Discussion week 1

Discussion WK 1: Presidential Agendas

Rather than focus on the treatment of chronic disease, policies that influence population health tend to emphasize prevention and wellness; the reduction or elimination of waste and the eradication of health disparities based on race, ethnicity, language, income, gender, sexual orientation, disability and other factors. The reasoning is that good health belongs to the whole, not just an individual. (New York State Dept. of Health, n.d.)  

Regardless of political affiliation, every citizen has a stake in healthcare policy decisions. Hence, it is little wonder why healthcare items become such high-profile components of presidential agendas. It is also little wonder why they become such hotly debated agenda items.

Consider a topic (mental health, HIV, opioid epidemic, pandemics, obesity, prescription drug prices, or many others) that rises to the presidential level. How did the current and previous presidents handle the problem? What would you do differently?

Reference:
New York State Department of Health. (n.d.). Making New York the healthiest state: Achieving the triple aim. Retrieved June 21, 2021 from https://www.health.ny.gov/events/population_health_summit/docs/what_is_population_health

To Prepare:

· Review the Resources and reflect on the importance of agenda setting.

· Consider how federal agendas promote healthcare issues and how these healthcare issues become agenda priorities.

By Day 3 of Week 1

Post your response to the discussion question: Consider a population health topic that rises to the presidential agenda level. Which social determinant most affects this health issue? How did two recent presidents handle the problem? What would you do differently?

By Day 6 of Week 1

Respond to at least two of your colleagues* on two different days by expanding on their response and providing an example that supports their explanation or respectfully challenging their explanation and providing an example.

RESOURCES:

Milstead, J. A., & Short, N. M. (2019). Health policy and politics: A nurse’s guide (6th ed.). Jones & Bartlett Learning.

· Chapter 1, “Informing Public Policy: An Important Role for Registered Nurses” (pp. 11–13 only)

· Chapter 2, “Agenda Setting: What Rises to a Policymaker’s Attention?” (pp. 17–36)

· Chapter 10, “Overview: The Economics and Finance of Health Care” (pp. 171–180)

· Chapter 12, “An Insider’s Guide to Engaging in Policy Activities”

· “Creating a Fact Sheet” (pp. 217-221)

https://www.nursingoutlook.org/article/S0029-6554(14)00057-8/fulltext

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0029655415001839?via=ihub

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1527154417728514

https://www.usa.gov/federal-agencies/a

https://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/cabinet/

8/29/22, 7:49 AMRubric Detail – Blackboard Learn

Page 1 of 4https://class.waldenu.edu/webapps/bbgs-deep-links-BBLEARN/app/course/rubric?course_id=_16998532_1&rubric_id=_3280043_1

Rubric Detail
Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.

Excellent Good Fair Poor

Main Posting 45 (45%) – 50
(50%)

Answers all
parts of the
discussion
question(s)
expectations
with re!ective
critical analysis
and synthesis
of knowledge
gained from
the course
readings for the
module and
current credible
sources.

Supported by
at least three
current,
credible
sources.

Written clearly
and concisely
with no
grammatical or
spelling errors
and fully

40 (40%) – 44
(44%)

Responds to
the discussion
question(s) and
is re!ective
with critical
analysis and
synthesis of
knowledge
gained from
the course
readings for the
module.

At least 75% of
post has
exceptional
depth and
breadth.

Supported by
at least three
credible
sources.

Written clearly
and concisely
with one or no
grammatical or

35 (35%) – 39
(39%)

Responds to
some of the
discussion
question(s).

One or two
criteria are not
addressed or
are super”cially
addressed.

Is somewhat
lacking
re!ection and
critical analysis
and synthesis.

Somewhat
represents
knowledge
gained from the
course readings
for the module.

Post is cited
with two
credible
sources.

0 (0%) – 34 (34%)
Does not
respond to the
discussion
question(s)
adequately.

Lacks depth or
super”cially
addresses
criteria.

Lacks re!ection
and critical
analysis and
synthesis.

Does not
represent
knowledge
gained from the
course readings
for the module.

Contains only
one or no
credible
sources.

