This page holds a finished NR 304 Week 6 documentation exercise, showing one encounter written as a record and then rebuilt as the report given aloud. Searches like "nr 304 week 6 assignment example", "nr304 week 6 sample" and "nr 304 week 6 example" land here.
What a finished NR 304 Week 6 documentation exercise looks like
Two documents from one visit, and they do not look alike. The written half runs in the order things happened, with times attached, every entry naming its site and what it was judged by, and the ordinary findings occupying their proper rows. The spoken half is a fraction of the length and rearranged rather than trimmed. Whatever moved goes into the first breath, a figure or two follow so a listener can believe it, and the closing sentence is a request. What the spoken version keeps is instructive. The comparator is said aloud, because the listener has not read the chart and cannot see what the number was on the previous shift. Both halves are dated and timed. Neither of them names a condition, and the spoken one names what is wanted instead.
How a NR 304 Week 6 example is structured
The written half follows whatever record your section issues, filled in the order the encounter ran, with a time on each entry so the sequence is recoverable afterwards. Sites, instruments and comparators appear inside the entries rather than in a preamble. The spoken half is then built from it rather than written fresh, which is what the exercise is really testing. The moved finding goes into the first breath, one or two figures follow so a listener can believe it without a chart, and the last sentence asks for an action somebody could take before putting the telephone down. The earlier figure is said aloud too, along with the interval since it was taken. A short reflection, where the assignment includes one, explains what was left out of the spoken half and why that was safe.
Times on the written entries
Every row carries the hour it was produced, which is what lets a later reader rebuild the sequence and gives the next reading something to be checked against.
The spoken half rebuilt, not cut
The report reordered around what changed rather than trimmed from the top, since shortening a record in place leaves the important line where nobody hears it.
The comparator said aloud
The earlier figure and the interval spoken outright, because a listener with no chart in front of them cannot supply either one from memory.
A request at the end
The spoken version finishes with something nameable that a listener could act on before hanging up, rather than tailing off once the situation has been described.
Two documents that agree
The same figures in both halves and the same times, since a reader who finds them disagreeing has to decide which of the two to trust.
Where marks go in NR 304 Week 6
The heaviest deduction is the spoken half that is only the record shortened. Cut from the top, same order, the changed finding still buried in the middle, and no listener reaches it before deciding you had nothing urgent. Running it close is the report with nothing requested in it, which tells somebody what is happening and stops before naming what you need from them. Then the rest. A comparator present in the record and gone from the spoken version, so the number arrives with nothing behind it. Times missing from the written half. Figures that differ between the two documents. A condition named aloud because it is faster to say. A reflection describing the exercise rather than the choices inside it. And a spoken version too long to listen to.
Get a NR 304 Week 6 example written to your instructions
Send the Week 6 instructions with both templates if your classroom issued two, and a custom example is written into them and returned inside 24 to 48 hours. The first one is free. Where the exercise rests on somebody you looked after, those readings live in an employer's record and stay there, so send us the printed case or a scenario of your own.
NR 304 Week 6 questions, answered
How much shorter should the spoken version be?
Short enough to say without a pause, which usually means a small fraction of the written record. Sections rarely print a word count for it and instead mark whether a listener could act on it. The test worth applying is whether somebody hearing it once, with no chart open, would know what changed, by how much, since when, and what you are asking them to do about it.
Does the written record still need everything if the spoken one is short?
Yes, and the gap between them is the point of the assignment. The record is where completeness lives, including the ordinary findings and the rows that turned up nothing. The spoken version selects from it under pressure. A student who thins the written half to match the spoken one has removed the material the selection was supposed to be made from and there is nothing left to mark.
Should the spoken half include my interpretation?
It should include what concerns you, stated as a concern, and stop short of a name. Saying that a reading has moved twice in four hours and that you want somebody to look is a concern. Saying what the underlying condition is takes you into another course's territory and, in this exercise, usually replaces the figures that would have justified the call in the first place.