St. Pe t e rsbu r g College
Cri tical Thinking Scena rio f o r
Nursing S tud e n ts
Background:
The St. Petersburg College -wide Quality Enhancement Project (QEP) is aimed at enhancing student success
through critical thinking! To function as a professional nurse req uires the nurse to utilize the nursing process to ensure
patient care at the highest level. It is during the application of the nursing process that critical thinking occurs. For more
information on critical thinking, please refer to our College of Nursin g Student Handbook which can be found in the
Nursing Commons on ANGEL. This assignment provides structured prompts to assist you in analyzing the patient
scenario. Your essays will be ‘graded’ by SPC
Patient History/Information:
A 58 year old female, with crippling rheumatoid arthritis and advanced liver failure, was brought into the Emergency
Department (ED). She was found on the floor in the bathroom of her apartment. Her husband called 911 and reported
she was hard to arouse and had shallow respirat ions. An empty prescription bottle of temazepam (Restoril)
30mg was found on the floor. The date on the bottle indicated that it had been refilled 1 week ago.
At the scene, the patient responded to painful stimuli applied by the paramedics by repeatedly saying “I
want to die!” and resisting medical attention. Her level of consciousness is diminished and her speech is
slurred.
As she is brought into the ED the patient is screaming, “You should let me die. I have no reason to live.”
Her vital signs are t 37.2C, BP 80/40, P 118, R 12, SPO 2 92% on 2L/min via nasal cannula .
The ER staff along with the husband are discussing the best course of action for this patient. The ER nurse
thinks the patient needs to be admitted to ICU for further monitoring. The ER physician is considering Baker
Acting her for further psychiatric evaluation . The husband wants to take her back home once her vital signs
stable. He states they don’t have any health insurance and wants information about Hospice services.
are
Directions:
1. Write a Critical Thinking essay based on the scenario above
2. Please turn it in by placing it in the Drop Box in the ANGEL course by the due date
3. The specific elements and tasks include:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
4.
Communication: Define the problem in your own words.
Analysis: Compare & contrast the available solutions within the scenario.
Problem Solving: Select one of the available solutions and defend it as your final solution.
Evaluation: Identify the weaknesses of your final solution.
Synthesis: Suggest ways to improve/strengt hen your final solution (may use information not
contained within the scenario).
Reflection: Reflect on your own thought process after completing the assignment.
a. “What did you learn from this process?”
b. “What would you do differently next time to improv e?”
.
NUR 2811C: CRITICAL THINKING ESSAY
1
St. Petersburg College
College of Nursing
NUR 2811C: Critical Thinking Essay Assignment
Criteria
**Performance
Element**
I. Communication
Please clearly and
thoroughly identify and
define a problem or situation
II. Analysis
Please clearly compare &
contrast the available solutions
available to you.
III. Problem Solving
Based on your analysis above,
please select and defend your
desired solution.
NUR2811C: CT Scenario
2009
Exemplary
Proficient
Developing
Emerging
Not
Present
Identifies the main idea or
problem with numerous
supporting details and
examples which are
organized logically and
coherently
Identifies the main idea
or problem with some
supporting details and
examples in an
organized manner
Identifies the main idea or
problem with few details or
examples in a somewhat
organized manner
Identifies the main idea or
problem poorly with few
or no details or states the
main idea or problem
verbatim from the text.
Does not
identify the
main idea or
problem
Uses specific inductive or
deductive reasoning to
make inferences
regarding premises;
addresses implications
and consequences;
identifies facts and
relevant information
correctly
Thoroughly identifies and
addresses key aspects of
the problem and
insightfully uses facts and
relevant evidence from
analysis to support and
defend potentially valid
solutions
Uses logical reasoning
to make inferences
regarding solutions;
addresses implications
and consequences;
Identifies facts and
relevant information
correctly
Uses superficial reasoning
to make inferences
regarding solutions; Shows
some confusion regarding
facts, opinions, and
relevant, evidence, data, or
information
Makes unexplained,
unsupported, or
unreasonable inferences
regarding solutions;
makes multiple errors in
distinguishing fact from
fiction or in selecting
relevant evidence
Does not
analyze
multiple
solutions
Identifies and addresses
key aspects of the
problem and uses facts
and relevant evidence
from analysis to develop
potentially valid
conclusions or solutions
Identifies and addresses
some aspects of the
problem; develops
possible conclusions or
solutions using some
inappropriate opinions and
irrelevant information from
analysis
Identifies and addresses
only one aspect of the
problem but develops
untestable hypothesis; or
develops invalid
conclusions or solutions
based on opinion or
irrelevant information.
Does not
select and
defend a
solution
**Performance
Element**
IV. Evaluation
Please identify strengths and
weaknesses in your final
solution.
V. Synthesis
Based on identified
weaknesses, what additional
skills, information or
knowledge would have
improved or strengthened
your final solution (“if I knew
then what I know” concept)
VI. Reflection
Reflect on your own thought
process.
“What did you learn from this
process?”
“What could you do differently
next time to improve?”
NUR2811C: CT Scenario
2009
Exemplary
Proficient
Developing
Emerging
Not
Present
Insightfully interprets data
or information;
identifies obvious as well
as hidden assumptions,
establishes credibility of
sources on points other
than authority alone,
avoids fallacies in
reasoning; distinguishes
appropriate arguments
from extraneous
elements; provides
sufficient logical support
Insightfully relates
concepts and ideas from
multiple sources; uses
new information to
enhance final solution;
recognizes missing
information; correctly
identifies potential effects
of new information.
Accurately interprets
data or information;
identifies obvious
assumptions,
establishes credibility of
sources on points other
than authority alone,
avoids fallacies in
reasoning; distinguishes
appropriate arguments
from extraneous
elements; provides
sufficient logical support
Accurately relates
concepts and ideas from
multiple sources; uses
new information to
enhance final solution;
correctly identifies
potential effects of new
information.
Makes some errors in data
or information
interpretation; makes
arguments using weak
evidence; provides
superficial support for
conclusions or solutions
Interprets data or
information incorrectly;
Supports conclusions or
solutions without
evidence or logic; uses
data, information, or
evidence skewed by
invalid assumptions;
uses poor sources of
information; uses
fallacious arguments
Does not
evaluate
data,
information,
or evidence
related to
final
solution.
Inaccurately or
incompletely relates
concepts and ideas from
multiple sources; shallow
determination of effect of
new information on final
solution
Poorly integrates
information from more
than one source to
support final solution;
Incorrectly predicts the
effect of new information
on final solution
Does not
identify new
information
for final
solution
Identifies strengths and
weaknesses in own
thinking: recognizes
personal assumptions,
values and perspectives,
compares to others’, and
evaluates them in the
context of alternate points
of view
Identifies strengths and
weaknesses in own
thinking: recognizes
personal assumptions,
values and
perspectives, compares
to others’, and evaluates
them in the context of
alternate points of view
Identifies some personal
assumptions, values, and
perspectives;
recognizes some
assumptions, values and
perspectives of others;
shallow comparisons of
alternate points of view
Identifies some personal
assumptions, values,
and perspectives;
does not consider
alternate points of view
Does not
reflect on
own
thinking