Case study Brief:
Drawing upon your critical reflections exercises, and the activities used in modules 2 and 3: critically analyse a case study within your clinical practice, where a HMP/DTP has been used. You need to identify how the case study and current nursing practice is situated within broader social, cultural, historical and political contexts.
1. You are required to critically analyse the case study retrospectively, to explore the situational practice components – all of the study modules. In essence you are putting it all together.
2. Your assignment can include using a deconstructive approach (Module 1) such as
• What is happening currently and what is problematic about it?
• What rationales are provided for the current practice/situation?
• What are the social, cultural, political and historical factors that underpin the development and maintenance of this practice?
• How does the practice/situation impact on the consumer/APN?
• Who benefits/is disadvantaged by the practice? What are the power relations between these groups?
• What other groups might be interested in this issue? How might you enter into a dialogue for action around this issue?
• What are the options for potential alternative actions?
• What are the rationales that support alternative options? What might you further need to know? What does the research, literature and other resources say about the issues/options?
• How will you evaluate it? What role will consumers, nurses, others have in evaluation?
• What role will evaluation have in further refining the change?
This assignment is designed to assess your critical thinking, problem solving, and communication skills as applied to the concepts within this course. More specifically, the reader will be asking the following questions:
1. Is the case study issue well stated? Is it clear and unbiased? Does the expression of the question do justice to the complexity of the matter at issue?
2. Does the writer cite relevant evidence, experiences, and/or information essential to the issue?
3. Does the writer clarify key concepts when necessary?
4. Does the writer show a sensitivity to what he or she is assuming or taking for granted? (Insofar as those assumptions might reasonably questioned)?
5. Does the writer develop a definite line of reasoning, explaining well how he or she is arriving at his or her conclusions?
6. Is the writer’s reasoning well- supported?
7. Does the writer show sensitivity to alternative points of view or lines of reasoning? Does he or she consider and respond to objections framed from other points of view?
8. Does the writer show sensitivity to the implications and consequences of the position he or she has taken?
