| Course | NR 300A Directed Independent Study |
|---|---|
| Week | 1 |
| Paper type | Independent study project outline |
| Length | About 1,100 words, 5 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Chamberlain University |
| Program | RN-to-BSN |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for NR 300A Week 1
Project Outline: An Evidence Summary and a One-Page Admission Checklist for Glasses, Hearing Aids and Dentures on a 30-Bed Medical Unit
Student Name
College of Nursing, Chamberlain University
NR 300A: Directed Independent Study
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
Project Outline: An Evidence Summary and a One-Page Admission Checklist for Glasses, Hearing Aids and Dentures on a 30-Bed Medical Unit
What Will Exist at the End
By the end of Week 8 I will hand my faculty sponsor two things. The first is a written evidence summary of about six pages that answers one question: what does published research say about how older hospitalized adults' glasses, hearing aids and dentures affect communication with staff, the accuracy of cognitive screening, and delirium, and what simple measures help? The second is a one-page admission checklist for sensory aids, written for the 30-bed adult medical unit where I work nights, and tried on 10 admissions by me and two colleagues to see whether it can be completed in practice.
The question comes from my own unit. In the last three months, our unit's property log records four lost hearing aids and two lost upper dentures, and I have admitted patients whose glasses were left in the emergency department or at home. We ask about these items on the admission property form, but nothing tells the next nurse that a patient needs them to hear the discharge teaching or read the menu. The project asks whether the evidence supports doing more, and what the least that would help looks like.
Starting Evidence
Two sources found while preparing this outline suggest the question is answerable and not already settled for a bedside nurse. Inouye et al. (1999) tested a multicomponent program to prevent delirium in hospitalized adults aged 70 and older that included protocols for vision and hearing impairment, for example checking that glasses and hearing aids were in use, alongside protocols for sleep, mobility, hydration and orientation. The intervention unit's delirium rate was about a third lower than the usual-care units' (9.9% against 15.0%). Because the program bundled six components, it cannot say how much of the effect came from sensory aids. Shukla et al. (2019) reviewed 13 studies of hearing loss and patient-provider communication among hospitalized patients and found that every study reported an adverse effect of hearing loss on communication, and that simple measures such as low-cost voice amplifiers improved it.
Neither source tells a nurse on a medical unit what to do at admission, which is the gap the checklist is meant to fill: a short, repeatable step at admission that a busy night nurse can complete. The Week 2 bibliography will test whether other work has already filled it.
What the Study Will Not Attempt
No measurement of patient outcomes. I will not try to show that the checklist reduces delirium or complaints. Eight weeks is not enough to measure either, and doing so would require a quality improvement proposal and approvals I do not have.
No hearing or vision screening. The checklist records aids the patient already uses. Screening for undiagnosed hearing or vision loss is a larger question with its own evidence base.
No pediatric or intensive care patients. The evidence and the checklist are limited to adults on a general medical unit.
No cost analysis. I will note the costs of lost items where published figures exist, but I will not build a budget or a business case.
No electronic record changes. The checklist will be on paper. If it proves useful, a later request to informatics can follow, but that is outside this study.
Workplan
Week 1: this outline, approved by the sponsor.
Week 2: annotated bibliography of at least 8 sources, with a paragraph on whether the reading changes the plan.
Week 3: literature summary organized by claim, 4 to 5 pages.
Week 4: progress memo to the sponsor, and version 1 of the checklist attached.
Week 5: draft of the evidence summary's central section, "What the checklist asks and why," at final wording.
Week 6: methods note on the search and the 10-admission usability trial, with the trial completed.
Week 7: revision plan responding to the sponsor's comments on the draft.
Week 8: final evidence summary and checklist, with a closing reflection.
Resources Already in Hand
I have access to CINAHL and PubMed through the university library, and a librarian consultation booked for Week 1. My nurse manager has agreed by email that I may try a paper checklist on 10 admissions during my own shifts, recording only whether each item could be completed and how long it took, with no patient names or clinical information collected. Two night-shift colleagues have agreed to use it on admissions they take. The unit's current admission property form and the last three months of the property log, with patient identifiers removed by the manager, are available to me.
Why Eight Weeks Is Enough
The study is sized to two products that each need about three weeks of focused work, with the reading shared between them. The evidence summary depends on a literature I expect to be small: searches I ran while preparing this outline suggest a few dozen relevant studies, most of them about hearing, fewer about glasses and very few about dentures. The checklist is short by design, and the usability trial needs only 10 admissions, which I will reach in two weeks of normal shifts. The riskiest week is Week 6, because admissions are unpredictable; if I have fewer than 10 by the end of Week 6, I will report the number reached rather than extending the trial.
Risks and What I Will Do About Them
Too few admissions in Week 6. Report the number reached; do not extend the trial.
The literature on dentures is too thin to summarize. Keep dentures on the checklist for loss prevention and say plainly in the summary that the evidence is limited.
Colleagues do not use the checklist. Record the non-use as a finding; it is information about the checklist's fit with the admission routine.
The question has already been answered in a published tool. Adapt the published tool rather than writing a new one, and tell the sponsor in the Week 2 bibliography.
