Write an argument essay on “Should influencers be allowed to market products? “. Make a word count of 900 to 1000 words and 5 to 6 paragraph. Should be in MLA format double spaced. Should have a thes

Write an argument essay on “Should influencers be allowed to market products? “.

Make a word count of 900 to 1000 words and 5 to 6 paragraph.

Should be in MLA format double spaced.

Should have a thesis statement.

All the references should be mentioned on a seperate page.

Help me write the assignment. Section II: Climate Change Deniers Question 7: Using the article Nelson (2015), write a short letter (less than 750 marks) to a family member that denies the occurrenc

Help me write the assignment.

Section II: Climate Change Deniers

Question 7: Using the article Nelson (2015), write a short letter (less than 750 marks) to a family member that denies the occurrence of climate change. You should base your letter on the five characteristics of denial discussed in the lectures. This letter should be double spaced and written in first-person. Use a 12-point, Arial font. You do not need to include an introduction or conclusion, as well no references should be used (this should be formatted as a letter). (10 mark)

Nelson, M. D. (2015). Climate Change Science & Propaganda. International Journal of Geosciences, 6(12), 1323

Description Deliverable Length: 2-3 pages Read a quantitative article in a peer-reviewed journal in the area of public administration or public policy that uses data collection to test some hypothesis

Description Deliverable Length: 2-3 pages

Read a quantitative article in a peer-reviewed journal in the area of public administration or public policy that uses data collection to test some hypothesis. Organize your paper with each of the following sections clearly numbered:

  1. Give the bibliographic citation for the article.
  2. Succinctly state the hypothesis or hypotheses being tested.
  3. List and briefly describe the dependent and independent variables.
  4. What theoretical basis or conceptual framework does the author utilize in framing an understanding of the problem or issue? Explain your answer.
  5. Briefly describe the data collection and analysis procedures.
  6. What are the inherent, pre-existent biases in the author’s approach?
  7. What is your overall evaluation of the study? What are the weak areas? What are the strong areas?

In this assignment, students will pull together the capstone project change proposal components they have been working on throughout the course to create a proposal inclusive of sections for each cont

In this assignment, students will pull together the capstone project change proposal components they have been working on throughout the course to create a proposal inclusive of sections for each content focus area in the course. For this project, the student will apply evidence-based research steps and processes required as the foundation to address a clinically oriented problem or issue in future practice.

Develop a 2,500-4,000 written project that includes the following information as it applies to the problem, issue, suggestion, initiative, or educational need profiled in the capstone change proposal:

  1. Background
  2. Clinical problem statement.
  3. Purpose of the change proposal in relation to providing patient care in the changing health care system.
  4. PICOT question.
  5. Literature search strategy employed.
  6. Evaluation of the literature.
  7. Applicable change or nursing theory utilized.
  8. Proposed implementation plan with outcome measures.
  9. Discussion of how evidence-based practice was used in creating the intervention plan.
  10. Plan for evaluating the proposed nursing intervention.
  11. Identification of potential barriers to plan implementation, and a discussion of how these could be overcome.
  12. Appendix section, for evaluation tools and educational materials, etc. are created.

Review the feedback from your instructor on the PICOT Question Paper, and Literature Review. Use this feedback to make appropriate revisions to these before submitting.

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines 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.

You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. A link to the LopesWrite technical support articles is located in Class Resources if you need assistance.

Benchmark Information

This benchmark assignment assesses the following programmatic competencies:

RN to BSN

1.4: Implement patient care decisions based on evidence-based practice.

2.2: Manage patient care within the changing environment of the health care system.

Textbook Research Methods for Social Work ISBN: 9781506345307-Farmer No Plagiarism 1.In what ways and under what circumstances have you seen or heard research be harmful to others? In what ways and u

Textbook Research Methods for Social Work ISBN: 9781506345307-Farmer

No Plagiarism

1.In what ways and under what circumstances have you seen or heard research be harmful to others? In what ways and under what circumstances have you seen or heard research be beneficial to others?

2. According to the textbook Research Methods for Social Work ISBN: 9781506345307-Farmer, it has been argued by Rodgers-Farmer and Potocky (2001) that the problem formulation phase by its very use of the term problem implies that researchers operate from a “deficit perspective” when it comes to conducting research with diverse groups or populations who are considered as a minority. What are the benefits and risks of using a deficit perspective when creating a research question?

3.How might a researcher minimize the risk of bias during sampling?

4. Which of the research designs in Chapter 4 of Research Methods” do you think would be the most difficult to conduct? Why? Which do you think would be the easiest to conduct? Why?

Purpose The Group Presentation is the final of the three assignments in this course. It builds upon and utilizes information gathered and reported in the first two assignments. The purpose of this ass

Purpose

The Group Presentation is the final of the three assignments in this course. It builds upon and utilizes information gathered and reported in the first two assignments. The purpose of this assignment is two-fold: a) to provide a solution to a clinical problem using the EBP process, and b) to demonstrate presentation skills for a group of peers.

Course outcomes: This assignment enables the student to meet the following course outcomes.

CO 1: Examine the sources of knowledge that contribute to professional nursing practice. (PO 7)

CO 2: Apply research principles to the interpretation of the content of published research studies. (POs 4 and 8) CO 3: Identify ethical issues common to research involving human subjects. (PO 6)

CO 4: Evaluate published nursing research for credibility and clinical significance related to evidence-based practice. (POs 4 and 8)

CO 5: Recognize the role of research findings in evidence-based practice. (POs 7 and 8)

Due date: Your faculty member will inform you when this assignment is due. The Late Assignment Policy applies to this assignment.

Total points possible: 240 points

Preparing the assignment (Online Students Only)

1.       Follow these guidelines when completing this online assignment. Speak with your faculty member if you have questions.

a.       Presentations will give a brief overview of the topic, followed by examples of how the topic influences or assists the nursing profession.

b.       Each student will contribute two to three slides for the group presentation.

c.       The final presentation will consist of 10–12 PowerPoint slides and may include handouts, if applicable.

Preparing the assignment (Campus Students Only)

1.       Follow these guidelines when completing this on-campus assignment. Speak with your faculty member if you have questions.

a.       Each group will have 15 minutes to present on their topic.

b.       Presentations will give a brief overview of the topic, followed by examples of how the topic influences or assists the nursing profession.

c.       Each student will have an opportunity to present (speak).

d.       Each student will contribute two to three slides for the group presentation.

e.       Students will be prepared to have 10–12 PowerPoint slides and may include handouts, if applicable.

2.       Include the following sections: (

a.       Content ([All Students] 125 points/52%)

·       Identification of problem and impact on nursing practice.

·       Clearly describe the research process, including what went well, barriers encountered, and what is still needed.

·       Correlates research findings to identified clinical issue.

·       Summarizes validity of qualitative and quantitative evidence.

·       Findings are clearly identified.

·       Recommends practice change with measurable outcomes and addresses feasibility issues.

·       Suggestions for implementation.

·       Conclusion of content findings.

b.       Delivery (40 points/17%)

(Online Students Only)

·       Follows guidelines for a professional PowerPoint presentation. Speak directly with faculty for online Canvas submission process.

·       Evidence of participation by all group members.

(Campus Students Only)

·       Follows guidelines for a professional PowerPoint presentation.

·       Verbal delivery with good volume, pitch, and inflection for all group members.

·       Physical delivery with professional dress, good posture, facial expression with eye contact, and enthusiasm is present for all group members.

