Benchmark - Ethical Conduct of Scholarly Activities

Assessment Description The focus of this assignment is to apply the principles detailed in the Belmont Report to case studies involving human subjects in research or a quality improvement project. Utilize the "Ethical Conduct of Scholarly Activities" document to complete this assignment. While APA style is not required for the body of this assignment, solid academic writing is expected, and documentation of sources should be presented using APA formatting guidelines, which can be found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion. Hello here is the link to the article https://journals(dot)lww(dot)com/dccnjournal/fulltext/2016/07000/the_belmont_report__the_triple_crown_of_research.8.aspx CLIENT UPDATE Rubric Criteria Case 1: Respect for Person 16.8 points Criteria Description Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of respect for person, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in respect for person. 5. Target 16.8 points Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of respect for person, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in respect for person, is thorough. 4. Acceptable 14.95 points Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of respect for person, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in respect for person, is detailed. 3. Approaching 13.27 points Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of respect for person, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in respect for person, is present. 2. Insufficient 12.6 points Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of respect for person, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in respect for person, is inaccurate or incomplete. 1. Unsatisfactory 0 points Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of respect for person, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in respect for person, is not present. Case 1: Beneficence 16.8 points Criteria Description Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of beneficence, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in beneficence. 5. Target 16.8 points Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of beneficence, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in beneficence, is thorough. 4. Acceptable 14.95 points Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of beneficence, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in beneficence, is detailed. 3. Approaching 13.27 points Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of beneficence, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in beneficence, is present. 2. Insufficient 12.6 points Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of beneficence, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in beneficence, is inaccurate or incomplete. 1. Unsatisfactory 0 points Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of beneficence, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in beneficence, is not present. Case 1: Justice 16.8 points Criteria Description Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of justice, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in justice. 5. Target 16.8 points Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of justice, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in justice, is thorough. 4. Acceptable 14.95 points Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of justice, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in justice, is detailed. 3. Approaching 13.27 points Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of justice, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in justice, is present. 2. Insufficient 12.6 points Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of justice, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in justice, is inaccurate or incomplete. 1. Unsatisfactory 0 points Explanation of how Case Study 1 meets and does not meet the components of justice, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in justice, is not present. Case 2: Respect for Person 16.8 points Criteria Description Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of respect for person, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in respect for person. 5. Target 16.8 points Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of respect for person, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in respect for person, is thorough. 4. Acceptable 14.95 points Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of respect for person, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in respect for person, is detailed. 3. Approaching 13.27 points Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of respect for person, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in respect for person, is present. 2. Insufficient 12.6 points Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of respect for person, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in respect for person, is inaccurate or incomplete. 1. Unsatisfactory 0 points Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of respect for person, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in respect for person, is not present. Case 2: Beneficence 16.8 points Criteria Description Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of beneficence, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in beneficence. 5. Target 16.8 points Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of beneficence, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in beneficence, is thorough. 4. Acceptable 14.95 points Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of beneficence, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in beneficence, is detailed. 3. Approaching 13.27 points Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of beneficence, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in beneficence, is present. 2. Insufficient 12.6 points Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of beneficence, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in beneficence, is inaccurate or incomplete. 