavior; comparison is vague, unclear, or inaccurate. | 20 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeExplain how motivational interviewing (MI) differs in tone, structure, and patient engagement compared to traditional interviewing. | **20 to >17.88 ptsExcellent** Provides a fully developed explanation of how motivational interviewing (MI) differs in tone, structure, and patient engagement compared to traditional interviewing.<br> <br>**17.88 to >15.88 ptsGood** Provides an adequately developed reflection on how they might use MI techniques in their own advanced practice role to promote patient-centered outcomes.<br> <br>**15.88 to >13.88 ptsFair** Provides a minimally developed reflection on how they might use MI techniques in their own advanced practice role to promote patient-centered outcomes.<br> <br>**13.88 to >0 ptsPoor** Does not provide a reflection on how they might use MI techniques in their own advanced practice role to promote patient-centered outcomes; reflection is vague, unclear, or inaccurate. | 20 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeReflect on how you might use MI techniques in your own advanced practice role to promote patient-centered outcomes. | **20 to >17.88 ptsExcellent** Provides a fully developed reflection on how they might use MI techniques in their own advanced practice role to promote patient-centered outcomes.<br> <br>**17.88 to >15.88 ptsGood** Provides an adequately developed reflection on how they might use MI techniques in their own advanced practice role to promote patient-centered outcomes.<br> <br>**15.88 to >13.88 ptsFair** Provides a minimally developed reflection on how they might use MI techniques in their own advanced practice role to promote patient-centered outcomes.<br> <br>**13.88 to >0 ptsPoor** Does not provide a reflection on how they might use MI techniques in their own advanced practice role to promote patient-centered outcomes; reflection is vague, unclear, or inaccurate. | 20 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeConsider how principles of autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice apply to patient interviewing and communication practices. | **20 to >17.88 ptsExcellent** Provides a fully developed analysis of how principles of autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice apply to patient interviewing and communication practices.<br> <br>**17.88 to >15.88 ptsGood** Provides an adequately developed analysis of how principles of autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice apply to patient interviewing and communication practices.<br> <br>**15.88 to >13.88 ptsFair** Provides a minimally developed analysis of how principles of autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice apply to patient interviewing and communication practices.<br> <br>**13.88 to >0 ptsPoor** Does not provide an analysis of how principles of autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice apply to patient interviewing and communication practices; analysis is vague, unclear, or inadequate. | 20 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeUse at least 3 scholarly resources that are less than 5 years old. | **10 to >8.94 ptsExcellent** Uses 3 peer-reviewed scholarly sources published within the last 5 years.<br> <br>**8.94 to >7.94 ptsGood** Uses 2 peer-reviewed scholarly sources published within the last 5 years.<br> <br>**7.94 to >6.94 ptsFair** Uses 1 peer-reviewed scholarly source published within the last 5 years.<br> <br>**6.94 to >0 ptsPoor** Does not use peer-reviewed scholarly sources or sources used are older than 5 years. | 10 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSource Attribution and APA Formatting | **5 to >4.46 ptsExcellent** All sources are cited in APA format without any errors.<br> <br>**4.46 to >3.96 ptsGood** All sources are cited in APA format with some minor errors.<br> <br>**3.96 to >3.46 ptsFair** All sources are cited with frequent APA formatting errors.<br> <br>**3.46 to >0 ptsPoor** Missing source citations and/or minimal adherence to APA formatting rules. | 5 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeGrammar, Mechanics, and Punctuation | **5 to >4.46 ptsExcellent** Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors.<br> <br>**4.46 to >3.96 ptsGood** Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with few errors.<br> <br>**3.96 to >3.46 ptsFair** Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with frequent errors.<br> <br>**3.46 to >0 ptsPoor** Post contains frequent errors in grammar, spelling, and punctuation that interfere with comprehension. | 5 pts |
Total Points: 100