·       All group members effectively use notes and do not read from slides.

·       Participation by all group members.

c.       Slide Presentation ([All Students] 60 points/25% distributed as shown)

·       Title slide including group members

·       Introductory slide with the clinical problem

·       Additional slides illustrating key points

·       Conclusion slide

·       Reference slide in current APA format

·       Effective balance of color, graphics, words, and space

·       Slide limit: 10–12, inclusive of introduction and references

***Optional handouts may be included to provide information for the audience to keep.

d.       Peer Evaluation ([All Students] 15 points/6%)

·       Completed peer evaluation with respectful and constructive feedback.

·       Equal work: Did equal share of work.

·       Teamwork: Took the initiative in helping get the group organized.

·       Communication: Provided ideas for the development of the presentation.

·       Team membership skills: Assisted group members.

·       Time: Met all deadlines.

For writing assistance, visit the Writing Center.

Please note that your instructor may provide you with additional assessments in any form to determine that you fully understand the concepts learned in the review module.

Grading Rubric Criteria are met when the student’s application of knowledge demonstrates achievement of the outcomes for this assignment.

Assignment Section and Required Criteria

(Points possible/% of total points available)

Highest Level of Performance

High Level of Performance

Satisfactory Level of Performance

Unsatisfactory Level of Performance

Section not present in paper

Content

(125 points/52%)

125 points

110 points

100 points

50 points

0 points

Required criteria

1.       Identification of problem and impact on nursing practice.

2.       Clearly describe the research process, including what went well, barriers encountered, and what is still needed.

3.       Correlates research findings to identified clinical issue.

4.       Summarizes validity of qualitative and quantitative evidence.

5.       Findings are clearly identified.

6.       Recommends practice change with measurable outcomes and addresses feasibility issues.

7.       Suggestions for implementation.

8.       Conclusion of content findings.

Includes 8 requirements for section.

Includes 7 requirements for section.

Includes 6 requirements for section.

Includes 5 or less requirements for section.

No requirements for this section presented.

Delivery

(40 points/17%)

40 points

35 points

25 points

12 points

0 points

Required criteria (Online Students Only)

1.       Follows guidelines for a professional PowerPoint presentation. Speak directly with faculty for online Canvas submission process.

2.       Evidence of participation by all group members.

(Campus Students Only)

1.       Follows guidelines for a professional PowerPoint presentation.

2.       Verbal delivery with good volume, pitch, and inflection for all group members.

3.       Physical delivery with professional dress, good posture, facial expression with eye contact, and enthusiasm is present for all group members.

4.       All group members effectively use notes and do not read from slides.

5.         Participation by all group members.

Includes 2 requirements for section. (online)

Includes 5 requirements for section. (campus)

N/A

Includes 4 requirements for section. (campus)

Includes 1 requirement for section. (online)

Includes 3 requirements for section. (campus)

N/A

Includes 2 or less requirements for section. (campus)

No requirements for this section presented. (online)

No requirements for section presented. (campus)

Assignment Section and Required Criteria

(Points possible/% of total points available)

Highest Level of Performance

High Level of Performance

Satisfactory Level of Performance

Unsatisfactory Level of Performance

Section not present in paper

Slide Presentation

(60 points/25%)

60 points

53 points

47 points

23 points

0 points

Required criteria

1.       Title slide including group members

2.       Introductory slide with the clinical problem

3.       Additional slides illustrating key points

4.       Conclusion slide

5.       Reference slide in current APA format

6.       Effective balance of color, graphics, words, and space

7.       Slide limit: 10–12, inclusive of introduction and references

***Optional handouts may be included to provide information for the audience to keep.

Includes 7 requirements for section.

Includes 6 requirements for section.

Includes 5 requirements for section.

Includes 4 or less requirements for section.

No requirements for this section presented.

Peer Evaluation

(15 points/6%)

15 points

13 points

11 points

6 points

0 points

1.       Completed peer evaluation with respectful and constructive feedback.

2.       Equal work: Did equal share of work.

3.       Teamwork: Took the initiative in helping get the group organized.

4.       Communication: Provided ideas for the development of the presentation.

5.       Team membership skills: Assisted group members.

6.       Time: Met all deadlines.

Includes 6 requirements for section.

Includes 5 requirements for section.

Includes 4 requirements for section.

Includes 3 or less requirements for section.

No requirements for this section presented.

