| Course | NURS 766 Advanced Evaluation Strategies for Nurse Educators (NURS766) |
|---|---|
| Module/Week | 1 |
| Assignment | Written Assignment 1: Learning Objectives |
| Paper type | Written assessment on learning objectives |
| Length | about 1,153 words, 4 double-spaced pages plus title page and references. Course guide: a written assessment in current APA format focused on learning objectives, following the assignment instructions in the course |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| Points | 75 |
| School | Liberty University Online |
| Program | PhD in Nursing |
| Where it sits | Module/Week 1 in Liberty's published NURS 766 course guide; current sections can differ |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for NURS 766 Week 1
Writing Measurable Learning Objectives for a Heart Failure Unit in a Junior-Year Adult Health Course
[Student Name]
School of Nursing, Liberty University
NURS 766: Advanced Evaluation Strategies for Nurse Educators
Written Assignment 1
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
The university, course and unit are composites; McDonald's textbook, the revised taxonomy, the AACN Essentials and the journal articles cited are real.
Writing Measurable Learning Objectives for a Heart Failure Unit in a Junior-Year Adult Health Course
The Course and the Problem
I teach the didactic portion of a junior-year adult health course in a BSN program at a small private university. The course's two-week unit on heart failure has six objectives inherited from an earlier syllabus. Four of them begin with verbs such as "understand" or "know," one combines three behaviors in a single sentence and none says how it will be assessed. Students reasonably ask what they need to study, and faculty have no shared idea of what the unit exam should measure. This assignment rewrites the unit's objectives so they can guide teaching and testing.
What an Objective Must Contain
McDonald (2018) treats objectives as the foundation of all assessment: they state what learners can do once instruction ends, and every test item, rubric and clinical behavior should be traceable to one. An objective is useful only when it describes behavior that can be observed or measured, so that two instructors would agree whether a student had met it. For that reason, McDonald recommends action verbs and warns against verbs such as "understand," "appreciate" and "know," which describe internal states no one can see.
Three parts make an objective workable for a nursing course: the learner, an observable behavior stated with one action verb and the content or condition to which the behavior applies. Criteria, such as accuracy or time, can be added when the assessment requires them. Keeping one behavior per objective matters for assessment, since an objective that asks students to "identify, explain and manage" a problem cannot be measured by one item and will be measured unevenly by several.
Setting the Level of Thinking
The revised taxonomy of Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) describes six cognitive processes, from remember and understand through apply, analyze and evaluate to create. The level of an objective should match what students must do in practice. Junior students caring for patients with heart failure need to remember the classes of medications used, but they also need to apply that knowledge to a patient's data and analyze which findings signal worsening.
For a prelicensure course, the higher levels are best described in the language of clinical judgment. Dickison et al. (2019) describe how the NCSBN Clinical Judgment Measurement Model, built for the licensure exam, can be carried into nursing curricula, which traces how a nurse notices what matters in a patient's data, makes sense of it, decides which problem is most pressing, weighs possible responses, acts and then checks the result. These steps are observable: a student can be asked which findings matter, which problem comes first and what to do about it. Using them as verbs for higher-level objectives makes the objectives match the thinking the licensure exam now measures.
Writing for Junior Students
Objectives must also fit the learners. These students are in their first adult health course, have completed fundamentals and pharmacology and have spent one semester in clinical practice. They can be expected to recognize the classic cues of fluid overload and to choose the first action in a clear-cut case, but not to manage a patient with several competing problems or to adjust medications. For that reason, the highest objective asks students to prioritize actions for one patient with acute decompensation, not to coordinate care for a group of patients, which belongs to the senior capstone. McDonald (2018) cautions that objectives written above the learners' level produce exams that discourage students and tell faculty little, while objectives written below it waste instruction. Leveling also shapes the verbs for the knowledge objectives. "Explain" asks for more than "list," since students must connect a reduced ejection fraction with the signs it produces, and that connection is what lets them recognize cues later in the unit.
Faculty readiness is part of the problem. When Pence et al. (2026) surveyed 126 educators teaching in accredited BSN programs, fewer than a quarter (23%) rated their own readiness to teach and assess clinical judgment at the top of the scale, and about a third (34%) said they were barely prepared or not prepared at all. Objectives written in clinical judgment terms give faculty a shared language, which is one practical step toward the preparation those educators lacked.
