Assessment Task 2: Reflective Essay Using Driscoll’s Model of Reflection Course Code: NURS2005 Course Name: Foundations of Reflective Practice in Nursing Assessment Type: Individual Reflective Essay Word Limit: 1,500 words
Assessment Task 2: Reflective Essay Using Driscoll’s Model of Reflection
Course Code: NURS2005
Course Name: Foundations of Reflective Practice in Nursing
Assessment Type: Individual Reflective Essay
Word Limit: 1,500 words (excluding references)
Weighting: 40%
Due Date: Week 8, Friday 5:00 PM (submit via LMS)
Learning Outcomes Assessed: LO2: Apply reflective models to analyse clinical experiences; LO3: Demonstrate self-awareness in professional nursing practice.
Assessment Description
Reflect on a specific clinical experience from your recent placement or simulation using Driscoll’s Model of Reflection (2007). This three-stage model—what?, so what?, now what?—helps you systematically examine your actions, feelings, and future improvements in nursing practice. Choose an incident involving patient care, teamwork, or ethical decision-making. Structure your essay to address each stage explicitly, drawing on nursing theory and evidence to support your analysis.
Task Requirements
- Introduction (150-200 words): Briefly describe the incident and outline the structure using Driscoll’s model.
- Body:
- What? (400-500 words): Describe the event, your role, key actions, and involved parties.
- So What? (400-500 words): Explore your feelings, responses, influences, and links to others’ reactions.
- Now What? (400-500 words): Identify learnings, alternative actions, and plans for future practice.
- Conclusion (150-200 words): Summarise insights and professional growth.
Incorporate at least 8 scholarly references (APA 7th edition). Use first-person voice. Maintain confidentiality using pseudonyms.
Marking Rubric
| Criteria | High Distinction (85-100%) | Distinction (75-84%) | Credit (65-74%) | Pass (50-64%) | Fail (<50%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Description of Experience (What?) | Clear, detailed, contextualised account with precise actions and context. | Detailed description with good context. | Adequate description but lacks depth. | Basic outline; omits key details. | Vague or absent. |
| Analysis of Feelings/Responses (So What?) | Deep insight into emotions, influences, and theoretical links. | Good analysis with some theory. | Surface-level analysis. | Minimal emotional reflection. | No analysis. |
| Action Plan (Now What?) | Specific, evidence-based strategies for improvement. | Clear future actions linked to learning. | General plans identified. | Vague intentions. | No plan. |
| Structure, Scholarship, Writing | Exemplary APA, flawless writing, seamless flow. | Strong adherence, minor errors. | Mostly correct, some issues. | Frequent errors affect readability. | Poor structure and referencing. |
