The practice of health care providers at all levels brings you into contact with people of a variety of faiths. This calls for acceptance of a diversity of faith expressions.
Research three diverse faiths. Choose faiths that are less well-known than mainstream faiths or are less known to you, such as Sikh, Bahai, Buddhism, Shintoism, Native American spirituality, etc. Compare the philosophy of providing care from the perspective of each of these three faiths with that of the Christian perspective and your own personal perspective.
In 1,250 -1500 words, summarize your findings, and compare and contrast the different belief systems, reinforcing major themes with insights gained from your research. Some of the questions to consider when researching the chosen religions are:
1. What is the spiritual perspective on healing?
2. What are the critical components of healing, such as prayer, meditation, belief, etc.?
3. What is important to people of a particular faith when cared for by health care providers whose spiritual beliefs differ from their own?
4. How do patients view health care providers who are able to let go of their own beliefs in the interest of the beliefs and practices of the patient? Compare these beliefs to the Christian philosophy of faith and healing.
In your conclusion, describe what you have learned from your research and how this learning can be applied to a health care provider practice.
This assignment uses a grading rubric. Instructors will be using the rubric to grade the assignment; therefore, students should review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the assignment criteria and expectations for successful completion of the assignment.
Prepare this assignment according to the APA guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is required.
Remember that Wikipedia is not considered a scholarly source
Health Care Provider and Faith Diversity: First Draft
1
Unsatisfactory
0.00%
2
Less than Satisfactory
65.00%
3
Satisfactory
75.00%
4
Good
85.00%
5
Excellent
100.00%
70.0 %Content
40.0 % Comprehension of concepts of diversity of faith
Reveals inaccurate comprehension of material and lacks the ability to apply information.
Displays a lack of comprehension but attempts to apply information. Presentation of material does not meet minimal requirements of the assignment. Demonstrates no critical thinking aspects.
Exhibits comprehension of the material and attempts to integrate it with outside material. Information represents basic thought and formulation surrounding understanding of varying components of faith across diverse religions and how health care providers handle those diversities.
Demonstrates integrative comprehension. Student exhibits thorough and thoughtful processing of material. Evidentiary support is creatively interwoven and presented in a manner that demonstrates the diversities of faith, the role they play in patient beliefs and practices, and their importance in managing patients? spiritual care.
Demonstrates integrative comprehension and thoughtful application of concepts surrounding spiritual diversity and circumstances involving application in real-world situations. Presentation of material and components includes expanded and unique perspective relative to similarities and differences of practices across various religions.
30.0 % Coverage of subject matter.
Subject matter is absent, inappropriate, and/or irrelevant.
There is weak, marginal coverage of subject matter with large gaps in presentation.
All subject matter is covered in minimal quantity and quality.
Comprehensive coverage of subject matter is evident.
Coverage extends beyond what is needed to support subject matter.
20.0 %Organization and Effectiveness
7.0 % Thesis Development and Purpose
Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing thesis and/or main claim.
Thesis and/or main claim are insufficiently developed and/or vague; purpose is not clear.
Thesis and/or main claim are apparent and appropriate to purpose.
Thesis and/or main claim are clear and forecast the development of the paper. It is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.
Thesis and/or main claim are comprehensive. The essence of the paper is contained within the thesis. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.
8.0 % Argument Logic and Construction
Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the thesis and/or main claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.
Sufficient justification of thesis and/or main claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.
Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of thesis and/or main claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.
Argument shows logical progression. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of thesis and/or main claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.
Clear and convincing argument presents a persuasive thesis and/or main claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.
5.0 % Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are used.
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register); sentence structure, and/or word choice are present.
Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used.
Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used.
Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
10.0 %Format
5.0 % Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)
Template is not used appropriately, or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.
Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent.
Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.
Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style.
All format elements are correct.
5.0 % Research Citations (In-text citations for paraphrasing and direct quotes, and reference page listing and formatting, as appropriate to assignment and style)
No reference page is included. No citations are used.
Reference page is present. Citations are inconsistently used.
Reference page is included and lists sources used in the paper. Sources are appropriately documented, although some errors may be present.
Reference page is present and fully inclusive of all cited sources. Documentation is appropriate and citation style is usually correct.
In-text citations and a reference page are complete and correct. The documentation of cited sources is free of error.
100 % Total Weightage
Use the order calculator below and get started! Contact our live support team for any assistance or inquiry.
[order_calculator]
