This page holds a finished NR 539 Week 2 logic model draft, shown complete with its narrative, its stated assumptions and the external factors sitting outside the chain. Searches like "nr 539 week 2 assignment example", "nr539 week 2 sample" and "nr 539 week 2 example" land here.
What a finished NR 539 Week 2 logic model draft looks like
Two artifacts arrive together in most sections: a one page diagram and a page or two of narrative that explains it. The diagram runs left to right through inputs, activities, outputs, short term outcomes and longer term outcomes, with a strip underneath for assumptions and another for external factors. Boxes are terse. Activities are verbs with quantities attached, outputs are counts of things produced, and outcomes are changes in people, which is the boundary most drafts blur. The narrative does the work the diagram cannot: it says which arrow the writer believes is weakest and why, and it names the theory of change the model is a picture of. Formatting is plain, one page, readable when printed in gray. Color, icons and shadowed boxes earn nothing at all.
How a NR 539 Week 2 example is structured
Build the chain from the right hand end. Strong drafts start at the outcome the funder was promised, then ask what output would have to exist for it, then what activity produces that output, then what input the activity consumes, and only then draw anything. Working left to right produces a model where the last column is a wish. Once the columns are populated, each arrow gets a sentence in the narrative of the form: this leads to that, provided people show up in these numbers and provided the service is delivered as designed. Assumptions collect the things being taken on faith, external factors collect the things nobody in the program controls, such as a clinic closing or a bus route being cut. The draft ends with the weakest arrow identified by name.
Right to left, then draw
Starting at the promised outcome and reasoning backwards produces a chain that holds. Starting at inputs produces a chain that ends wherever the writer ran out of ideas.
Outputs count things, outcomes change people
Forty workshops held is an output. Fewer people leaving the catchment untested is an outcome. Drafts that mix the two promise the funder activity in place of results.
Name the arrow you doubt
Every chain has one link doing more work than the rest, usually the one where a delivered service is supposed to change a habit. Saying which earns marks.
Assumptions versus external factors
An assumption is something the program is betting on and could test. An external factor is weather, an election or a funding cycle, which the program can only watch.
The narrative is the graded half
Graders read the paragraph before the picture in many sections. The diagram shows the shape; the narrative shows whether the writer understands why that shape was chosen.
Where marks go in NR 539 Week 2
Most points are lost at the output to outcome boundary. A model that lists sessions delivered under outcomes has quietly promised nothing, because sessions delivered is a description of the program, not of the population. Next is the unnamed arrow: eleven boxes and no statement of which link the writer doubts, which turns a theory into a flowchart. Third, outcomes with no unit, so nobody can say later whether they happened; a change stated as improved awareness cannot be checked, a change stated as first prenatal visit before the fourteenth week can. Fourth, assumptions that are truisms rather than risks. Fifth, a diagram and narrative that disagree, usually because the diagram was drawn first and edited last. Legibility carries marks too, since a model nobody can read at a glance has failed its only job.
Get a NR 539 Week 2 example written to your instructions
Send the assignment instructions, the rubric and any template your section publishes, and a custom NR 539 example is written against them and returned inside 24 to 48 hours. The first one is free. If your classroom supplies a particular logic model layout, include it, since the columns and the labels differ between templates and the marking follows the template.
NR 539 Week 2 questions, answered
Diagram, narrative, or both?
Both, in most sections, and the split of points between them is worth checking in the rubric before drafting. A common arrangement gives the diagram a smaller share and the narrative the rest, which surprises people who spent their evening on box alignment. If the classroom supplies a template, the diagram half is largely decided for you.
Is a logic model the same as a theory of change?
They overlap and many rubrics treat them loosely, but the useful distinction is that a logic model shows the columns and a theory of change explains why one column produces the next. A finished draft that includes both reads as complete; one that includes only boxes reads as an inventory of the program.
How many outcomes should the model carry?
Fewer than most drafts attempt. Two short term outcomes and one longer term outcome make a workable model; six of each make a list. Every outcome added is another arrow to justify and another measure the evaluation plan will have to pay for, and the later weeks of this course make that cost visible.