| Course | NUR 464 Capstone The Synthesis of Professional Nursing |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 1 |
| Paper type | Capstone proposal revision summary and timeline |
| Length | About 627 words, 5 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Arizona State University |
| Program | RN to BSN |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for NUR 464 Module 1
What Changed and Why: Resubmitting the Hearing Amplifier Capstone Proposal With a Final Implementation Timeline
Student Name
Edson College of Nursing and Health Innovation, Arizona State University
NUR 464: Capstone: The Synthesis of Professional Nursing
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
What Changed and Why: Resubmitting the Hearing Amplifier Capstone Proposal With a Final Implementation Timeline
Purpose of This Resubmission
My NUR 445 proposal, which offers pocket amplifiers to patients 65 and over who struggle to hear on our medical floor, passed with comments. This resubmission addresses each comment, describes what I changed, and sets the final timeline for the project that NUR 464 will carry out. The project's purpose is unchanged: to help older patients hear and understand their nurses during teaching, consent and discharge conversations, using a low-cost intervention supported by evidence.
Faculty Comment 1: The Outcome Measure Needed Definition
The original proposal said I would ask patients two questions about understanding but did not give the wording or the scale. The revised measure uses two statements read aloud at discharge to every patient who screened positive: "I understood what the nurses told me about my care" and "I understand what to do when I get home." Answers use four choices, running from strong disagreement to strong agreement. The result will be reported as the percentage who agree or strongly agree with both. I chose simple statements that can be read aloud with the amplifier in place, since patients who cannot hear a question cannot answer it accurately.
Faculty Comment 2: The Baseline Was Too Small
The proposal compared the pilot with a two-week baseline. Faculty noted that two weeks might include very few eligible patients. I extended the baseline to three weeks, during which nurses will screen patients and ask the discharge questions without offering amplifiers. This gives a more stable comparison while keeping the project within the session.
Faculty Comment 3: Privacy of Data Was Not Addressed
The original proposal did not explain how answers would be recorded. In the revised plan, the nurse records only the date, whether the patient screened positive, whether an amplifier was offered and used, and the two answers, on a paper tally sheet with no names or record numbers. Sheets are kept in a locked drawer and entered weekly into a spreadsheet on a hospital computer. My manager confirmed that the project fits the hospital's quality improvement process, since it does not collect identifiable information or seek generalizable knowledge.
Faculty Comment 4: The Plan Did Not Address Sustainability
Faculty asked what would happen after the session ends. I added two steps. First, the unit educator agreed to include the amplifiers in new nurse orientation if the project continues. Second, a staff champion will check the device bin weekly and restock ear covers, an approach meant to address the maintenance and tracking problems reported in the literature on personal amplifiers in clinical settings (Koerber et al., 2024).
Evidence Reminder
The evidence base is unchanged. Hearing loss reliably degrades hospital conversations, and low-cost amplification has helped where tested (Shukla et al., 2019). A randomized pilot in an emergency department found that older veterans given an amplifier reported easier understanding (Chodosh et al., 2021). These sources support a unit-level project rather than a research claim.
Implementation Timeline
| Weeks | Activity | Responsible |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Final approval from manager; order devices and ear covers | Student, nurse manager |
| 2 | Huddle education on screening, use and cleaning; post one-page guide | Student, unit educator |
| 2 to 4 | Baseline: screening and discharge questions, no amplifiers | Staff nurses, student |
| 5 to 10 | Implementation: amplifiers offered for teaching, consent and discharge | Staff nurses, champions |
| 7 | Midpoint check: device count, staff feedback, adjustments | Student, champions |
| 11 | Data entry complete; compare baseline and implementation | Student |
| 12 | Report to unit council and manager; decision to continue or stop | Student, nurse manager |
Conclusion
The revised proposal keeps the same intervention and evidence but makes the measurement clearer, the comparison stronger, the data safer and the change more likely to last. It is ready for implementation.
