| Course | NUR 673 Producing and Evaluating Programs for Academic and Practice Settings |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 2 |
| Paper type | Test blueprint with rationale |
| Length | About 527 words, 4 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Arizona State University |
| Program | MS in Nursing |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for NUR 673 Module 2
Planning Before Writing: A Test Blueprint for a Fifteen-Question Quiz on Fluids, Electrolytes and Acid-Base Balance
Student Name
Edson College of Nursing and Health Innovation, Arizona State University
NUR 673: Producing and Evaluating Programs for Academic and Practice Settings
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
Planning Before Writing: A Test Blueprint for a Fifteen-Question Quiz on Fluids, Electrolytes and Acid-Base Balance
Purpose and Context
This blueprint plans a 15-item unit quiz for NUR 3XX, Adult Health II, a second-semester course in a prelicensure BSN program. The quiz follows a two-week unit on fluid, electrolyte and acid-base imbalances and counts toward the course exam grade. A blueprint, also called a table of specifications, ensures that a test samples the content in proportion to its importance and at the cognitive levels the outcomes require, which is the main source of content validity evidence for a classroom test (Oermann et al., 2024).
Outcomes and Learning Domain
Course outcome: Analyze assessment data to prioritize nursing care for adults with acute and chronic health conditions.
Unit outcomes: (1) Explain the causes and clinical manifestations of fluid volume and electrolyte imbalances. (2) Apply knowledge of fluid and electrolyte therapy to safe nursing interventions. (3) Analyze laboratory and assessment data, including arterial blood gases, to identify and prioritize imbalances.
Domain: The quiz assesses the cognitive domain. Psychomotor skills, such as IV pump programming, and affective outcomes are assessed in the skills lab and clinical setting, not on this quiz.
Weighting the Content
Content areas were weighted by two factors: how much class time each received and how often each causes harm in practice. Potassium and acid-base content were weighted relatively heavily because errors with potassium replacement and missed acid-base changes carry high risk.
The Blueprint
| Content area | Understand | Apply | Analyze | Total items | Percent |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fluid volume deficit and excess | 1 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 27 |
| Sodium imbalances | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 20 |
| Potassium imbalances | 0 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 20 |
| Calcium and magnesium imbalances | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 13 |
| Acid-base imbalances | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 20 |
| Total | 3 | 6 | 6 | 15 | 100 |
Levels of Learning
The levels follow the revised Bloom's taxonomy (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001). Only 3 of 15 items (20%) sit at the understanding level, because the unit outcomes ask students to apply and analyze. Six items (40%) require application, such as choosing a safe action in a defined situation, and six (40%) require analysis of data in a short case. This distribution corrects the imbalance found in last term's exam, in which most items required recall.
Mapping to Clinical Judgment
Each analysis item is also tagged to a step of the NCSBN Clinical Judgment Measurement Model so that the quiz samples more than one step (Dickison et al., 2019): two items on recognizing cues, two on analyzing cues and prioritizing hypotheses and two on evaluating outcomes after an intervention.
Item Formats
| Format | Number | Use |
|---|---|---|
| Single-best-answer multiple choice | 11 | Most understanding and application items |
| Select-all-that-apply | 3 | Cue recognition and safe-action items with more than one correct response |
| Extended multiple response with a short case | 1 | Evaluating outcomes after treatment |
Administration and Scoring
The quiz will be given online with a 25-minute limit, about 90 seconds per item, plus time for the case. Select-all-that-apply items will be scored with partial credit (plus/minus scoring) to match current licensure scoring practice. Item analysis will be reviewed after administration, and any item with a negative discrimination index will be reviewed before scores are finalized.
References
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman.
Dickison, P., Haerling, K. A., & Lasater, K. (2019). Integrating the National Council of State Boards of Nursing Clinical Judgment Model into nursing educational frameworks. Journal of Nursing Education, 58(2), 72-78. https://doi.org/10.3928/01484834-20190122-03
Oermann, M. H., Gaberson, K. B., & De Gagne, J. C. (Eds.). (2024). Evaluation and testing in nursing education (7th ed.). Springer Publishing.
