| Course | NR 395 Ethics, Integrity, and Professional Nursing Trends |
|---|---|
| Week | 3 |
| Paper type | Academic integrity reflection |
| Length | About 1,120 words, 5 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Chamberlain University |
| Program | RN-to-BSN |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for NR 395 Week 3
Academic Integrity Reflection: The Paraphrase I Left Too Close at 2 a.m., and the Vital Signs I Almost Charted at 1600
Student Name
College of Nursing, Chamberlain University
NR 395: Ethics, Integrity, and Professional Nursing Trends
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
Academic Integrity Reflection: The Paraphrase I Left Too Close at 2 a.m., and the Vital Signs I Almost Charted at 1600
The Moment
In my second term, I wrote a paper on pressure injury prevention for a course that required five sources. At 2 a.m. the night before it was due, I had four sources and one paragraph that still read almost exactly like the article I had taken it from. I had changed "repositioning" to "turning," "patients at risk" to "at-risk patients," and moved one clause to the front of the sentence. I cited the article, so I told myself it was not plagiarism. I submitted it. The similarity report flagged the paragraph at 61% matching, and my instructor wrote in the margin: "This is the author's sentence with your synonyms. Cited, but not yours." She gave me the chance to rewrite it, and I did.
What I want to be honest about is not that I did not know the rule. I knew that paraphrasing means restating an idea in my own words and structure, not replacing words one at a time. I did it anyway, because it was late and the paragraph said exactly what I wanted to say.
The Reasoning, as It Felt Then
At 2 a.m. my reasoning went like this. The citation is there, so the author gets credit. The idea is correct, so the reader is not misled. Nobody is harmed. I will do it properly on the next paper, when I have more time. Each step felt reasonable. Together they made a decision I would not have defended in daylight.
The part of that reasoning I find most uncomfortable now is "nobody is harmed." It treated the paper as a transaction between me and a grade, rather than as evidence of what I could do. A paraphrase that is really a copy says I understood something I had only rearranged.
Rewriting the paragraph taught me something the rule alone had not. To write it properly, I had to go back to the article and work out what the authors had actually found, rather than what their sentence said. Their point was that turning schedules only helped when the support surface was also changed; my synonym version had quietly dropped the second half, because I had never understood it. The honest paraphrase was not just more original. It was more accurate. The dishonest one had copied the words and lost the meaning, which is the opposite of what I had told myself at 2 a.m.
The Standard, Quoted Once
The Code of Ethics for Nurses includes, in its fifth provision, the nurse's moral duty to self-respect through integrity and professional competence (American Nurses Association [ANA], 2025). I used to read that as a statement about practice after graduation. I now read it as a statement about what I am practicing now. Integrity is not something I will switch on when I get a license; it is a habit, and I was practicing the wrong one at 2 a.m.
That provision also changed how I read the instructor's comment. She did not accuse me of stealing. She said the sentence was not mine, which is a statement about competence as much as honesty. A nurse who can only repeat an author's sentence has not yet shown that the idea could be explained the idea to a patient or a colleague in her own words, and explaining is most of what nurses do.
The Clinical Twin
Three weeks later, on a clinical day, I took a set of vital signs on my patient at 1530. At 1600 the flowsheet reminded me that her 1600 vitals were due. I was busy with another task and the numbers had been normal half an hour earlier. My cursor was in the 1600 box with the 1530 values ready to type. I stopped because the moment felt exactly like the paraphrase: the numbers were true, just not at the time I would be claiming. I charted them at 1530 with the real time and took a new set at 1610.
Krueger (2014) surveyed 336 nursing students and found that more than half reported cheating in both classroom and clinical settings, and that the frequency of cheating in one setting was related to the frequency in the other. When I read that, I recognized the pattern from my own two moments. The classroom shortcut and the clinical shortcut are not different kinds of behavior. They come from the same reasoning: the content is basically true, the time or the words do not matter much, and I will be more careful next time. In a paper, the cost is a grade. In a chart, a vital sign recorded at a time it was not taken could hide a change that happened in between.
A Commitment Someone Could Check
My commitment is specific. For every paraphrase in the rest of my program, I will close the source, write the idea from memory, and then check it against the source for accuracy, not the other way around. I can show this: I keep my notes with the source closed in a separate document, and my instructor can ask to see them for any paper. In clinical, I will chart every assessment at the time it was done, and if I miss a scheduled check, I will write a late entry with the real time rather than filling the box. My clinical instructor can check that against my flowsheet times on any shift.
I do not expect this to be easy at 2 a.m. or at 1600 on a busy floor. That is the point of writing it down: the commitment is for the moments when I will be tired and the shortcut will look harmless, because those are the only moments when integrity costs anything.
What I Still Find Hard
One part of this remains unsettled for me. When a whole group uses a shortcut, such as a template copied from a previous cohort, it is hard to know where the line falls between working efficiently and presenting other people's work as my own. I do not have a rule for that yet. What I have is a question to ask each time: if my instructor saw exactly how this was made, would it still say what I am claiming it says? My paraphrase at 2 a.m. would have failed that test, and I knew it at the time.