Total Points Possible = 240 points

Purpose The Group Presentation is the final of the three assignments in this course. It builds upon and utilizes information gathered and reported in the first two assignments. The purpose of this ass
NR449 Evidence-Based Practice RUA: Evidence-Based Practice Change Group Project Guidelines Purpose The Group Presentation is the final of the three assignments in this course. It builds upon and utilizes information gathered and reported in the first two assignments. The purpose of this assignment is two-fold: a) to provide a solution to a clinical problem using the EBP process, and b) to demonstrate presentation skills for a group of peers. Course outcomes: This assignment enables the student to meet the following course outcomes. CO 1: Examine the sources of knowledge that contribute to professional nursing practice. (PO 7) CO 2: Apply research principles to the interpretation of the content of published research studies. (POs 4 and 8) CO 3: Identify ethical issues common to research involving human subjects. (PO 6) CO 4: Evaluate published nursing research for credibility and clinical significance related to evidence-based practice. (POs 4 and 8) CO 5: Recognize the role of research findings in evidence-based practice. (POs 7 and 8) Due date: Your faculty member will inform you when this assignment is due. The Late Assignment Policy applies to this assignment. Total points possible: 240 points Preparing the assignment (Online Students Only) Follow these guidelines when completing this online assignment. Speak with your faculty member if you have questions. Presentations will give a brief overview of the topic, followed by examples of how the topic influences or assists the nursing profession. Each student will contribute two to three slides for the group presentation. The final presentation will consist of 10–12 PowerPoint slides and may include handouts, if applicable. Preparing the assignment (Campus Students Only) Follow these guidelines when completing this on-campus assignment. Speak with your faculty member if you have questions. Each group will have 15 minutes to present on their topic. Presentations will give a brief overview of the topic, followed by examples of how the topic influences or assists the nursing profession. Each student will have an opportunity to present (speak). Each student will contribute two to three slides for the group presentation. Students will be prepared to have 10–12 PowerPoint slides and may include handouts, if applicable. Include the following sections: ( Content ([All Students] 125 points/52%) Identification of problem and impact on nursing practice. Clearly describe the research process, including what went well, barriers encountered, and what is still needed. Correlates research findings to identified clinical issue. Summarizes validity of qualitative and quantitative evidence. Findings are clearly identified. Recommends practice change with measurable outcomes and addresses feasibility issues. Suggestions for implementation. Conclusion of content findings. Delivery (40 points/17%) (Online Students Only) Follows guidelines for a professional PowerPoint presentation. Speak directly with faculty for online Canvas submission process. Evidence of participation by all group members. (Campus Students Only) Follows guidelines for a professional PowerPoint presentation. Verbal delivery with good volume, pitch, and inflection for all group members. Physical delivery with professional dress, good posture, facial expression with eye contact, and enthusiasm is present for all group members. All group members effectively use notes and do not read from slides. Participation by all group members. Slide Presentation ([All Students] 60 points/25% distributed as shown) Title slide including group members Introductory slide with the clinical problem Additional slides illustrating key points Conclusion slide Reference slide in current APA format Effective balance of color, graphics, words, and space Slide limit: 10–12, inclusive of introduction and references ***Optional handouts may be included to provide information for the audience to keep. Peer Evaluation ([All Students] 15 points/6%) Completed peer evaluation with respectful and constructive feedback. Equal work: Did equal share of work. Teamwork: Took the initiative in helping get the group organized. Communication: Provided ideas for the development of the presentation. Team membership skills: Assisted group members. Time: Met all deadlines. For writing assistance, visit the Writing Center. Please note that your instructor may provide you with additional assessments in any form to determine that you fully understand the concepts learned in the review module. Grading Rubric Criteria are met when the student’s application of knowledge demonstrates achievement of the outcomes for this assignment. Assignment Section and Required Criteria (Points possible/% of total points available) Highest Level of Performance High Level of Performance Satisfactory Level of Performance Unsatisfactory Level of Performance Section not present in paper Content (125 points/52%) 125 points 110 points 100 points 50 points 0 points Required criteria Identification of problem and impact on nursing practice. Clearly describe the research process, including what went well, barriers encountered, and what is still needed. Correlates research findings to identified clinical issue. Summarizes validity of qualitative and quantitative evidence. Findings are clearly identified. Recommends practice change with measurable outcomes and addresses feasibility issues. Suggestions for implementation. Conclusion of content findings. Includes 8 requirements for section. Includes 7 requirements for section. Includes 6 requirements for section. Includes 5 or less requirements for section. No requirements for this section presented. Delivery (40 points/17%) 40 points 35 points 25 points 12 points 0 points Required criteria (Online Students Only) Follows guidelines for a professional PowerPoint presentation. Speak directly with faculty for online Canvas submission process. Evidence of participation by all group members. (Campus Students Only) Follows guidelines for a professional PowerPoint presentation. Verbal delivery with good volume, pitch, and inflection for all group members. Physical delivery with professional dress, good posture, facial expression with eye contact, and enthusiasm is present for all group members. All group members effectively use notes and do not read from slides. Participation by all group members. Includes 2 requirements for section. (online) Includes 5 requirements for section. (campus) N/A Includes 4 requirements for section. (campus) Includes 1 requirement for section. (online) Includes 3 requirements for section. (campus) N/A Includes 2 or less requirements for section. (campus) No requirements for this section presented. (online) No requirements for section presented. (campus) Assignment Section and Required Criteria (Points possible/% of total points available) Highest Level of Performance High Level of Performance Satisfactory Level of Performance Unsatisfactory Level of Performance Section not present in paper Slide Presentation (60 points/25%) 60 points 53 points 47 points 23 points 0 points Required criteria Title slide including group members Introductory slide with the clinical problem Additional slides illustrating key points Conclusion slide Reference slide in current APA format Effective balance of color, graphics, words, and space Slide limit: 10–12, inclusive of introduction and references ***Optional handouts may be included to provide information for the audience to keep. Includes 7 requirements for section. Includes 6 requirements for section. Includes 5 requirements for section. Includes 4 or less requirements for section. No requirements for this section presented. Peer Evaluation (15 points/6%) 15 points 13 points 11 points 6 points 0 points Completed peer evaluation with respectful and constructive feedback. Equal work: Did equal share of work. Teamwork: Took the initiative in helping get the group organized. Communication: Provided ideas for the development of the presentation. Team membership skills: Assisted group members. Time: Met all deadlines. Includes 6 requirements for section. Includes 5 requirements for section. Includes 4 requirements for section. Includes 3 or less requirements for section. No requirements for this section presented. Total Points Possible = 240 points © 2021 Chamberlain University. All Rights Reserved NR449_RUA_Group_Presentation_V2_JUL22 0
Purpose The Group Presentation is the final of the three assignments in this course. It builds upon and utilizes information gathered and reported in the first two assignments. The purpose of this ass
Topic Search Strategy Paper: Ethics of Euthanasia Name University NR449Evidence-Based Practice Professor Date Deliberately taking an individual’s life to ease their misery, otherwise called killing, is a profoundly petulant subject with moral consequences that length medical services and society. Physician-assisted euthanasia in adult patients in the last stages of their illness remains a contentious issue (Greonewoud et al., 2022). The individuals who support it contend that it is a humane method for lightning enduring. In contrast, the people who go against it argue that it is against clinical morals and the holiness of life. Clinical Question The group’s work focuses on the topic “Ethics of Euthanasia.” Specifically, the group will focus on how euthanasia is applied among terminally ill patients and the resulting implications when it is physician-assisted. In addition, there will also be a comparison between palliative care and euthanasia; palliative care revolves around providing specialized care to those suffering from severe illnesses and who may qualify for euthanasia. From this perspective, the group will explore how these factors relate to the ethics of patient autonomy, suffering, and the toll it takes on practitioners and the patient’s family. The topic of euthanasia has significance because it directly relates to patient well-being. Research indicates that terminal illnesses such as cancer mean pain is a constant reality for patients. Notably, Mallah et al. (2019) suggest that about 77% of cancer patients report moderate to serve pain, with about 65% receiving adequate pain management. In another research by Hagarty et al. (2020), severe pain is a source of fear for terminally ill patients experiencing end-of-life care. Therefore, serious ethical questions are raised on whether physician-assisted euthanasia is appropriate in these causes of serve patient discomfort. The group has developed a PICOT question that will assist in exploring the topic of the ethics of euthanasia. The sections of the PICOT questions are indicated below: P: In terminally ill adult patients I: what are the ethical implications of physician-assisted euthanasia. C: Comparing euthanasia to palliative care O: In terms of patient autonomy and societal perception The complete PICOT question is presented: “In terminally ill adult patients, what are the ethical implications of physician-assisted euthanasia compared to palliative care in terms of patient autonomy, relief of suffering, and impact on families and healthcare providers?” The purpose of this paper is to explore scholarly evidence and provide an analysis of the ethical implications of physician-assisted euthanasia compared to palliative care. Notably, this assessment will determine the impact of these interventions regarding patient autonomy, relief of suffering, and impact on families and healthcare providers. Ultimately, the research will assist in making informed decisions concerning end-of-life care. Levels of Evidence Based on the PICOT question described in the section above, it can be categorized as an ethics question because it primarily concerns ethical decision-making within euthanasia. Therefore, to address the question, one needs to have a nuanced understanding of the problem and interpret the different perspectives and values around euthanasia. Moreover, it requires comparing euthanasia and palliative care to highlight the ethical distinctions between the two interventions. The best type of research to address the question is qualitative studies. At their core, qualitative studies are about exploring real-world challenges to develop new insights. As mentioned above, the ethical nature of the research question requires a nuanced approach to finding a solution. Therefore, stringent facts and figures may not accurately capture patients’ perceptions and how families and health practitioners feel affected when making end-of-life care decisions. Search Strategy The search terms selected were inspired by the PICOT question created in the earlier sections to allow us to identify the largest pool of relevant articles. The search terms that were primarily used when looking for articles in order of preference include; “terminally ill patients,” “physician-assisted euthanasia,” “palliative care,” “ethical implications of euthanasia,” “euthanasia and pain,” and “impact of euthanasia.” These are just some of the search terms deployed, but they were not used in isolation, as some were combined to get different variations of results. The