Leadership vision 2

The purposes of this assignment are to: a) identify and articulate key concepts of your leadership vision, b) provide empirical, scholarly evidence to support your position, and c) communicate ideas in a clear, succinct, and scholarly manner.

A source is scholarly when it • comes from a professional, peer-reviewed publication (e.g., a journal or a government report such as from the FDA or CDC); • contains references for sources cited, so you can find the original source of information; • is written by a professional or scholar in the field and indicates credentials of the author(s); and • is no more than 5 years old

You are to take 3 scholarly articles less than 5 years old and critique them based upon the instruction below.
Please set paper according to the format below with introduction, vision concepts, evidence, examples and conclusion.
1: Introduction
Introduction clearly introduces your vision.
2: Vision Concepts
Identification of key concepts of vision is articulated clearly with no inaccuracy.
3: Evidence
Empirical, scholarly evidence supporting your vision is clearly critiqued.
4: Examples
Specific examples clearly demonstrate the impact or importance of your vision of nursing.
5: Conclusion
Concluding statements summarizing content are present and accurate

The following are some questions you may want to address in your critique no matter what type
of article you are critiquing. (Keep in mind: these items don’t have to be discussed in
this order and some may not be pertinent to your specific article.) If your assignment is a short paper, you may choose a few items to include in your critique as you see fit and have room.

1. Is the title of the article appropriate and clear?
2. Is the abstract specific and representative of the article?
3. Is the purpose of the article made clear in the introduction?
5. Is all of the discussion relevant?
6. Has the author cited the literature?
7. Have any ideas been overemphasized or underemphasized?
8. Should some sections of the manuscript be expanded, condensed, or omitted?
9. Are the author’s statements clear?
10. What underlying assumptions does the author have?
11. Has the author been objective in his or her discussion of the topic?

Leadership vision 2

The purposes of this assignment are to: a) identify and articulate key concepts of your leadership vision, b) provide empirical, scholarly evidence to support your position, and c) communicate ideas in a clear, succinct, and scholarly manner.

A source is scholarly when it • comes from a professional, peer-reviewed publication (e.g., a journal or a government report such as from the FDA or CDC); • contains references for sources cited, so you can find the original source of information; • is written by a professional or scholar in the field and indicates credentials of the author(s); and • is no more than 5 years old

You are to take 3 scholarly articles less than 5 years old and critique them based upon the instruction below.
Please set paper according to the format below with introduction, vision concepts, evidence, examples and conclusion.
1: Introduction
Introduction clearly introduces your vision.
2: Vision Concepts
Identification of key concepts of vision is articulated clearly with no inaccuracy.
3: Evidence
Empirical, scholarly evidence supporting your vision is clearly critiqued.
4: Examples
Specific examples clearly demonstrate the impact or importance of your vision of nursing.
5: Conclusion
Concluding statements summarizing content are present and accurate

The following are some questions you may want to address in your critique no matter what type
of article you are critiquing. (Keep in mind: these items don’t have to be discussed in
this order and some may not be pertinent to your specific article.) If your assignment is a short paper, you may choose a few items to include in your critique as you see fit and have room.

1. Is the title of the article appropriate and clear?
2. Is the abstract specific and representative of the article?
3. Is the purpose of the article made clear in the introduction?
5. Is all of the discussion relevant?
6. Has the author cited the literature?
7. Have any ideas been overemphasized or underemphasized?
8. Should some sections of the manuscript be expanded, condensed, or omitted?
9. Are the author’s statements clear?
10. What underlying assumptions does the author have?
11. Has the author been objective in his or her discussion of the topic?