References
Chodosh, J., Goldfeld, K., Weinstein, B. E., Radcliffe, K., Burlingame, M., Dickson, V., Grudzen, C., Sherman, S., Smilowitz, J., & Blustein, J. (2021). The HEAR-VA pilot study: Hearing assistance provided to older adults in the emergency department. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 69(4), 1071-1078. https://doi.org/10.1111/jgs.17037
Koerber, R. M., Kokorelias, K. M., & Sinha, S. K. (2024). The clinical use of personal hearing amplifiers in facilitating accessible patient-provider communication: A scoping review. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 72(7), 2195-2205. https://doi.org/10.1111/jgs.18784
Shukla, A., Nieman, C. L., Price, C., Harper, M., Lin, F. R., & Reed, N. S. (2019). Impact of hearing loss on patient-provider communication among hospitalized patients: A systematic review. American Journal of Medical Quality, 34(3), 284-292. https://doi.org/10.1177/1062860618798926
NUR 464 Module 1 instructions, in plain terms
The posted NUR 464 syllabus opens with Module 1, Synthesis of Professional Nursing, which covers capstone implementation dates, the ANA Code of Ethics, ANA position statements and the ANA principles and standards of practice. Graded work includes an introduction on VoiceThread and the Capstone Project Proposal Resubmission, and the clinical practice experience for the whole course is the capstone project itself. The resubmission usually asks you to revise the NUR 445 proposal in response to faculty feedback and to confirm implementation dates. Many instructors want a short summary of changes so they can see each comment addressed. Check Canvas for the format, whether the full proposal or a revision memo is required, and the due date.
How the NUR 464 Module 1 example is put together
The document opens by restating the project in two sentences, then devotes a short section to each faculty comment: the undefined outcome measure, the small baseline, the missing privacy plan and the lack of a sustainability plan. Each section quotes the problem briefly, explains the change and gives the reason, which is what a reviewer wants to see. An evidence reminder keeps the sources in view without repeating the full literature review. A three-column timeline table assigns responsibilities by week, and a two-sentence conclusion states that the project is ready to begin. Because faculty read many resubmissions, the document keeps each answer short and puts the comment it responds to in the heading.
NUR 464 Module 1 rubric: what earns full marks
Resubmissions are usually judged on whether every faculty comment has been addressed clearly, whether the changes improve the project's feasibility and rigor, and whether the implementation dates are realistic within the session. Graders look for measurable outcomes, a defined data collection process that protects privacy, and a plan for sustaining the change. Organization matters, because a reviewer should be able to match each comment to its revision quickly. APA format and accurate citations remain part of the grade. A resubmission that changes the project without explaining why tends to raise new questions rather than resolve old ones. Clear dates that fit inside the session also show faculty that the project can finish before the final paper is due.
NUR 464 Module 1 help with common mistakes
The most common problem is resubmitting a lightly edited proposal without showing what changed. A short section or table for each comment solves this. Another mistake is setting a timeline that leaves no time for data analysis before the final paper is due; work backward from the Module 6 deadline. Confirm approvals in writing if your manager agrees. Do not add new interventions late; refine the one you proposed. Keep data free of identifiers. If you would like help turning faculty comments into a clear resubmission, send the comments and your proposal to the desk. A final read for consistency between the revised measure, the timeline and the data sheet will catch most errors before submission.
Write yours, or have the desk draft it
This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Arizona State University document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.
More NUR 464 and RN to BSN sample papers
- NUR 464 Module 2: Nursing Practice Project Discussion
- NUR 464 Module 3: Professional Philosophy and Career Alignment
- NUR 464 Module 4: Rich Cultural Context of Nursing Discussion
- NUR 464 Module 5: Interprofessional Collaboration Discussion
- NUR 464 Module 6: Capstone Project Final Paper
- NUR 464 Module 7: Nursing Practice Project Presentation
- NUR 445 Module 3: Unit Culture Case Scenario Short Paper
- NUR 444 Module 4: Leading Innovation Case Scenario Paper
- NUR 391 Module 1: Introductions and Social Forces Discussion
- NUR 318 Module 6: Evidence Evaluation Table and Appraisal
NUR 464 Module 1 questions, answered
Where can I find a free NUR 464 Module 1 sample paper?
The full proposal resubmission is on this page: four faculty comments answered one by one, a tightened outcome measure, a privacy plan, a sustainability plan, an implementation timeline and references.
Do I have to resubmit my capstone proposal in NUR 464?
The posted syllabus lists a Capstone Project Proposal Resubmission in Module 1, usually to address faculty feedback and set implementation dates.
How do I show changes in the NUR 464 resubmission?
List each faculty comment and explain what you changed and why, in a short section or table, so the reviewer can match comment to revision.
How long is the NUR 464 capstone project?
It runs through the session, with implementation in the middle modules and the final paper due in Module 6, so plan your timeline backward from that date.
Is the NUR 464 capstone a research study?
No. It is an evidence-based practice project implemented on a unit, which usually goes through the facility's quality improvement process rather than research review.