search for scholarly articles and research studies began at the CU library databases. The CU library was especially helpful as it provided access to various scholarly publications. Some databases proved useful when performing the search for studies. Some notable databases include BMC, PubMed Central, CINAHL, and PsycINFO. In addition, Google Scholar offers an easily accessible search avenue where it is easy to specify parameters and get open-access articles without barriers. As noted above, some search terms were combined to get different results, which was a refinement strategy. In such a situation, boolean operators combine the search terms. For example, “terminally ill patients” AND “ethical implications.” Another refinement strategy was using a time restriction, as only articles published within the last five years were considered. The two articles selected are “Ethical Considerations at the end-of-life Care” by Akdeniz et al. (2021) and “Nursing and Euthanasia: A narrative review of the nursing ethics literature” by Pesut et al. (2019). The article by Akdeniz et al. (2021) is relevant because it addresses the ethical challenges of end-of-life care and the ethical principles that guide the decision, notably autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, fidelity, and justice. On the other hand, the article by Pesut et al. (2019) is relevant because it highlights the ethical arguments for euthanasia and how it affects nursing practitioners. Conclusion Physician-assisted euthanasia is usually applied among terminally-ill patients who are in significant discomfort. Therefore, it is essential to explore the ethical implications of euthanasia and compare this with palliative care. The research question developed for this research falls in the category of ethical analysis and can best be addressed using qualitative studies. The research revolves around limiting articles to five years since publication and combining search terms using Boolean operators to find different results. References Akdeniz, M., Yardımcı, B., & Kavukcu, E. (2021). Ethical Considerations at the end-of-life Care. SAGE Open Medicine, 9(9). https://doi.org/10.1177/20503121211000918. Hagarty, A. M., Bush, S. H., Talarico, R., Lapenskie, J., & Tanuseputro, P. (2020). Severe pain at the end of life: a population-level observational study. BMC Palliative Care, 19(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12904-020-00569-2. Mallah, H., Mousa, R., Fadl, N. B., Musmar, S., Ball, S., & Nugent, K. (2019). Pain Severity and Adequacy of Pain Management in Terminally Ill Patients with Cancer: An Experience from North Palestine. Indian Journal of Palliative Care, 25(4), 494–500. https://doi.org/10.4103/IJPC.IJPC_39_19. Pesut, B., Greig, M., Thorne, S., Storch, J., Burgess, M., Tishelman, C., Chambaere, K., & Janke, R. (2019). Nursing and euthanasia: A narrative review of the nursing ethics literature. Nursing Ethics, 27(1), 096973301984512. https://doi.org/10.1177/0969733019845127.
Purpose The Group Presentation is the final of the three assignments in this course. It builds upon and utilizes information gathered and reported in the first two assignments. The purpose of this ass
Article Interpretation: Ethics of Euthanasia Name University NR449- Evidence Based Practice Professor Date Problem The topic that guides this presentation is “Ethics of Euthanasia.” The problem being addressed in this presentation is the application of euthanasia among terminally ill patients and the preceding consequences, especially when the procedure is physician-assisted. Another approach to this problem that will be approach is to compare euthanasia and palliative care. These two concepts are opposites, as palliative care requires specialized care for individuals with terminal illnesses. In other words, these people would also qualify for physician-assisted euthanasia. With this context in mind, the discussion will explore the ethical considerations related to autonomy, relief of suffering, and the impact on healthcare providers and the patient’s family. The topic of euthanasia is significant as it is directly related to the concept of patient outcomes. Specifically, it can impact the well-being of terminally ill patients. A statistic highlighting the significance of the problem is by Mallah et al. (2019), who indicate that about 77% of cancer patients report moderate to severe pain, and only about 65% receive adequate pain management. Another concerning finding in the research is that terminally ill patients fear pain, especially when receiving end-of-life care. These findings emphasize the pressing need to address the ethical questions surrounding the appropriateness of physician-assisted euthanasia in cases where patients experience severe discomfort. It asks whether practitioners must alleviate their patient’s discomfort and whether this promotes or distracts from ensuring patient well-being. Therefore, this paper aims to analyze two articles that offer insight into the ethical implications of physician-assisted euthanasia compared to palliative care for terminally ill adult patients. The ethical principles guiding this exploration are patient autonomy, the procedure’s potential impact on family members and medical practitioners, and the duty to relieve patient suffering. An evidence matrix will be completed and provided in the appendix section with an appropriate reference, purpose, variables, sample size, and major findings of each article. The PICOT question guiding this interpretation of the articles is “In terminally ill adult patients, what are the ethical implications of physician-assisted euthanasia compared to palliative care in terms of patient autonomy, relief of suffering, and impact on families and healthcare providers?” Evidence Matrix Table Template: Data Summary The purpose of this section is to describe data input in the Evidence Matrix Table. The data is vital as it provides an opportunity to compare and contrast the two articles selected most appropriately responding to the PICOT question. In addition, this comparison will allow highlighting of the articles’ purpose, methods, and, notably, the significant findings they present. Please see Appendix A for the complete Evidence Matrix Table, which includes a detailed description of the data from the two articles: Akdeniz et al. (2021) and Pesut et al. (2019). Description of Findings Variables The independent variable in the article by Akdeniz et al. (2021) is ethical principles, while the dependent variable is the ethical challenges and difficulties encountered in end-of-life care. On the other hand, for Pesut et al. (2019), there are multiple independent variables, including ethical principles, moral consistency, the nature of the social good, and the nature of nursing. However, the article’s dependent variable is the ethical arguments surrounding euthanasia in nursing practice. Since both these articles are qualitative and exploratory, variables are not explicitly stated when they describe their research process. Methods The two articles selected use qualitative study design and procedures. Akdeniz et al. (2021) depend on a qualitative study design, specifically a narrative review, and draw information from varied sources, including research studies, ethical guidelines, and expert opinions, to discuss ethical difficulties in end-of-life care. Similarly, Pesut et al. (2019) systematically searched nine electronic databases and synthesized information to provide an overview of the ethical arguments surrounding euthanasia in relation to nursing practice. Participants The two articles are similar in that they are both qualitative since they depend on literature reviews. Therefore, neither of the articles relied on participants to provide data. Instead, the studies turned on information they retrieved from various sources and did not involve primary data collection from participants. Instruments The article by Akdeniz et al. (2021) is purely a narrative review and does not provide details on the instruments used to collect and synthesize information. In contrast, the article by Pesut et al. (2019) systematically searched nine electronic databases and loaded articles into an EPPI-Reviewer. A screening process was then used to determine if the articles met the eligibility criteria. Then a critical analysis of the articles was conducted, and data were thematically categorized based on the nature of the questions and arguments used to address those questions. Implications for Future Work The research findings in both articles provide valuable insights into the ethical dimensions of the clinical problem surrounding euthanasia in end-of-life care and its implications for healthcare professionals, particularly nurses. Akdeniz et al. (2021) highlight the importance of adhering to ethical principles such as fidelity, beneficence, nonmaleficence, autonomy, and justice in end-of-life care. Pesut et al. (2019) explore the arguments for and against euthanasia, emphasizing the need for nurses to consider various ethical factors and the scarcity of literature on the topic. While the findings contribute to understanding the clinical problem, further evidence is needed to examine the perspectives of patients, families, and healthcare providers directly involved in end-of-life care decision-making. Based on the current findings, two questions that can guide the group’s work are: What are the experiences and perspectives of terminally ill patients, their families, and healthcare providers regarding euthanasia and palliative care? How can healthcare professionals, including nurses, be better prepared to address the ethical challenges and dilemmas of euthanasia in end-of-life care? Conclusion The two articles, Akdeniz et al. (2021) and Pesut et al. (2019), have provided valuable insights into the ethical implications of euthanasia in end-of-life care. The narrative reviews have shed light on the ethical challenges healthcare professionals face and the arguments surrounding euthanasia concerning nursing practice. The findings emphasize the importance of adhering to ethical principles and considering the multifaceted nature of the ethical debate. While the studies contribute to understanding the clinical problem, further evidence is needed to explore the perspectives of patients, families, and healthcare providers directly involved in end-of-life care decision-making. Moving forward, it is crucial to consider the experiences and viewpoints of all stakeholders and develop a comprehensive understanding of the ethical dimensions of euthanasia to inform and guide healthcare practice. References Akdeniz, M., Yardımcı, B., & Kavukcu, E. (2021). Ethical Considerations at the end-of-life Care. SAGE Open Medicine, 9(9). https://doi.org/10.1177/20503121211000918. Mallah, H., Mousa, R., Fadl, N. B., Musmar, S., Ball, S., & Nugent, K. (2019). Pain Severity and Adequacy of Pain Management in Terminally Ill Patients with Cancer: An Experience from North Palestine. Indian Journal of Palliative Care, 25(4), 494–500. https://doi.org/10.4103/IJPC.IJPC_39_19. Pesut, B., Greig, M., Thorne, S., Storch, J., Burgess, M., Tishelman, C., Chambaere, K., & Janke, R. (2019). Nursing and euthanasia: A narrative review of the nursing ethics literature. Nursing Ethics, 27(1), 096973301984512. https://doi.org/10.1177/0969733019845127. Appendix A Evidence Matrix Table: Data Summary Article References Purpose Hypothesis Study Question(s) Variables Independent(I) Dependent(D) Study Design Sample Size & Selection Data Collection Methods Major Finding(s) 1 Akdeniz, M., Yardımcı, B., & Kavukcu, E. (2021). Ethical Considerations at the end-of-life Care. SAGE Open Medicine, 9(9). https://doi.org/10.1177/20503121211000918. Explore the ethical difficulties healthcare professionals encounter in end-of-life care. D-Ethical challenges and difficulties I-Ethical principles Qualitative: Narrative review Varied sources inform the discussion, including research studies, ethical guidelines, and expert opinions. Literature search to gather relevant information from various sources Ethical principles are essential to adhere to when providing end-of-life care. These ethical principles include fidelity, beneficence, nonmaleficence, autonomy, and justice. 2 Pesut, B., Greig, M., Thorne, S., Storch, J., Burgess, M., Tishelman, C., Chambaere, K., & Janke, R. (2019). Nursing and euthanasia: A narrative review of the nursing ethics literature. Nursing Ethics, 27(1), 096973301984512. https://doi.org/10.1177/0969733019845127. Review the moral justifications for euthanasia in nursing practice. D-ethical arguments surrounding euthanasia in nursing practice I-Ethical principles, Moral consistency, nature of the social good, nature of nursing Qualitative: Narrative review N – 9 electronic databases were searched. 43 articles were identified. Systematic search and narrative review The nature of the social good, ethical precepts, and moral consistency are often the foundations of the arguments for and against euthanasia. However, the scarcity of literature on the subject suggests that nurses may not be adequately prepared to deal with the ethical issues surrounding euthanasia. Arguments for and against euthanasia are multifaceted thus nurses need to take consideration of all the information before forming an opinion.

