With reference to your practice experience, write a care study to demonstrate critical understanding of caring for a person with limited capacity Your study should be primarily concerned with the implementation of planned interventions with an analysis of the care delivery. (2000 words/70% of module mark.) (A copy of the care plan can be included as an appendix).
case study is a written description of a problem or situation… which contains the facts of a story arranged in a chronological sequence. The purpose of a case study is to place you in the role of decision-maker, asking you to distinguish pertinent from peripheral facts, to identify central alternatives among several issues competing for attention, and to formulate strategies and policy recommendations. The method provides an opportunity to sharpen problem-solving skills and to improve your ability to think and reason rigorously. (Sharon A. McDade, 1988, Director of the Institute for Educational Management © President and Fellows of Harvard College)
This assignment should be based on clinical work, with an individual client, that you are involved in during your practice placement in Term 4. As with all course work, the study must be completely anonymised and no reference should be made to the name of the ward or department, nor the client’s or colleagues’ real identities. The choice of the client is at the discretion of the student, but should ensure that the interplay between bio-psychosocial factors in clients with limited capacity is demonstrated. In addition, the student should demonstrate understanding of health promoting and evidenced based interventions.
Please Note: The work must be your original work and will be subjected to electronic screening for plagiarism. If you are uncertain about what plagiarism is please speak to your tutor and read the information provided on Moodle for this module.
On the following page I outline the sections that may be included in the study, with guidance for each.
Below is a possible approach to the assignment. The majority of this assignment should be concerned with an analysis of the care that is delivered.
Introduction (Briefly summarise the points 1- 3 below,) 300 – 400 words only
- Set the scene
(Briefly describe the service and its primary function/purpose.)
- Describe briefly the history
(Patients/Client’s significant physical/mental health history? What is the patient/client’s past bio/psycho/social history? How does this history relate to this service involvement?)
- Describe briefly the planned intervention(s).
Critical analysis of care implementation and evaluation (main focus of study) 1200-1400 words
- Present a critical analysis of care implementation giving consideration to some of the following themes. (Eg. How was the planned care delivered? How did the nursing team engage the patient/client and carers in delivering the care plan? How did the patient/client respond to the delivered care? Did this change the planned approach? How did capacity impact upon the person’s ability to engage and recover? How do these issues interrelate?)
- What methods were used to evaluate the outcome? (What was the outcome of that evaluation? What was good about care delivery, what could be improved, what else may have been tried?)
Conclusion – 300 – 400 words
- What did you learn from this care study? (What are the implications for your future practice?)
University of Essex
School of Health and Human Sciences
Assessment/Assignment Feedback Sheet = MSc Pre-registration Programmes
MSc Adult & Mental Health Nursing – Pre Registration
HS867— Care of the Person with Limited Capacity
For a brief explanation of these sections please see the grid attached
|Knowledge and Understanding
– Knowledge base
– Ethical Issues
|Cognitive and Intellectual Skills
– Management of
|Marks out of (30)||<40% (<12)||41% – 49% (12-14)||50% – 59% (15-17)||60% – 69% (18-20)||70% – 79% (21-23)||80% + (24+)|
|KNOWLEDGE AND UNDERSTANDING||POOR||UNACCEPTABLE||SATISFACTORY||GOOD||VERY GOOD||EXCELLENT|
|Knowledge base: has depth and systematic understanding of knowledge in specialised /applied areas and can work with theoretical / research based knowledge at the forefront of their academic discipline||Insufficient depth or understanding with significant gaps.||Inclusion of some relevant material but with major omissions &/or factual errors.||Acceptable depth of understanding of current theory / research but with some omissions.||Comprehensive understanding with evidence of current theory / research.||Detailed, with depth of understanding and evidence of current theory / research.||Exceptional depth and understanding.|
|Ethical issues: has the awareness and ability to engage with the implications of ethical dilemmas||Insufficient awareness & ability. Little or no discussion.||Evidence of awareness & ability but limited discussion.||Evidence of awareness & ability to manage implications with evidence of active debate.||Comprehensive awareness & ability to manage implications & debate.||Fully aware & able to manage implications and debate.||Exceptional awareness & ability to manage implications and debate.|
