Review Case Study 1 and Case Study 2, and then

Review Case Study 1 and Case Study 2, and then provide an introduction also provide a clear purpose statement for the paper. In detail, summarize each case in your paper. Answer the questions from each case. Include a rationale for your correct answer and a rationale for each answer you did not select as correct from each case. Support your answers with evidence from three (3) sources of literature including your course textbook (Philosophies and Theories FOR ADVANCED NURSING PRACTICE – Janie B. Butts, PhD, RN Professor, Emeritus – The University of Southern Mississippi School of Nursing Hattiesburg, Mississippi Karen L. Rich, MN, PhD, RN Associate Professor, Retired – The University of Southern Mississippi School of Nursing Long Beach, Mississippi) for each case using in-text citations. Provide a summary/conclusion for your paper. Use headings for organization of your paper (Title of Paper -place your introduction and purpose statement under the title heading-, Case Study 1, Case Study 2, and Conclusion). Provide a title page and reference page Case Study 1: The DNP study group met to review the four philosophical areas of nursing. For a fun twist, Greg created “Philosophy Bingo.” Each group member received a card with “BINGO” written across the top of it. Under each letter were four boxes. Each box contained the word ontological, epistemology, ethics, or logic. As the caller, Greg pulled strips of paper with written perspectives or questions that represented each philosophy. The first group member with four in a row won the game. After Greg pulled four slips of paper out of the jar, Jill yelled “BINGO!” and pointed to a box with “epistemology” written in it. Questions for Case Study 1 1. Which question pulled out of the jar contributed to Jill’s Bingo? a. “What can we know?” b. “What is said to exist or be?” c. “What ought I do as a nurse?” d. “If it exists, what is there to it?” 2. The epistemology area is: a. what we believe to be “true” in terms of the central interest of the discipline. b. normative inquiry about what is valued by a discipline in terms of actions and practices. c. a method of inquiry or logical reasoning through which arguments are presented and evaluated. d. inquiry into the creation, dissemination, and categorization of knowledge. Case Study 2: As Greg’s study group was discussing the differences between conceptual models and theories, they became more and more confused. Jeff asked, “What is the difference between a conceptual model and a theory?” Marla, the organizer of the group said, “And how can we sort these categories?” Greg told the group that he had asked those very questions when preparing for the study group and found that different authors used different terms to define the very same concepts. Ultimately, the group decided to use Fawcett’s way of distinguishing theory from conceptual models, and the four types of theories specified by McEwen to further develop their understanding. Questions for Case Study 2 1. According to Fawcett, if the purpose of the work is to describe, explain, or predict concrete and specific phenomena, then the work is probably a: a. grand theory. b. middle-range theory. c. conceptual model. d. metatheory. 2. Descriptive theory is specified by McEwen as a: a. factor-relating theory. b. situation-relating theory. c. situation-producing theory. d. factor-isolating theory.

******CLICK ORDER NOW BELOW AND OUR WRITERS WILL WRITE AN ANSWER TO THIS ASSIGNMENT OR ANY OTHER ASSIGNMENT, DISCUSSION, ESSAY, HOMEWORK OR QUESTION YOU MAY HAVE. OUR PAPERS ARE PLAGIARISM FREE*******."