Using a 9-month calendar, what themes from SIECUS will you address each month for what grade level using what SPECIFIC lessons or activities that include at least these five areas: Heres what I hav

Using a 9-month calendar, what themes from SIECUS will you address each month for what grade level using what SPECIFIC lessons or activities that include at least these five areas:

Heres what I have so far

September: Gender Identity Grade 6:

Students will be able to understand gender identity, differentiate between different genders, and understand different pronouns. Then they will engage in an activity where students will sit in a circle and the instructor will say different phrases and when the phrase applies to them students will stand in the middle of the circle. Eventually at the end of the activity all students including the instructor will be in the middle to also understand the importance of equality no matter your gender.

October: Body Image Grade 6:

Students will be able to understand what body image is, the importance of body image, and mental illness awareness. Students will be handed 3 index cards, then will be instructed to describe their physical appearance, then we’ll move on and watch a series of 3 videos on body image. Then will describe their personality, lastly students will write an insecurity on a index card and the lesson will end with students ripping the index card. We will end off with a class discussion on why this activity was chosen.

November: Sexual Orientation Grade 6:

Students will be able to understand and differentiate different sexual orientations, students will also be able to understand the importances of respecting others that don’t have the same interest as our own. Students will watch an in depth lesson plan teaching about last month’s topics plus sexual orientation to lock everything in. Lastly, instructors will play real life scenarios to demonstrate if students picked up the lesson plan well.

December: Puberty Grade 8:

Students will be able to understand the changes in their bodies. We will start class off with a game. All students will put their heads down without peeking. They will raise their hands as I ask them questions. I will ask questions about all types of physical changes a teen might notice as they grow up. Since Most students already go through puberty by the time they are in 8th grade, I will explain to students about how nobody is alone and everyone goes through puberty. I will ask students what changes they might notice in teens.  I will then end the class with a video to help teens deeply understand that they are not alone and that puberty shouldn’t make you insecure.

Finnish the rest:

January: Family

February: Friendship

March:Sexual Abuse Assault, Violence and Harassment

April: Romantic Relationships and Dating

May: Marriage and Lifetime Commitments

June: sexual Abstinence

Pick any grade you would like for the rest of the months

250 words minimum Review “Criticism and Judgment: A Critical Look at Scientific Peer Review,” Discuss the importance of incorporating feedback from a peer-review process and dealing with the experie

250 words minimum

Review “Criticism and Judgment: A Critical Look at Scientific Peer Review,”

Discuss the importance of incorporating feedback from a peer-review process and dealing with the experience of uncertainty it may create for both the learner/author, chair, and the reviewer.