References
American Nurses Association. (2025). Code of ethics for nurses. https://codeofethics.ana.org/
Krueger, L. (2014). Academic dishonesty among nursing students. Journal of Nursing Education, 53(2), 77-87. https://doi.org/10.3928/01484834-20140122-06
NR 395 Week 3 instructions, in plain terms
The Week 3 reflection asks you to examine academic integrity and connect it to your professional practice. Graders look for a specific situation, honest reflection on your reasoning, the professional standard involved, a link to clinical practice, a plan for the future and APA. Open on one moment with details that make it checkable. Admit what you knew at the time. Write out the reasoning as it felt then, and then say what was wrong with it. Quote the standard once and use it. Find a clinical moment with the same shape. Commit to something an instructor could check. Name what you still find hard rather than claiming the issue is settled.
How the NR 395 Week 3 example is put together
The first section places the writer at 2 a.m. with four of five required sources and one paragraph that still followed the article sentence by sentence, then admits knowing what paraphrasing means. The reasoning section lists the justifications: the citation gives credit, the idea is correct, nobody is harmed. The writer rejects the last one and explains what rewriting the paragraph taught about the study. The standard section quotes Provision 5 and rereads the instructor's comment as a matter of competence. The clinical section describes vital signs taken at 1530 and a 1600 reminder that tempted the writer to chart the earlier numbers, with Krueger's survey. The commitment and the unresolved question about copied templates close the paper.
Where the points sit in the NR 395 Week 3 rubric
Integrity reflection rubrics generally award points for an honest and specific account, depth of self-analysis, application of professional standards, the connection between academic and clinical integrity, a concrete plan and APA. Honesty and self-analysis matter most, and the paper earns them by admitting the writer knew the rule and examining the 2 a.m. reasoning line by line. The standards row is credited through one use of Provision 5. The academic and clinical connection scores because the two moments share a shape and Krueger's survey links them. The plan earns points for being checkable: notes written with the source closed, and late entries with real times. Naming an unresolved question shows reflection graders value.
NR 395 Week 3 help from the desk
The dominant loss on this reflection is a paper with no admission in it, describing what other students do wrong. Another is a vague commitment to be honest, which no one could check. Students also quote the Code of Ethics several times without using it, or treat academic integrity as unrelated to nursing practice. Reflections that end with every question settled read as performance. First person is expected, and you do not need to confess to a serious violation; a near miss is enough. If you have a moment from your own studies that fits, describe it and an NR 395 integrity reflection can be shaped around it with you.
Get a NR 395 Week 3 example written to your instructions
Send the reflection prompt from your classroom, the integrity policy your section links, and a line about the situation you want the example built around. We return a custom example inside 24-48h and the first is free. It comes back written in first person, at the length your prompt asks for.
More NR 395 papers and RN-to-BSN samples
- NR 395 Week 1: Error Disclosure Position Post
- NR 395 Week 2: Covert Medication Ethics Case Analysis
- NR 395 Week 4: Position Paper
- NR 395 Week 5: Ethical Framework Analysis
- NR 395 Week 6: Trend Analysis
- NR 395 Week 7: Professional Issue Analysis
- NR 395 Week 8: Reflection
- NR 436 Week 3: Community Assessment
- NR 394 Week 3: Cultural Assessment Interview Write-Up
- NR 439 Week 3: Literature Search Strategy
- NR 393 Week 3: Lillian Wald Biographical Analysis
NR 395 Week 3 questions, answered
Do I have to admit to something I actually did?
You do not have to confess anything serious, and nothing in the assignment asks for a disclosure with consequences. What earns marks is honesty about ordinary pressure: the paraphrase written at midnight, the source skimmed rather than read. Small and true beats large and invented. Graders in this course have read enough manufactured confessions to recognize the shape of one.
Is first person acceptable in a nursing paper?
For this assignment it is usually expected, and third person makes the paper worse. The reflection is an account of the writer's own reasoning, so removing the writer leaves a policy summary behind. APA formatting still applies to the title page, the headings and any citations you use. The voice changes, the mechanics do not.
How does an integrity paper connect to clinical practice?
Through documentation, mostly. The reasoning that lets a citation slide is the reasoning that rounds a blood pressure or charts an assessment done from the doorway. A finished example makes that link with one concrete pairing rather than a general claim that honesty matters everywhere, which is where most drafts stop.
Where can I find a free NR 395 Week 3 sample paper?
The complete Week 3 reflection on a too-close paraphrase and a near-miss vital signs entry, with the reasoning, the Code provision, the clinical link, the commitment and two references, is shown here.
How will the NR 395 Week 3 writer prove the commitment is kept?
To write every paraphrase with the source closed and then check it, keeping those notes for the instructor, and in clinical to chart each assessment at the real time with late entries when a check is missed.