19 Mar Why you are entering the health care field?

Order Instructions

M5: Journal Reflection 4-7

Due No Due Date Points 60 Submitting a file upload

Assignment header

 

This assignment will be comprised of four Journal Reflections. You will complete the journal entries and submit your answers within this assignment. This assignment should be completed in ONE document, and your answers should be separated by Journal Reflection # headings (4-7). Please contact your instructor using Canvas Messages with any questions you may have.

 

 

 

Journal Reflection #4

4. Why you are entering the health care field? What is your motivation for serving people in this capacity? Where does that motivation come from? (150 words: 10 pts)

 

 

 

Journal Reflection #5

5. Do you think health care is a human right or privilege? (300 words, 10 pts)

 

 

 

 

 

Journal Reflection #6

6. Discuss how the three case studies discussed in the module show how a person from an underserved population has limited access to health care. What would you do to help an underserved person access health care on a personal level, professional level, and national level? (500 words, 20 pts)

 

 

 

Journal Reflection #7

7. After watching the video lecture, answer the following question:

 

Why is patient advocacy important? (500 words: 20 pts)

 

 

 

To complete this assignment, click “Submit your assignment,” and then choose one of the following methods for submitting your work:

 

1. Drag and drop your file into the submission box, and then select “Submit file.”

 

2. Select the file you want to upload, and then select “Submit file.”

 

Please contact your instructor using Canvas Messages with any questions you may have. Your instructor may take several business days to grade all of your work. Please be patient as your instructor works to provide a level of feedback that corresponds to the hard work you put into the assignment.

 

 

 

PL_icon_gray.png

 

Rubric

M5: Journal Reflection 4-7

M5: Journal Reflection 4-7

Criteria Ratings Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeContent

15 to >12.0 pts

Distinguished

Prompts are addressed correctly, accurately, and appropriately (in sufficient detail)

12 to >9.0 pts

Proficient

Prompts are addressed correctly and accurately; lack of detail present at times

9 to >6.0 pts

Developing

Uneven in the answer accuracy and level of detail

6 to >3.0 pts

Minimal

Significant problems with providing sufficient content and/or answering accurately

3 to >0 pts

Absent

Content is inaccurate or greatly lacking in detail

15 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeEvidence

10 to >8.0 pts

Distinguished

Relevant and important information from the module systematically utilized and integrated; evidence clearly supports points

8 to >6.0 pts

Proficient

Evidence is provided, including support for all major points, although priority is not given to the most important ideas / terms

6 to >4.0 pts

Developing

Uneven in how often the evidence from the module supports statements

4 to >2.0 pts

Minimal

Limited use of evidence from the module for positions, or poor sources selected

2 to >0 pts

Absent

Fails to provide evidence for positions from the module

10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWriting

10 to >8.0 pts

Distinguished

Highly attuned to appropriate language, level of formality, and appropriate tone of writing Few to no grammar or language problems

8 to >6.0 pts

Proficient

Engaging tone with appropriate level of formality and audience awareness Some minor errors but they do not occur throughout the paper

6 to >4.0 pts

Developing

Uneven tone, level of formality and/or audience awareness; or, minor errors throughout the paper; or, some major APA or writing concerns at times

4 to >2.0 pts

Minimal

Either: inappropriate tone or level of formality, frequent major grammar/language/APA errors throughout the paper

2 to >0 pts

Absent

Lacks awareness of audience, appropriate tone and level of formality; Major errors in conventional use of grammar / language that interfere with paper readability

10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeEvaluation

10 to >8.0 pts

Distinguished

High quality evaluation; thoughts are carefully considered and carefully explained

8 to >6.0 pts

Proficient

Acceptable quality evaluation; thoughts are fairly well-considered and explained

6 to >4.0 pts

Developing

Evaluation is attempted; some articulation of writer’s thoughts but lacking sufficient detail

4 to >2.0 pts

Minimal

Minimal evaluation present; surface level evaluation with minimal detail

2 to >0 pts

Absent

Evaluation is absent

10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFollows Prompt

15 to >12.0 pts

Distinguished

Fully addresses all questions in the prompt

12 to >9.0 pts

Proficient

Addresses nearly all aspects of the prompt

9 to >6.0 pts

Developing

Unevenly addresses prompt

6 to >3.0 pts

Minimal

Significant problems with addressing prompt

3 to >0 pts

Absent

Prompt is not addressed

15 pts

Total Points: 60