How the Sponsor Will Know It Is Finished
The study is finished when the sponsor has a six-page summary that answers the question above with cited evidence, and a one-page checklist with a short note on how it performed on 10 admissions. The final reflection in Week 8 will quote each commitment from this outline and say whether it was met.
References
Inouye, S. K., Bogardus, S. T., Jr., Charpentier, P. A., Leo-Summers, L., Acampora, D., Holford, T. R., & Cooney, L. M., Jr. (1999). A multicomponent intervention to prevent delirium in hospitalized older patients. New England Journal of Medicine, 340(9), 669-676. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM199903043400901
Shukla, A., Nieman, C. L., Price, C., Harper, M., Lin, F. R., & Reed, N. S. (2019). Impact of hearing loss on patient-provider communication among hospitalized patients: A systematic review. American Journal of Medical Quality, 34(3), 284-292. https://doi.org/10.1177/1062860618798926
The Chamberlain NR 300A Week 1 instructions
The first week of a directed independent study asks for a proposal or outline that you and your faculty sponsor agree on. Expect it to cover the question or problem, what you will produce, the scope and its limits, a weekly plan, resources and how completion will be judged. Because there is no standard syllabus, the outline itself becomes the measure for later weeks. Size the work to the credit hours and eight weeks available. Name products a sponsor could hold, not intentions. State what is excluded and why, so the scope cannot grow. Confirm resources such as library access or a manager's permission rather than assuming them. Cite a few sources that show the question is answerable.
How the NR 300A Week 1 example is put together
The outline opens with what will exist at the end of Week 8: a six-page evidence summary and a one-page checklist. The next section explains where the question came from: four hearing aids and two dentures lost in three months. Two sources, Inouye et al. (1999) and Shukla et al. (2019), show the question is answerable but not settled for bedside nurses. Five exclusions follow, each with a reason, from outcome measurement to electronic record changes. A workplan lists a deliverable for every week, with the usability trial in Week 6. Resources in hand include library databases and a manager's email. Risks each get a response, and the close defines finished.
Where the points sit in the NR 300A Week 1 rubric
A directed study usually has no published rubric, so the sponsor grades the outline on feasibility, clarity of the products, scope, a realistic workplan, resources and a definition of completion. Feasibility tends to decide the grade, so the outline is sized to two products of about three weeks each. Clarity scores when a sponsor could tell a finished product from an abandoned one. Scope is credited through stated exclusions with reasons. The workplan earns points when every row names something that could be handed over. Confirmed resources and named risks show planning. Starting evidence with full APA references supports the claim that the question is worth eight weeks.
NR 300A Week 1 help: mistakes that cost points
The costliest Week 1 mistake is scale: a year's project placed in an eight-week container. An outline with nothing ruled out lets the scope grow until the term ends. A workplan whose middle rows say reading and writing reports intention, not output. Justifications that the subject matters in general, resources assumed instead of confirmed, no standard for completion and pages of background nobody asked for all weaken the proposal. Keep the work small enough to finish and specific enough to check. If the sponsor rewrites part of the plan, record the change. Tell us your topic and credit hours, and an NR 300A outline can be sized to them.
Get a NR 300A Week 1 example written to your instructions
Send the outline instructions your faculty sponsor gave you, or the agreement the two of you settled on, and a custom example is written to it and returned inside 24 to 48 hours, with the first one free. The agreement itself stays with you: it carries an approval only the two of you can give, and nobody else drafts that.
More NR 300A papers and RN-to-BSN samples
- NR 300A Week 2: Annotated Bibliography
- NR 300A Week 3: Literature Summary
- NR 300A Week 4: Progress Memo
- NR 300A Week 5: Draft Section
- NR 300A Week 6: Methods Note
- NR 300A Week 7: Revision Plan
- NR 300A Week 8: Final Reflection
- NR 305 Week 1: Discussion Post
- NR 306 Week 1: Discussion Post
- NR 451 Week 1: Discussion Post
- NR 307A Week 1: Discussion Post
NR 300A Week 1 questions, answered
How is a Week 1 outline graded when no rubric exists for it?
In many agreements the sponsor marks it on ordinary judgment rather than a published grid: is the object clear, are the edges real, could a working nurse finish this before the term ends. Ask early what weight the proposal carries, because in some studies it is a small entry cost and in others a graded piece in its own right.
How small should the proposed work be?
Small enough that the finished thing fits into one sentence and weeks are left over. A blunt test is removal: take away the most interesting part of the plan and ask whether what remains would still earn the credit. If it would, the first version was oversized. Sponsors reject very few proposals for being too tightly drawn.
What happens if the sponsor rewrites the plan?
That is the normal result and not a mark against the writer. Amendments usually shrink the scope, swap one deliverable for another, or move a date. Get the revised version in writing and treat it as the governing document from that day forward, since the study will be assessed against what was agreed last rather than what was proposed first.
Where can I find a free NR 300A Week 1 sample paper?
The complete Week 1 outline for a sensory aid evidence summary and admission checklist, with the exclusions, workplan and risks, is reproduced on this page.
What does the NR 300A Week 1 outline rule out?
It excludes measuring patient outcomes, screening for hearing or vision loss, pediatric and intensive care patients, a cost analysis and changes to the electronic record, each with a reason.