|Disciplinary methodologies: has a comprehensive understanding of techniques / methodologies applicable to their own work (theory or research-based)||Insufficient understanding with minimal application.||Evidence of understanding with limited application.||Acceptable understanding and application to own work.||Comprehensive understanding and application to own work.||Demonstrates detailed understanding and application to own work.||Exceptional understanding and application to own work.|
|Marks out of (50)||<40% (<20)||41% – 49% (20-24)||50% – 59% (25-29)||60% – 69% (30-34)||70% – 79% (35-39)||80% + (40+)|
|COGNITIVE AND INTELLECTUAL SKILLS||POOR||UNACCEPTABLE||SATISFACTORY||GOOD||VERY GOOD||EXCELLENT|
|Analysis: with critical awareness can undertake analysis of complex, incomplete or contradictory areas of knowledge communicating the outcome effectively||Superficial awareness, lack of evidence of engagement with complex and contradictory areas.||Evidence of awareness but lacks evidence of engagement with complex and contradictory areas.||Acceptable with relevant evidence of analysis and understanding of the complexity of the areas studied. Limited communication of outcome.||Comprehensive analysis involving complex areas of knowledge. Outcome clearly communicated.||Extensive analysis of complexities and contradictions. Effective communication of outcome.||Exceptional analysis of complexities and contradictions with matching communication of outcome.|
|Synthesis: with critical awareness can synthesise information in a manner that may be innovative, utilising knowledge or processes from the forefront of the discipline / practice||Insufficient critical awareness and/or significant gaps in knowledge base.||Some synthesis evident but inadequate critical awareness and/or inappropriate knowledge base.||Satisfactory evidence of synthesis and innovation.||Evidence of synthesis and innovation that on occasion moves beyond a predictable format.||Evidence of synthesis and innovation that consistently moves beyond a predictable format.||Wide ranging evidence of innovation and creativity.|
|<40%||41% – 49%||50% – 59%||60% – 69%||70% – 79%||80% +|
|COGNITIVE AND INTELLECTUAL SKILLS (continued)||POOR||UNACCEPTABLE||SATISFACTORY||GOOD||VERY GOOD||EXCELLENT|
|Evaluation: has a level of conceptual understanding that will allow him/her critically to evaluate research, advanced scholarship and methodologies and argue alternative approaches||Insufficient evaluation with significant gaps in conceptual understanding.||Some evaluation evident but not consistent.||Consistent evidence of evaluation.||Comprehensive evaluation of relevance and significance.||Detailed and extensive evaluation.||Exceptional evidence of evaluation.|
|Application: can demonstrate initiative and originality in problem solving.||Insufficient evidence of application with significant gaps.||Some evidence of application but at an unacceptable level.||Satisfactory application and problem solving ability. Awareness of complexity of context.||Able to identify and define complex problems / solutions.||Confident and flexible in identifying and defining problems / solutions. Demonstrates innovation and creativity.||Exceptional approach to application and problem solving.|
|Marks out of (20)||<40% (<8)||41% – 49% (8-9)||50% – 59% (10-11)||60% – 69% (12-13)||70% – 79% (14-15)||80% + (16+)|
|TRANSFERABLE SKILLS||POOR||UNACCEPTABLE||SATISFACTORY||GOOD||VERY GOOD||EXCELLENT|
|Learning resources: is able to use full range of learning resources. Can reference accurately and appropriately.||Insufficient use of appropriate learning resources. Inaccurate referencing.||Limited use of appropriate learning resources. Inaccurate referencing.||Satisfactory evidence of a range of resources. Accurate / appropriate referencing.||Comprehensive range of referencing. Sound referencing.||Appropriate selection and extensive use of relevant resources. Effective integration of appropriate references.||Excellent and appropriate range of resources used effectively.|
|Communications: can engage confidently in academic and professional communication with others, reporting on action clearly, autonomously and competently.||Ineffective and / or unclear expression.||Evidence of a lack of confidence in communication.||Acceptable with clear structure and direction.||Clear, concise and professional with effective signposting of ideas.||Excellent communication and presentation.||Exceptional ability to communicate and structure effectively.|
|Management of information: can competently undertake research tasks with minimum guidance.||Inadequate with insufficient ability to undertake research.||Can undertake research tasks but with considerable guidance.||Demonstrates ability to undertake some independent research activity.||Sound ability to undertake research tasks independently.||Excellent ability to undertake research tasks independently.||Exceptional ability to undertake research independently.|
Order your paper now