Not written

Name: NURS_6050_Module01_Week01_Discussion_Rubric

EXIT

Grid View List View

https://class.waldenu.edu/webapps/bbgs-deep-links-BBLEARN/app/course/rubric?course_id=_16998532_1&rubric_id=_3280043_1#

https://class.waldenu.edu/webapps/bbgs-deep-links-BBLEARN/app/course/rubric?course_id=_16998532_1&rubric_id=_3280043_1#

8/29/22, 7:49 AMRubric Detail – Blackboard Learn

Page 2 of 4https://class.waldenu.edu/webapps/bbgs-deep-links-BBLEARN/app/course/rubric?course_id=_16998532_1&rubric_id=_3280043_1

adheres to
current APA
manual writing
rules and style.

spelling errors
and fully
adheres to
current APA
manual writing
rules and style.

Written
somewhat
concisely; may
contain more
than two
spelling or
grammatical
errors.

Contains some
APA formatting
errors.

clearly or
concisely.

Contains more
than two
spelling or
grammatical
errors.

Does not
adhere to
current APA
manual writing
rules and style.

Main Post:
Timeliness

10 (10%) – 10
(10%)

Posts main
post by day 3.

0 (0%) – 0 (0%) 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not post
by day 3.

First
Response

17 (17%) – 18
(18%)

Response
exhibits
synthesis,
critical thinking,
and application
to practice
settings.

Communication
is professional
and respectful
to colleagues.

Responses to
faculty
questions are
fully answered,
if posed.

Provides clear,
concise
opinions and
ideas that are
supported by at

15 (15%) – 16
(16%)

Response
exhibits critical
thinking and
application to
practice
settings.

Communication
is professional
and respectful
to colleagues.

Responses to
faculty
questions are
answered, if
posed.

Provides clear,
concise
opinions and
ideas that are
supported by
two or more

13 (13%) – 14
(14%)

Response is on
topic and may
have some
depth.

Responses
posted in the
discussion may
lack e#ective
professional
communication.

Responses to
faculty
questions are
somewhat
answered, if
posed.

Response may
lack clear,
concise
opinions and
ideas, and a few

0 (0%) – 12 (12%)
Response may
not be on topic
and lacks
depth.

Responses
posted in the
discussion lack
e#ective
professional
communication.

Responses to
faculty
questions are
missing.

No credible
sources are
cited.

8/29/22, 7:49 AMRubric Detail – Blackboard Learn

Page 3 of 4https://class.waldenu.edu/webapps/bbgs-deep-links-BBLEARN/app/course/rubric?course_id=_16998532_1&rubric_id=_3280043_1

least two
scholarly
sources.

Demonstrates

synthesis and
understanding
of learning
objectives.

Response is
e#ectively

written in
standard,
edited English.

credible
sources.

Response is
e#ectively
written in
standard,
edited English.

or no credible
sources are
cited.

Second
Response

16 (16%) – 17
(17%)

Response
exhibits
synthesis,
critical thinking,
and application
to practice
settings.

Communication
is professional
and respectful
to colleagues.

Responses to
faculty
questions are
fully answered,
if posed.

Provides clear,
concise
opinions and
ideas that are
supported by at
least two
scholarly
sources.

Demonstrates

14 (14%) – 15
(15%)

Response
exhibits critical
thinking and
application to
practice
settings.

Communication
is professional
and respectful
to colleagues.

Responses to
faculty
questions are
answered, if
posed.

Provides clear,
concise
opinions and
ideas that are
supported by
two or more
credible
sources.

Response is
e#ectively

12 (12%) – 13
(13%)

Response is on
topic and may
have some
depth.

Responses
posted in the
discussion may
lack e#ective
professional
communication.

Responses to
faculty
questions are
somewhat
answered, if
posed.

Response may
lack clear,
concise
opinions and
ideas, and a few
or no credible
sources are
cited.

0 (0%) – 11 (11%)
Response may
not be on topic
and lacks
depth.

Responses
posted in the
discussion lack
e#ective
professional
communication.

Responses to
faculty
questions are
missing.

No credible
sources are
cited.

8/29/22, 7:49 AMRubric Detail – Blackboard Learn

Page 4 of 4https://class.waldenu.edu/webapps/bbgs-deep-links-BBLEARN/app/course/rubric?course_id=_16998532_1&rubric_id=_3280043_1

synthesis and
understanding
of learning
objectives.

Response is
e#ectively
written in
standard,
edited English.
written in
standard,
edited English.

Participation 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets
requirements
for
participation by
posting on
three di#erent
days.

0 (0%) – 0 (0%) 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not meet
requirements
for participation
by posting on 3
di#erent days.

Total Points: 100

Name: NURS_6050_Module01_Week01_Discussion_Rubric

EXIT