1. Unsatisfactory 0 points Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of beneficence, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in beneficence, is not present. Case 2: Justice 16.8 points Criteria Description Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of justice, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in justice. 5. Target 16.8 points Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of justice, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in justice, is thorough. 4. Acceptable 14.95 points Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of justice, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in justice, is detailed. 3. Approaching 13.27 points Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of justice, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in justice, is present. 2. Insufficient 12.6 points Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of justice, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in justice, is inaccurate or incomplete. 1. Unsatisfactory 0 points Explanation of how Case Study 2 meets and does not meet the components of justice, as well as steps that can be taken by nurse or quality improvement manager to adhere to ethical principles in justice, is not present. Ethical Principles, Christian Worldview, and Nursing Practice 11.2 points Criteria Description Discussion of how the ethical principles of the Belmont Report align with the Christian worldview and with personal nursing practice. 5. Target 11.2 points Discussion of how the ethical principles of the Belmont Report align with the Christian worldview and with personal nursing practice is thorough. 4. Acceptable 9.97 points Discussion of how the ethical principles of the Belmont Report align with the Christian worldview and with personal nursing practice is detailed. 3. Approaching 8.85 points Discussion of how the ethical principles of the Belmont Report align with the Christian worldview and with personal nursing practice is present. 2. Insufficient 8.4 points Discussion of how the ethical principles of the Belmont Report align with the Christian worldview and with personal nursing practice is inaccurate or incomplete. 1. Unsatisfactory 0 points Discussion of how the ethical principles of the Belmont Report align with the Christian worldview and with personal nursing practice is not present. Demonstration of Professional Aptitude for Ethical Conduct (B) (B) 14 points Criteria Description Overall demonstration of professional aptitude for application of ethical research guidelines, ethical behaviors, and advocacy for the protection of participants in Scholarly initiatives and Scholarly practice-based projects. (C.4.3) (C4.3) 5. Target 14 points The learner clearly demonstrates professional aptitude for application of ethical research guidelines, ethical behaviors, and advocacy for the protection of participants in Scholarly initiatives and Scholarly practice-based projects. Rationale is appropriate for the assignment criteria and nursing content and provides strong support for both factual and subjective responses throughout. 4. Acceptable 12.46 points The learner demonstrates professional aptitude for application of ethical research guidelines, ethical behaviors, and advocacy for the protection of participants in Scholarly initiatives and Scholarly practice-based projects. Rationale is appropriate for the assignment criteria and nursing content and provides support for both factual and subjective responses throughout. 3. Approaching 11.06 points The learner demonstrates adequate professional aptitude for application of ethical research guidelines, ethical behaviors, and advocacy for the protection of participants in Scholarly initiatives and Scholarly practice-based projects. Rationale is mostly appropriate for the assignment criteria and nursing content and provides general support for both factual and subjective responses throughout. 2. Insufficient 10.5 points The learner inconsistently demonstrates professional aptitude in the application of ethical research guidelines, ethical behaviors, and advocacy for the protection of participants in Scholarly initiatives and Scholarly practice-based projects. Rationale is lacking and does not reflect the assignment criteria and nursing content in many scenarios. Overall, support for both factual and subjective responses is lacking. 1. Unsatisfactory 0 points The learner does not demonstrate professional aptitude in the application of ethical research guidelines, ethical behaviors, and advocacy for the protection of participants in Scholarly initiatives and Scholarly practice-based projects. Rationale is not appropriate or does not reflect the assignment criteria and nursing content. Support for both factual and subjective responses is not provided. Mechanics of Writing 8.4 points Criteria Description Includes spelling, capitalization, punctuation, grammar, language use, sentence structure, etc. 5. Target 8.4 points No mechanical errors are present. Appropriate language choice and sentence structure are used throughout. 4. Acceptable 7.48 points Few mechanical errors are present. Suitable language choice and sentence structure are used. 3. Approaching 6.64 points Occasional mechanical errors are present. Language choice is generally appropriate. Varied sentence structure is attempted. 2. Insufficient 6.3 points Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors are present. Inconsistencies in language choice or sentence structure are recurrent. 1. Unsatisfactory 0 points Errors in grammar or syntax are pervasive and impede meaning. Incorrect language choice or sentence structure errors are found throughout. Format/Documentation 5.6 points Criteria Description Uses appropriate style, such as APA, MLA, etc., for college, subject, and level; documents sources using citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., appropriate to assignment and discipline. 5. Target 5.6 points No errors in formatting or documentation are present. 4. Acceptable 4.98 points Appropriate format and documentation are used with only minor errors. 3. Approaching 4.42 points Appropriate format and documentation are used, although there are some obvious errors. 2. Insufficient 4.2 points Appropriate format is attempted, but some elements are missing. Frequent errors in documentation of sources are evident. 1. Unsatisfactory 0 points Appropriate format is not used. No documentation of sources is provided. Total 140 points