must use 2 references, the article attached is one

250 words minimum Review “Criticism and Judgment: A Critical Look at Scientific Peer Review,” Discuss the importance of incorporating feedback from a peer-review process and dealing with the experie
242 AJCC AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CRITICAL CARE, July 2019, Volume 28, No. 4 www.ajcconline.org C RITICISM AND J UDGMENT : A C RITICAL L OOK AT S CIENTIFIC P EER R EVIEW By Aluko A. Hope, MD, MSCE, and Cindy L. Munro, PhD, RN, ANP, E ditorial T he scholarly work we present in these pages is the culmination of a process that refl ects criticism and judgment. After investigators submit their work to our journal, our editors for- ward submissions they fi nd of suitable quality to up to 3 external reviewers who make independent judgments about the form and substance of the work. These judgments—of the editors and peer reviewers—by aiming to improve the quality and suitability of the work for our readers, become the process by which we present new knowledge into these pages, knowledge that we hope will improve the science of curing, comfort, and care. 1 Toward a Philosophy of Scientifi c Peer Review From where does this judgment come? Francis Bacon in his Novum Organum (published in 1620) articulated 4 potential key processes that we think allow for skillful criticism and judgment of scholarly work. 2 First, judgment emerges from what Bacon called a “simple sensuous perception.” Such per- ception begins with a thorough examination of the scholarly work, a kind of snuggling-up with the work that comes from a deep affection for the science that the scholarly work will join. Such close readings can only be enhanced using tools or signposts that help reviewers see and articulate whether a particu- lar study, as reported, meets the standards that have emerged from the scientifi c community. Initiatives like the Equator Network Resource Center 3 and the Commit- tee on Publication Ethics (COPE), 4 by publishing inter- national consensus statements and guidelines about the reporting standards for research of all types, provide a central location for editors and peer reviewers to fi nd tools to help them in their close reading of a work. The reliance on these tools to improve one’s perception of a particular work should not be interpreted to mean that scientifi c judgment is as simple as deciding whether a submission has met all of a prescribed list of standards. We would argue, as did John Dewey, that criticism that takes a more judicial stance by focusing more on acquit- tal or condemnation rather than on careful perception 5 is likely to mischaracterize innovative work, particularly when such work is presented in new ways or with struc- tural fl aws. A second key process skill that we think cultivates good judgment is a posture of skepticism. Bacon asked his reviewers to “make some little trial . . . of the way” the new knowledge was presented. 2 Such a posture of skepticism pushes us away from the more consumerist social-media type of engagement in which a t humbs-up or a thumbs-down passes for judgment. Judgment, ©2019 American Association of Critical-Care Nurses doi:https://doi.org/10.4037/ajcc2019152 www.ajcconline.org AJCC AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CRITICAL CARE, July 2019, Volume 28, No. 4 243 imagined in this way, though it may begin with a series of impressions, pushes beyond such impres- sions to analyze the strengths and weaknesses of the various sections of the work. This posture assumes that asking questions of the work—debating the work—does not have to be driven toward its destruc- tion, that a healthy recognition of a work’s poten- tial strengths and limitations is key to ensuring a high standard of both scientific practice and scien- tific communication. 6 We think it’s important to acknowledge that scientific judgment emerges from a lived experience and expertise. Bacon asked of reviewers that they “familiarize [their] thoughts with that subtlety of nature to which experience bears witness.” 2 Such lived experience or expertise is what editors depend on when deciding which peer reviewers to choose for a submission. A scholarly work testing a novel clinical intervention via a randomized clinical trial, for example, might be sent out to an expert in the intervention, a methodological expert in clinical tri- als, and a clinician who would be potentially imple- menting the intervention. Even if these 3 experts were to set about to use the same checklist in their systematic close reading of the work, to acknowledge the importance of their different lived experience is to hope that the individual judgments that emerge be colored by the differences in their expertise. We also believe that the best scientific judg- ment acknowledges that hu man decision-making is vulnerable to systematic bias. Bacon asked review- ers to “through seasonable patience and due delay” correct the “deep-rooted habits” of their mind. If we were to imagine each scholarly work as having a true value that is measured through the review process, biases are cognitive processes that can make judgment of the work’s value deviate far from the work’s actual value. The list of potential biases that can influence reviewers’ judgment are too many to name here but could include anything from confir- mation bias (in which a reviewer is biased against manuscripts that describe results that are inconsistent with their theoretical perspective) to gender, geo- graphic, language, or author-prestige biases that can distort a reviewer’s perception of a submitted work if the identity of the authors is known to the reviewer. 7 Bacon appears to have had a very compassionate understanding of the human tendency to distort the nature of things by these decision-making shortcuts, as he suggested that the work of debias- ing is a slow process—requiring patient reflection and deliberation. 2 What Are the Challenges Associated With Peer Review as We Do It? Despite the importance of the peer review pro- cess to the quality of the work we present to our readers, there remain significant challenges in the process as we practice it currently. The first and most pressing challenge is how to incentivize high- quality peer reviews. Many reviewers are academics who see peer reviewing as an integral part of their duty to the scientific community. For many, to be asked to review a manuscript is a recognition of their expertise in an area. For some reviewers, peer reviewing may help with academic or clinical pro- motion or provide them with an important way to keep abreast of the scientific literature. And yet, research suggests that the peer review system is strained: more than 2 million scientific research publications are published each year, and the majority of peer reviews are being conducted by a minority of academic investigators. 8 As the number of sub- mitted scholarly works increases, it will remain important that journals like ours find innovative ways to increase the pool of potential reviewers. Even from the admittedly idealistic description of the principles of scientific judgment that we coalesced from Frances Bacon, the tension between scientific innovation (which values creativity, origi- nality, and rapid dissemination) and quality control (which values accuracy, validity, and slow, consensus- driven deliberation) remains inherent in our current peer review process. 1 No doubt, there are many exam- ples of innovative and important work that had great potential to improve patient care that was suppressed or stifled by the peer review process. In many of these examples, when we examine the peer review process closely, we find that the peer review process often missed the mark on many of our key principles, most often because of lack of modesty or because of bias on the part of the peer reviewers. Potential bias as a human element in the review process is Journals like ours [must] find innovative ways to increase the pool of potential reviewers. About the AuthorsAluko A. Hope is coeditor in chief of the American Journal of Critical Care. He is an associate professor at Albert Einstein College of Medicine and an intensivist and assistant bioethics consultant at Montefiore Medical Center, both in New York City. Cindy L. Munro is coeditor in chief of the American Journal of Critical Care. She is dean and professor, School of Nursing and Health Studies, University of Miami, Coral Gables, Florida. 244 AJCC AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CRITICAL CARE, July 2019, Volume 28, No. 4 www.ajcconline.org something that cannot be completely eradicated. When such bias leads to corruption, the peer review process could very easily lead to the inappropriate delay or suppression of innovative work. Still, in an increasingly fast-paced world, we think it import- ant to emphasize two things. First, it is rare indeed that we encounter a scholarly work so innovative and so urgent as to be hampered by a peer review process that takes a few months to complete. Sec- ond, high-quality peer review takes time and should take time. So, for journal communities like ours, even as we continue to find innovative ways to shorten the time between work submission and publication, we must also ensure that peer review remains an avenue for improving the form and the substance of the knowledge we present. A third challenge is to determine how transpar- ent the peer review process should be to the readers, the authors, and other stakeholders. Investigators who submit their work to AJCC do not know who is reviewing their submission, and we take steps to ensure that peer reviewers are not able to easily ascertain who are the authors of the submission. In fact, our author guidelines request that the author’s name or institution not be included in the running head or anywhere in the manuscript after the title page or in the file names of the manuscript compo- nents. Manuscripts that do not meet this require- ment are not reviewed by AJCC. This so-called double-blinded review process requires considerable effort and is done in the hopes of providing ample space for frank analysis from peer reviewers who can focus more clearly on judging the work that has been submitted rather than the social identity and status of the people who have submitted the work. Many other scientific journals will aim for a single- blind review during which the reviewers are anony- mous to the authors, but the authors are known to the reviewers. This single-blind review has the advan- tage of allowing reviewers to view the full c ontext of the author’s work, which can be an important ingredient in analyzing the quality of the submis- sion. Many of the recent innovations in the peer review process have focused on increasing the trans- parency of the peer review process by allowing peer reviewers and authors to both be known to one another, with some journals even moving toward having the peer review be published along with the submitted work (so-called open peer review). The limited research into the effectiveness of blinding reviewers for improving the quality of reviews suggests that rev ealing the identity of the peer reviewer may have little impact on the quality of the review but may lower the likelihood that someone will accept an invitation to review a scholarly submission. 8,9 In light of the limited training that is available in con- ducting peer reviews and the decreasing incentives for peer reviewers to v olunteer to do this import- ant work, we worry that clinicians outside of tradi- tional academic settings will be more afraid to do peer reviews in an open sy stem that requires them to publish their reviews. We also are concerned that early career investigators ma y be more reti- cent to sign a negative review of a scholarly work from a prominent research group in an open sys- tem that requires peer reviewers to be identifiable to the authors. The Future of Peer Review for AJCC What does the future hold for the peer review system at AJCC? As a learning community, we must be willing to fight against inertia and the status quo by making commitments to improve our peer review process. First, we will strengthen our procedures to more systematically ev aluate the effectiveness of our peer review system by putting our own peer review process through the kind of rigorous evaluation we profess to afford our manuscript submissions. A more thorough qualitative self-assessment of our peer review process could provide important ave- nues for improvement and has the potential to improve further the value of the work that we pub- lish in these pages. The second commi tment we will make is to increase the pool of well-qualified reviewers available to us by starting an AJCC Junior Peer Reviewer Program. The program will aim to bring new voices into our peer reviewing commu- nity and will leverage adult learning principles to improve learners’ skill in scientific criticism. We expect that this selective program would be appro- priate for early stage academic faculty or clinicians with an interest in acute critical care or nursing research. Third, we will look to find innovative ways (besides this editorial) to increase the transparency of our peer review process. Ours is a community with a passion for learning and a passion for impro ving care. An AJCC Junior Peer Reviewer Program . . . will aim to bring new voices into our peer reviewing community and will leverage adult learning principles to improve learners’ skill in scientific criticism. www.ajcconline.org AJCC AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CRITICAL CARE, July 2019, Volume 28, No. 4 245 Our willingness to continue improving our ability to judge new science will remain an imp ortant means through which we can improve care. The statements and opinions contained in this editorial are solely those of the coeditors in chief. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURES None reported. REFERENCES 1. Horrobin DF. The philosophical basis of peer review and the suppression of innovation. JAMA. 1990;263(10):1438-1441. 2. Bacon F. The New Organon (Novum Organum). Pantianos Classics; 1902:1-20. 3. Centre for Statistics in Medicine, The UK Equator Center. http://www.equator-network.org/about-us/what-is-a-reporting -guideline. Accessed May 10, 2019. 4. Committee on Publication Ethics. The peer peview process.ht tps://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines-new/cope -ethical-guidelines-peer-reviewers. Accessed May 10, 2019. 5. Boydston JA, ed. John Dewey: The Later Works, 1925-1953. Vol 10. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University; 2008. 6. Kronick DA. Peer review in 18th-century scientifi c journalism. JAMA. 1990;263(10):1321-1322. 7. Lee CJ, Sugimoto CR, Zhang G, Cronin B. Bias in peer review. J Am Soc Inform Sci Technol. 2013;64(1):2-17. 8. Tennant JP, Dugan JM, Graziotin D, et al. A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations in peer review. F1000Res. 2017;6:1151. 9. Tennant JP. The state of the art in peer review. FEMS Microbiol Lett. 2018;365(19). To purchase electronic or print reprints, contact American Association of Critical-Care Nurses, 101 Columbia, Aliso Viejo, CA 92656. Phone, (800) 899-1712 or (949) 362-2050 (ext 532); fax, (949) 362-2049; email, [email protected]. Copyright ofAmerican JournalofCritical Careisthe property ofAmerican Association of Critical- CareNurses anditscontent maynotbecopied oremailed tomultiple sitesorposted to alistserv without thecopyright holder’sexpresswrittenpermission. However,usersmay print, download, oremail articles forindividual use.

