| Course | NURS 6351 Role of the Nurse Educator |
|---|---|
| Week | Week 10 |
| Paper type | Role development plan |
| Length | About 1,020 words, 6 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Walden University |
| Program | Master of Science in Nursing (MSN) |
| Updated | September 2026 |
Free sample paper for NURS 6351 Week 10
Four Outcomes by Next September: A Role Development Plan Weighted Toward Evaluation
Student Name
College of Nursing, Walden University
NURS 6351: Role of the Nurse Educator
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
Four Outcomes by Next September: A Role Development Plan Weighted Toward Evaluation
This plan covers my first year after this course, from October to the following September, while I stay a staff nurse and preceptor on a step-down unit and teach one clinical group a week for our partner associate degree program. It carries four objectives. Two belong to teaching, one to scholarship and one to service, and the imbalance is deliberate: the role analysis I wrote in the second week argued that teaching takes most of an educator's week, and a plan split into equal thirds would contradict the only argument about the role I have made in writing.
Each objective is written as an outcome another person could verify, not an activity I would attend. A workshop or a meeting appears only underneath an objective, as something it depends on. The format borrows the five questions Doran (1981) put to any management objective, asking whether it is specific, whether progress can be measured, whether someone is assigned to it, whether it is realistic and whether a time is attached, with one addition: every entry names what could make it fail. The two teaching objectives come straight from the two lowest ratings that matter on my self-assessment, assessment and evaluation at 2 and curriculum design at 1, measured against the National League for Nursing competencies (Halstead, 2019).
Objective 1 (Teaching): A Clinical Evaluation Tool in Use
Outcome: by the end of January, our unit's orientation uses a clinical evaluation tool I wrote, with behavioral criteria for each of the unit's six core competencies, and two orientees have been evaluated with it at week four and week eight. Evidence: the tool, the four completed evaluations with names removed, and the written review from our clinical nurse specialist. Dependency: four hours a month of release time from my manager, and the progression committee mentor named in my mentorship plan. Risk: our unit may hire no new graduates between October and January. If that happens, the tool is piloted with the next orientee from the neighboring step-down unit, which shares our competencies, rather than postponed.
Objective 2 (Teaching): Thirty Items, Analyzed
Outcome: by the end of June, 30 multiple-choice items I wrote for the partner program's medical-surgical examinations have been reviewed by its test committee, at least ten have been used on a live examination, and I have read the item analysis for each of those ten. Evidence: the committee's review notes and the analysis report, showing each item's difficulty and discrimination values. Reading those values correctly, and knowing when a poor discrimination index means the item is flawed rather than the students unprepared, is the skill this objective exists to build (Oermann & Gaberson, 2021). Dependency: the committee chair's monthly review. Risk and abandonment condition: if the program has not scheduled any of my items for an examination by the end of April, I will stop writing new items and abandon the live-use part of this objective, because items that are never administered cannot teach me anything about their quality. The written review stays as a smaller, finished outcome.
Objective 3 (Scholarship): One Abstract Submitted
Outcome: by the end of August, an abstract describing the evaluation tool from Objective 1 and what the first orientees' results showed is submitted to a regional nursing education or professional development conference. Evidence: the submitted abstract and the confirmation of receipt; acceptance is not required, because acceptance is not within my control. This is scholarship in the modest sense the course has used throughout, the scholarship of teaching rather than funded research (Boyer, 1990). Dependency: a determination from the hospital's nursing research council that the project is quality improvement, and a colleague willing to read a draft. Risk: the council's review may take longer than expected, so the request goes in by the end of February.
Objective 4 (Service): A Seat With a Term Attached
Outcome: by the end of March, I hold a seat on the hospital's nursing education council for its standard two-year term, have attended at least four of its first five meetings, and have brought one agenda item on how preceptors document concerns about orientees. Evidence: the council roster, the minutes showing attendance and the agenda item. Dependency: my manager's nomination, which is due in December. Risk: the council may have no open seat this year, in which case I will join its preceptor subcommittee instead, which meets on the same schedule.
The Measures Across the Year
The dates are staggered so that the plan can be wrong early. The service seat is measured in March, the evaluation tool in January, the items in June and the abstract in August, which gives me a checkpoint in every quarter and means a slipping objective shows up in a quarter when it can still be rescued. A plan whose every measure falls in September cannot be judged until it is too late to change. The staggering also protects the objectives from each other. The evaluation tool in January feeds the abstract in August, so if the tool slips by a quarter, the abstract has to slip with it, and I would know that by February rather than discover it in July. Likewise, the council seat in March gives my agenda item on preceptor documentation a hearing before the item analysis in June, which may show that some of my weakest items came from the same unclear clinical expectations the agenda item is about. Each checkpoint is a fifteen-minute meeting with my manager, where I bring the evidence named in the objective or explain why it does not exist yet.
What I Will Not Attempt This Year
I will not sit for a nurse educator certification examination this year, and I will not apply to a doctoral program. Both belong in a later plan. Attempting either now would take the same evenings that Objectives 1 and 2 need, and those two objectives address the ratings that would keep me from being a fair clinical teacher. A certificate earned before I can write a sound evaluation would describe a competence I do not yet have.