NUR 673 Module 2 instructions, in plain terms
The portfolio's first part, a test blueprint, closes Week 2 of NUR 673 and carries 10 points. According to the syllabus, the blueprint must make that alignment visible across outcomes, domains and levels. It opens the four-part portfolio: Part 2 asks for test questions written to this blueprint, Part 3 for a written assignment with a rubric and Part 4 for a peer review of a classmate's items. The Week 2 topics, planning for testing and the main item types from true-false to essay, supply the content. Choose a topic you teach or could teach, because you will write every item on it in Part 2. A blueprint that is too large will make Part 2 unmanageable.
How the NUR 673 Module 2 example is put together
A complete blueprint, the sample opens with the purpose and context of the quiz and the reason a blueprint supports validity. It states the course outcome, three unit outcomes and the domain being assessed, naming where other domains are assessed instead. A short section explains how content areas were weighted. The blueprint table crosses five content areas with three cognitive levels and gives counts and percentages. A levels section explains the distribution with reference to the revised Bloom's taxonomy and the previous exam's imbalance. A mapping section tags analysis items to clinical judgment steps. Item formats and an administration and scoring plan complete the document. The Oermann text and two other sources back the decisions.
Where the marks sit in the NUR 673 Module 2 rubric
The Part 1 rubric in Canvas awards 10 points. Blueprints are generally judged on clear, measurable outcomes, explicit identification of the learning domain, a content-by-level grid with accurate totals, a cognitive level distribution that matches the outcome verbs, a rationale for weighting and evidence of planning for formats and administration. Blueprints lose points when totals do not add up, when most items sit at the recall level despite outcomes that ask for analysis, when weighting is unexplained and when the domain is not named. Because Part 2 is graded against this plan, a blueprint that is precise and realistic in size makes the next assignment easier. Faculty feedback returns within a week, before Part 2 is finalized.
NUR 673 Module 2 help from the desk
Arithmetic is where blueprints most often go wrong, with rows and columns that fail to add up. Check every sum. Another is listing cognitive levels that do not match the outcome verbs; if your outcome says analyze, most items should not be at the remember level. Explain your weighting rather than assigning equal items to every topic. Name the domain and keep the blueprint to the size you can write well. Use the revised Bloom's taxonomy or another named framework consistently. Remember that Part 2 must follow this plan item for item. If you send the desk your unit outcomes, it can help you check that the blueprint matches them.
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 673 and MS in Nursing sample papers
- NUR 673 Module 1: Paper: Meaningful Assessment and Evaluation in Nursing Education
- NUR 673 Module 3: Assessment Portfolio, Part 4: Peer Review of Draft Test Questions
- NUR 673 Module 4: Assessment Portfolio, Part 3: Written Assignment and Rubric
- NUR 673 Module 5: Assessment Portfolio, Part 2: Final Test Questions
- NUR 673 Module 6: Case Study: Course Evaluation
- NUR 673 Module 7: Case Study: Program Evaluation
- NUR 673 Module 8: Paper: Reflection on Learning
- NUR 521 Module 7: Integrating Informatics and Health Care Final Project
- NUR 552 Module 4: Triple Aim to Quintuple Aim Essay
- NUR 672 Module 2: Learning Plan Part 2: Outcomes, Objectives and Evaluation
- NUR 671 Module 5: Instructional Unit Portfolio Part 2: Evaluation and Instructional Plan
NUR 673 Module 2 questions, answered
Where can I find a free NUR 673 Module 2 sample paper?
The NUR 673 Module 2 sample above is a finished blueprint, with outcomes, weighting and a grid of content against cognitive level for a short electrolyte and acid-base quiz.
What is a test blueprint in nursing education?
A table that plans a test before items are written, showing how many items each content area receives at each cognitive level, so the test matches the outcomes.
How do you decide how many items each topic gets?
Weight topics by their importance in the outcomes, the teaching time they received and their consequences in practice, then explain the weighting.
What are the parts of the NUR 673 assessment portfolio?
Part 1 is a test blueprint, Part 2 test questions, Part 3 a written assignment with a rubric and Part 4 a peer review of a classmate's test questions.
How much is the NUR 673 test blueprint worth?
The blueprint carries 10 points and is submitted as Week 2 ends.