MGT Case1 MGT499 Strategic Management The Organizations Purpose: Mission, Vision, Values, and Goals Do some research in the library and on the internet, and find the following: Five criteria that comp

MGT Case1 MGT499 Strategic Management

The Organizations Purpose: Mission, Vision, Values, and Goals

Do some research in the library and on the internet, and find the following:

  1. Five criteria that comprise good (quality) Mission statements; and
  2. Five criteria that comprise good (quality) Vision statements.
  3. Visit the corporate website of Microsoft and read the organization’s Mission and Vision statements: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/about
  4. Using the specific criteria that you listed in Item #1 above, critique the Mission and Vision statements of Microsoft as follows:

    1. Mission Statement: Is the organization’s Mission statement a “good” Mission statement? Why or why not? Justify your answer using your five chosen criteria. Be specific.
    2. Vision Statement: Is the organization’s Vision statement a “good” Vision statement? Why or why not? Justify your answer using your 5 chosen criteria. Be specific.
  5. Finally, find the company’s Values statement: Conclude your paper with an analysis of the company’s Values statement: What do Microsoft’s values say about the organization’s sense of ethics?
  • The minimum length requirement for this Module Case Assignment is 5 full pages (excluding Title and Reference pages) to include 3 scholarly sources.
  • Provide an APA-formatted title page. Use the APA 7 Template.
  • The 5 full-pages will include an introduction, body of work with 3 scholarly sources cited to support your work, and a conclusion (that aligns with your purpose statement, summarizes each section, and then wraps up into a final thought).
  • Provide an APA7-formatted References Page (See APA 7 “References” section at https://apastyle.apa.org/style-grammar-guidelines/ ).

**I wanted to inform you that AI detection is now a part of Turnitin (TII) report. This means that when submitted work through TII, it will be checked not only for plagiarism but also using AI technology to detect any potential instances of academic misconduct.

Please be aware that this technology is in place to ensure academic integrity and maintain a fair and level playing field for all students. It is important that you submit original work and give proper credit to any sources you use in your assignments.

Assignment*** Links below ****

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/8aitoi86eki8dz6x95l2a/MGT499-Module-1-Case-Mission-Vision-Values-and-Goals-Info.docx?rlkey=7vy29rvvtn0kwqn16tc62x8r2&dl=0

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/jtcg7s7w4zen1cv6dqqwi/apa-7th-assignment-template-v.1-3-71906-3.docx?rlkey=s95y7c9vfw6wkasx079jpwlro&dl=0

Summary: Produce an ER Model for the following scenario (presented in Step 1 below) and business need, for the Pythagoras Math Academy. Reference the attached video (Link attached at the bottom), f

Summary:

Produce an ER Model for the following scenario (presented in Step 1 below) and business need, for the Pythagoras Math Academy.  Reference the attached video (Link attached at the bottom), for a full introduction and demonstration and expectations for this project.

Deliverables:

ER Model for the scenario presented.

You have the option to use MS Visio (if you have the software) to produce your ER Model.

Alternatively, if you do not have MS Visio, you can use the ERD PLUS (Open source ER Modeling Software) and produce your ER Model.

Required Software:

MS Visio by Microsoft OR

ERD PLUS, Open Source Offering. This offering is cloud-based, and you do not need to download any clients. You will need to create an account (username and password), link to this offering follows: https://erdplus.com

Lab Steps:

Step 1: Read and understand the Scenario and Business needs presented below. Define and document the ENTITIES, and RELATIONSHIPS, required to address the business needs. The nouns in the scenario below will give the ENTITIES that you will need. Finally, the verbs will describe the RELATIONSHIPS.

Scenario and Business Need

The Pythagoras Math Academy is in need to develop a database to keep track and control of his students, teachers, and classes offered.

Teachers are able to teach multiple courses. But they are required to be certified on the course they are teaching. For example, only a group of teachers are certified to teach Algebra, and other Geometry.