References
Boyer, E. L. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate. Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.
Doran, G. T. (1981). There's a S.M.A.R.T. way to write management's goals and objectives. Management Review, 70(11), 35-36.
Halstead, J. A. (Ed.). (2019). NLN core competencies for nurse educators: A decade of influence. National League for Nursing.
Oermann, M. H., & Gaberson, K. B. (2021). Evaluation and testing in nursing education (6th ed.). Springer Publishing.
What the NURS 6351 Week 10 instructions ask for
The Week 10 assignment in Role of the Nurse Educator usually asks for a professional development plan for your first year or two in the educator role. Prompts commonly require goals across teaching, scholarship and service, strategies or resources for each, a timeline and a way to measure progress, often linked to the NLN competencies or a similar framework. Many sections expect the plan to build on the earlier self-assessment. Length limits tend to fall between three and five pages, and some sections allow a table for the timeline. Read whether the prompt sets a number of goals; if it does not, a small number with strong measures is easier to defend than a long list.
How the NURS 6351 Week 10 example is put together
The introduction sets the plan's year and the writer's situation, then states the weighting and the reason for it, citing the role analysis from Week 2. It explains that every objective is an outcome and every workshop is a dependency, and it names the SMART model plus one addition, a risk for each entry. The four objectives follow with identical fields: outcome, evidence, dependency and risk. Objective 2 carries the plan's abandonment condition, tied to April. The scholarship objective counts submission rather than acceptance, since acceptance is not in the writer's control. A short section shows how the measures fall across the year, and the final section gives up two things, certification and doctoral study, for now.
Reading the NURS 6351 Week 10 rubric
Development plan rubrics usually score goals across the educator role, measurability, alignment with competencies, feasibility, use of sources and writing. Measurability is where most plans lose marks, and it is judged in the verbs and the evidence: an artifact, a seat or a number scores, while improve or develop does not. Alignment asks whether the goals map to the competencies and to earlier self-assessment results, which the example does in its introduction. Feasibility rewards a plan a working nurse could complete, so four objectives with release time named read better than eight. Sources are lighter here but the framework is usually expected, and the writing row checks APA format.
Common NURS 6351 Week 10 mistakes, and how to avoid them
The mistake that costs most is writing activities as goals, such as attend a conference or take a course, with nothing that shows the activity changed anything. Another is a plan entirely about teaching in a course that has argued all term that the role includes service and scholarship. Plans with every deadline at the end of the year cannot show progress, and graders notice. Some students list more goals than a full-time nurse could meet, which the feasibility row catches. Finally, a plan with no risks reads as untested. Name one thing that could go wrong for each goal and say what you would do, and consider saying what you will postpone to make room.
Get a NURS 6351 Week 10 example written to your instructions
Send the prompt, the rubric and any table your section wants the plan laid out in, and a NURS 6351 Week 10 example comes back in that layout with evidence and dates filled through. First custom one free, delivered in 24 to 48 hours. The objectives you commit to are still your call to make.
More NURS 6351 papers and MSN samples
- NURS 6351 Week 1: Discussion post
- NURS 6351 Week 2: Role analysis
- NURS 6351 Week 3: Competency self-assessment
- NURS 6351 Week 4: Educator interview
- NURS 6351 Week 5: Teaching philosophy
- NURS 6351 Week 6: Ethics case
- NURS 6351 Week 7: Observation write-up
- NURS 6351 Week 8: Discussion post
- NURS 6351 Week 9: Mentorship plan
- NURS 6351 Week 11: Portfolio
- NURS 6341 Week 10: Scholarly paper
- NURS 6331 Week 10: Implementation memo
- NURS 6321 Week 10: Curriculum design
- NURS 6241 Week 10: Strategic plan
NURS 6351 Week 10 questions, answered
How many objectives does the example carry?
Four, spread unevenly across teaching, service and scholarship. Prompts sometimes set a number and yours governs, but the count matters less than what sits under each one, and plans with more entries usually carry thinner evidence on each. Feasibility is a scored row in a fair number of sections, which is worth knowing before the list grows.
Is this the same document as the self-assessment earlier in the term?
No, though the two are meant to connect. The self-assessment establishes standing and stops there. This plan takes two of the weak domains forward and turns them into outcomes with dates and evidence. Sections assigning both often expect the plan to reference the earlier ratings, and the example does that in one line.
Does the plan need a framework reference?
Usually at least one, and the competency document used earlier in the term is the natural fit, since the objectives map onto its domains. The example cites it at the point where an objective is derived from a domain rather than listing the framework at the top, which is what the evidence row tends to reward.
Where can I find a free NURS 6351 Week 10 sample paper?
The whole development plan, with its four objectives, the timeline section and references, is posted here in full. Share your self-assessment and your section's goal requirements and a matching plan comes back free, usually within a day or two.
How many goals should the NURS 6351 development plan have?
Unless your prompt sets a number, three to five is a workable range for a year. The example uses four so each can carry evidence, a date, a dependency and a risk without the plan becoming a list.