Analysis of an Ethical Dilemma-Nursing

This is a CLC assignment.Refer to the “Collaborative Learning Community: Analysis of an Ethical Dilemma” resource for the dilemmas and resources that will be used for this multi-part assignment.After completing the individual interviews (Part Two), share your interview results. As a group, consider the responses of the four types of individuals interviewed. Assess their similarities and differences.Compose a written recommendation of 750-1,000 words. Incorporate the research your group has done as well as your interview results for the four types of individuals to come to a resolution to the ethical dilemma. Be sure to clearly articulate your groups position and the rationale for your position.Prepare this assignment according to the APA guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.You are required to submit this assignment to Turnitin. Please refer to the directions in the Student Success Center.1Unsatisfactory71.00%2Less Than Satisfactory75.00%3Satisfactory79.00%4Good89.00%5Excellent100.00%80.0 %Content40.0 %Research and Four Interviews Used to Format the ResolutionNo outside sources are used to support the assignment. Interviews are not mentionedFew outside sources are used to support the assignment. Limited research is apparent. Interview results are briefly mentioned.Research is adequate. Sources are standard in relevance, quality of outside sources, and/or timeliness. Interviews are mentioned but do not give enough supporting details.Research is timely and relevant, and addresses all of the issues stated in the assignment criteria. Interviews are discussed and supported in the reasoning for the resolution.Research is supportive of the rationale presented. Sources are distinctive. Addresses all of the issues stated in the assignment criteria. Interviews are discussed in detail and thoughtfully supported the reasoning for the resolution.40.0 %Explanation of Resolution for the Ethical DilemmaDoes not identify ethical resolution. Does not present own perspective. Discussion is grounded in absolutes, with little or no acknowledgement of own bias.Applies explanation of a resolution to the issue, though some aspects are incorrect or confusing. Key details are missing. Presents own perspective without justification. Does not address other views.Applies explanation of a resolution to the issue with limited integration. Analysis is incomplete. Presents own perspective without justification.Identifies own position on issue, gives justification and connection to theory but lacks details.Identifies own position on issue, gives justification and connection to theory, and uses details and research that support resolution.15.0 %Organization and Effectiveness5.0 %Thesis Development and PurposePaper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.Thesis and/or main claim are insufficiently developed and/or vague; purpose is not clear.Thesis and/or main claim are apparent and appropriate to purpose.Thesis and/or main claim are clear and forecast the development of the paper. It is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.Thesis and/or main claim are comprehensive; contained within the thesis is the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.5.0 %Paragraph Development and TransitionsParagraphs and transitions consistently lack unity and coherence. No apparent connections between paragraphs are established. Transitions are inappropriate to purpose and scope. Organization is disjointed.Some paragraphs and transitions may lack logical progression of ideas, unity, coherence, and/or cohesiveness. Some degree of organization is evident.Paragraphs are generally competent, but ideas may show some inconsistency in organization and/or in their relationships to each other.A logical progression of ideas between paragraphs is apparent. Paragraphs exhibit a unity, coherence, and cohesiveness. Topic sentences and concluding remarks are appropriate to purpose.There is a sophisticated construction of paragraphs and transitions. Ideas progress and relate to each other. Paragraph and transition construction guide the reader. Paragraph structure is seamless.5.0 %Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are used.Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, and/or word choice are present.Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used.Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used.Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.5.0 %Format2.0 %Paper Format (1- inch margins; 12-point-font; double-spaced; Times New Roman, Arial, or Courier)Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.Template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent.Template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.Template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style.All format elements are correct.3.0 %Research Citations (In-text citations for paraphrasing and direct quotes, and reference page listing and formatting, as appropriate to assignment)No reference page is included. No citations are used.Reference page is present. Citations are inconsistently used.Reference page is included and lists sources used in the paper. Sources are appropriately documented, although some errors may be present.Reference page is present and fully inclusive of all cited sources. Documentation is appropriate and citation style is usually correct.In-text citations and a reference page are complete. The documentation of cited sources is free

“