Students can take multiple courses. Courses are taught by teachers with the proper certification and have multiple certs as needed.  Courses are taught in one of the classrooms at one of the School’s several sites.

Each classroom is optimized to serve the needs for a course (for example some courses might require computer labs and whiteboards). The school needs to keep track of the math courses delivered in each of the sites.

Step 2: For this project, you are required to use MS Visio or ERD PLUS to produce the deliverables.

If you are using MS Visio follow the steps below:

Reference the Course Project Ph2 VIDEO.mp4, for a short demonstration and tutorial of this tool, and project overview/ expectations.

Open MS Visio

Click on the Software Database Template in the main window

Select the Database Model Diagram Template to open a new file.

Save the File and ensure to have in your file name PROJECT2_LastName_FistInitial.

If you are using ERD PLUS.

Watch the recorded short tutorial for this tool. Reference the attached video as follows: Course Project Ph2 VIDEO.mp4.

From the ERP PLUS main interface, select DOCUMENTS –> NEW DIAGRAM (NAME YOUR DIAGRAM) –>ER DIAGRAM –> CREATE

Reference demonstration video for how to navigate tool, how to create entities, add attributes, relationships, and Cordiality. Demonstration video attached as follows: Course Project Ph2 VIDEO.mp4

Step 3: Define and Database ENTITIES

Add an entity for each Table you identified in the Scenario and Business Need.

You will use the MS Visio tool, or the ERD PLUS open source offering to complete this step.

Step 4: ADD the required ENTITY ATTRIBUTES

Add the required Attributes for each Entity that you feel would help to define each Entity as needed.

Select one of the attributes to be PRIMARY KEY (PK)

Step 5: Define RELATIONSHIPS

Use the Crow’s Feet Notation.

Reference recorded demonstrations on how to use these notations, for MS Visio and ERD PLUS. Reference attached video as follows: Course Project Ph2 VIDEO.mp4

Drag and drop (draw) relationships between the entities you defined.

Connect the ends to the two entities for each relation.

Defined the Primary Key for the parent entity.

Step 6: Define CARDINALITY RELATIONSHIP

Set the cardinality for each of your relationships defined in Step 5.

For MS Visio: select a relationship line in the drawing area that is connecting two entities. In the Database Properties window, select the miscellaneous category. Select the cardinality for the selected relationship.

Step 7: Upload your Work

Save the File and ensure to have in your file name PROJECT2_LastName_FistInitial.

Rubric:

40 points: ER Model (MS Visio OR ERD PLUS)

40 points: Entities: Minimum of three entities are represented

40 points: Attributes: Minimum of two attributes for each Entity. Most would require more than two attributes, and I am only requiring two per entity.

40 points: Relationships: Minimum three relationships are presented.

40 points: Cardinality is defined and specific for each relationship with Crow’s foot notation.

(Video Link) https://learn-us-east-1-prod-fleet01-xythos.content.blackboardcdn.com/blackboard.learn.xythos.prod/5a31b16bb2c48/8377387?X-Blackboard-S3-Bucket=blackboard.learn.xythos.prod&X-Blackboard-Expiration=1686420000000&X-Blackboard-Signature=i7hKmN3wCCUbAQXDMGwRR1WGSGUmHwiukN23m6lI0rU%3D&X-Blackboard-Client-Id=305918&X-Blackboard-S3-Region=us-east-1&response-cache-control=private%2C%20max-age%3D21600&response-content-disposition=inline%3B%20filename%2A%3DUTF-8%27%27Course%2520Project%2520Ph2%2520VIDEO.mp4&response-content-type=video%2Fmp4&X-Amz-Security-Token=IQoJb3JpZ2luX2VjEF0aCXVzLWVhc3QtMSJHMEUCIGh%2FvBJ6N3fTzOmz36wYmsr6ekSlBbz6mrqvGrPCAeVcAiEAvqEz1UsEK5YbO7Cnve9H9Tk79rTM7DsiKMc0v6uQLCoqvAUIpf%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2FARAAGgw1NTY5MDM4NjEzNjEiDKtN6BR3HXsQVePXbyqQBW7F3q5MGl9eLG0tRe5EUqpiv5ErpREZhsVrfVeWB7M92QJogtb8azBDqcdpnDNFs4eKeizSFmQNq%2BrDCydiKtd4IoF9F5UE%2FrcLUIYHXj%2BK3%2FsAp5O5QytSmAGkFxJFwkgB7v0Zoz7maRuIHZJIUGCLZjb2JDe46Ny%2FiAezw0T4NlJu34oi3GMDrFkJ%2FRlU%2B886Z4O5L%2FOJSMtRFwxDNzkd21t7QHXJnjRQhKxE32U6crAuvpsJMiVY0JLsnh6v%2BXTD%2BRizz5W%2BlskraZw5PevZzQnyQTCVofx52Q0hchNfMKjjXQouqRgA3CyYF1D4iODGDoyl3Fv0rgNERcGKHjnzMibJ5VMlgWbwosDiDC2FXWZnuwZ2iJbobt2YmbSSant%2BxYwc15U6RkFWxOVqvW768vvgoHiitYhz2FRYUJBWZ6Y8E1Ubr2y76vYTkfBSDvDa2T8ULb8Sfja%2BPj65mNt%2Bb5PKsBBu6BmlkMOXVP2Mwx19h55S3s37u9qN9F025i1KcH7OCk2Wak9DQ5%2BYcgV03SwSdV9rEAYwa9bOWANvtwDbpgW82rRf2Fo0I294Vd90f7VYIsZhk1OEqTA1X%2F0HrxNqKCDwOCkef68xpxt8DrfkU%2FrQLlOygdGFNjUQBazjRg2FRd%2BTRo2A8kO4wWiHH%2FqCoPKwNph%2FkJ6OwFVZQ0XPMMu2buELxrVel%2BcHtrkMtQ51todNXrARd2xu2sEB8fwONXS0%2FVPPOagsvLdyqrHnx5P1ScZxbH0rc5Liv4rmiFbo%2B9FIYkcFrEUyRo%2BxR4%2F9%2BnKzeAmF%2B93eNBPADEjaqr2ChZfG8D4jz6JyXkCYx3GdWZw4VnVE4dLLHP1A0MaImJTloWXFc22LerC6MPXQkaQGOrEBjy%2BllektPP%2BRJQjC3n9CTwI7CzyoWwOcQ4JeEQo%2Bd2lmITtER7rzMjygO0tq5jiQnmbN5JQZFCpwi%2BtQlhimTX2O%2BWd4C%2B2V0XTwYW4f1tGURuiGeMQiaeq3IZy%2FbbQRzbccGLT7qU7vf26UFlmnURTcYYHXhJxEo2GqdIsqY2UIPmGx4aG%2BQYnR2bvYV9xao0%2Fd1e3MpAXUyGNZc%2FlBoGbDLdZCYFVlfLuFbLdmVqmm&X-Amz-Algorithm=AWS4-HMAC-SHA256&X-Amz-Date=20230610T120000Z&X-Amz-SignedHeaders=host&X-Amz-Expires=21600&X-Amz-Credential=ASIAYDKQORRY36PIUNWD%2F20230610%2Fus-east-1%2Fs3%2Faws4_request&X-Amz-Signature=2e642a4ad7cac69bcfc11ceaa8025b40ee09661a893e52d922ea233607281204