The interrelationships between nursing practice, knowledge and research. This journal article argues that culture within nursing practice, plays a significant role in the notion denoting research as superfluous to care provision. The authors examine the nurses’ perception concerning their use of research in practice, by employing three specific questions regarding views on, use of and workplace support within research.
Using the quantitative approach, they gather biographic information, views-on and knowledge-of research and ones ability to utilise it within practice settings. A Likert-based questionnaire was used to analyse descriptive statistics scores as a percentage, where respondents rated answers one to five. Their findings show nurses value practice based research. Their decision-making process typically involves a range of factors outside the scope of research and often research requires an effort in accessing resources.
The authors ascertain that research yields both greater value and acceptance to decisions that require justification (NICE, cited in Heaslip, Hewitt-Taylor et al. 2012 pg. 1344-1345). They conclude, whilst research is valued by nurses, both a complementary culture and adequate workplace support are often absent. Isolated, research cannot enable thorough clinical decision making, which should encompass a variety of factors and resources.
Philosophical Service Project For this assignment, you will perform some “philosophical community service.” The service you will provide is demonstrating
Philosophical Service Project For this assignment, you will perform some “philosophical community service.” The service you will provide is demonstrating to some members of your community how to think critically about moral issues using the logical methods we’ve practiced in this class. So, you will model thinking in systematic ways about moral issues, engage some arguments from your audience, and help them evaluate these arguments. Here’s what to do: 1. You may do this project on your own, or you may do it in a group of 2-3 students. If you do a group, each member must submit the project on their own: not doing this will result in a zero for any student who doesn’t submit the assignment. 2. Pick a “practical” or “applied” topic from the syllabus (not an ethical theory) that we have covered in this course or develop your own with the approval of the instructor. Here are some of the topics we’ve covered: the treatment of disabled newborns, euthanasia and assisted suicide, female genital mutilation, male circumcision, homosexuality, racism in dating, racial preferences in romantic relationships, polyamory and monogamy, abortion, absolute poverty, reparations for slavery, racism, sexism, and speciesism, vegetarianism and the treatment of animals, punishment and the death penalty, drug use and the criminalization of drug use, the ethics of grades and extra credit, and more. 3. Develop at least 5 arguments in logically valid form on this topic. You will Grammar and spelling: errors and distractions are eliminated; paper has been carefully proofread. 9 want to review the video on syllogisms, to remind yourself how to make arguments in valid form: https://youtu.be/xw8DJQRYWXg Recall that the pattern here is: A is an X. All things that are X are Y. Therefore, A is a Y. or A is an X. If something is an X, then that something is a Y. Therefore, A is a Y. 4. Find an audience of at least 3 people, not from this class. This can be three people from “real, in-person” life, or people online, say via Zoom or Skype or the like. 5. Present your arguments to this audience. Given them an introduction to what you will do in your presentation. Explain to them what you will do and how you will do it: tell them what arguments are and what makes arguments good and bad and how you can tell (explain – with examples – the concepts of arguments logical validity, soundness, counterexamples). State and explain your five arguments in logically valid form and fully evaluate them as sound or not: explain whether each and every premise is true or false and why. Do not present any “question-begging” arguments, where the premises assume the conclusion; if your audience offers any question-begging arguments, you will need to identify those as question-begging and explain why they are inadequate. 6. Get at least 3 (ideally, at least 5) new arguments, or premises, on the same topic from the audience. 7. With the audience, formulate these arguments in logically valid form and determine whether they are sound or not: address each and every premise. 8. Formulate any conclusions from your discussion and conclude your discussion, reviewing what you did. 9. Write up a report on what happened, using the headings below: cut and paste the text below into a document to use. Your final report here should be organized, clear, and easy to read. You should upload it here to submit it. Philosophical “Community Service” Project: Report Form: 1. Your Class: 10 2. Your name. You may do this on your own or as a small group of 2-3 (see above). If you do a group, please include your group members’ names: (note: each member must submit this report: failing to do this will result in a zero for the assignment for the student who doesn’t submit the report, if he is a member of a group). 3. Your topic: 4. Summarize the introduction to what you will do in your presentation. You will need to explain to the audience what you will do and how you will do it: you need to explain the methods that you will use to identify and evaluate moral arguments. 5. Present at least 5 arguments on that topic, stated in logically valid form. 6. Evaluate those 5 arguments as sound or not. Fully explain why they are sound or not: by explaining whether each and every premise is true or false (Note: merely stating whether an argument is sound or not does not explain why it is sound or not: explanations of whether each and every premise is true or false and why is needed). 7. Your audience members’ names: 8. Your audience’s reactions to the arguments that you presented and your evaluation of them: 9. The 3-5 arguments from the audience: 10. These arguments stated in logically valid form: 11. Your, and the audience’s, evaluations of these arguments as sound or not: 12. Your conclusions and summary of this activity that you presented to the audience. 13. Your group’s reflections on this experience: what went well? What was interesting? What was surprising? What was challenging? How was this experience, overall? The project will be graded on the basis of these concerns: Excellent Good Fair Poor Very poor Organization: the report has a 11 clear, orderly structure, with labelled sections. Clarity: the presentation is clear and concise; easy to understand and follow. Accuracy: what is said about the issues is accurate; it is clear the author understands the issues. Argumentation: multiple arguments are presented, in logically valid form, and fully evaluated. This includes arguments from the author and arguments from the audience. Grammar and spelling: errors and distractions are eliminated; paper has been carefully proofread.