Before and After
| Original objective | Problem | Rewritten objective | Level |
|---|---|---|---|
| Understand the pathophysiology of heart failure | "Understand" cannot be observed | Explain how reduced and preserved ejection fraction lead to the signs of left- and right-sided heart failure | Understand |
| Know the medications used for heart failure | "Know" cannot be observed; scope unclear | Identify the action and two priority nursing assessments for each of the four main classes of heart failure medications | Remember |
| Recognize, assess and manage fluid overload | Three behaviors in one objective | Recognize cues of worsening fluid overload in a patient's assessment, weight and laboratory data | Analyze (recognize cues) |
| Appreciate the importance of patient education | "Appreciate" is an internal state | Develop a discharge teaching plan on daily weights, sodium restriction and symptom reporting for a patient with heart failure | Create |
| Be familiar with heart failure classifications | Vague verb | Classify a patient's symptoms using the New York Heart Association functional classes | Apply |
| Provide safe care for heart failure patients | Too broad to assess | Prioritize nursing actions for a patient with acute decompensated heart failure | Evaluate (prioritize hypotheses, take action) |
Aligning Objectives With Standards and Assessments
The American Association of Colleges of Nursing (AACN, 2021) organizes entry-level nursing education into ten domains of competence. The rewritten objectives fall mainly within Domain 1, knowledge for nursing practice, and Domain 2, person-centered care, with the teaching plan reaching Domain 3, population health, through community resources. Each objective is matched with the assessment that will measure it.
| Rewritten objective (short form) | Essentials domain | Assessment |
|---|---|---|
| Explain heart failure pathophysiology | 1 | Two multiple-choice items |
| Identify medication actions and assessments | 1, 2 | Three multiple-choice items |
| Recognize cues of fluid overload | 2 | Case study with highlight and matrix items |
| Develop a discharge teaching plan | 2, 3 | Teaching plan graded with a rubric |
| Classify functional class | 1 | One multiple-choice item |
| Prioritize actions in decompensation | 2 | Bowtie item; clinical observation |
The alignment table exposes something the original objectives hid. Three of the six objectives now sit at the level of analysis or above, and those cannot be measured with recall questions. Ibrahim et al. (2026) synthesized 20 reviews covering more than 700 studies of competency-based assessment in nursing and found that such assessments mostly target the upper levels of Bloom's taxonomy; simulations and structured clinical examinations showed strong validity but demanded heavy resources, while workplace tools captured real performance but varied from one assessor to the next. Rewriting objectives, in other words, commits faculty to more demanding assessment, including case-based items and rubrics, and to training that helps them score those assessments consistently.
How Students Will Use the Objectives
Objectives guide students as much as faculty. The rewritten objectives will appear at the top of the unit's study guide, and each class session will begin by naming the objectives it addresses. Before the exam, students will receive a practice case built around the cue recognition and prioritization objectives, so that the item formats on the exam are not a surprise. After the exam, the item analysis will be reported to students by objective, showing the class which objectives were met and which need more work. Used this way, the objectives become a shared map of the unit rather than a list in the syllabus that no one reads.
What the Revision Requires Next
The rewritten objectives change three things in the unit. The unit exam must include case-based items for the cue recognition and prioritization objectives, which the next assignment on item writing will draft. The discharge teaching plan needs a rubric with levels tied to the objective's content, which Written Assignment 4 will build. Clinical instructors need to know which objectives they are observing, since the prioritization objective will also appear on the clinical evaluation tool.
Conclusion
An objective earns its place in a syllabus only when a teacher could watch a student meet it and two teachers would agree on what they saw. Rewritten with one observable behavior each, leveled by the revised taxonomy and stated in clinical judgment terms at the higher levels, the heart failure objectives now tell students what to learn and tell faculty what to test. The work of the rest of this course is to build assessments worthy of them. When the term closes, the faculty will revisit the objectives with the item analysis and student comments in hand, so that any objective students consistently misread can be clarified, with clearer wording or a worked example, before the course runs again.
References
American Association of Colleges of Nursing. (2021). The essentials: Core competencies for professional nursing education. https://www.aacnnursing.org/Portals/0/PDFs/Publications/Essentials-2021.pdf
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
Ibrahim, R. K., Darwish, A., Bayliss-Pratt, L., El-Ashry, A. M., Fouda, M. E., Elmi, A. H., Hendy, A., & Almagharbeh, W. T. (2026). Competency-based assessment in nursing education: An umbrella review of strengths and limitations. Nurse Education Today, 168, 107378. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2026.107378
McDonald, M. E. (2018). The nurse educator's guide to assessing learning outcomes (4th ed.). Jones & Bartlett Learning.
Pence, P. L., Brodersen, L. D., Chung, S. Y., Moran, V., & Kim, M. J. (2026). Study of nurse educators' preparedness to teach and assess clinical judgment in alignment with the Next-Generation NCLEX. Nurse Educator, 51(1), E78-E83. https://doi.org/10.1097/NNE.0000000000002024
What the NURS 766 Week 1 instructions ask
The first of five written assignments in NURS 766 is due in Module/Week 1, in the opening week, which also asks students to read McDonald's first two chapters, watch one presentation, post introductions and sign off on the requirements checklist. The course guide describes the five written assessments together: each is written in current APA format and focuses on one part of evaluation, beginning with learning objectives. The detailed prompt is posted in the course, so check its required length and sections before writing. Because every later assignment in the course builds on measurement, choosing a unit you actually teach, or expect to teach, gives you material you can reuse for items, rubrics and clinical tools.
How this NURS 766 Week 1 example is built
The sample opens with the course and unit and the problem with the existing objectives: several begin with "understand" or "know," which cannot be observed. A section on what an objective must contain draws on McDonald. The next sections explain cognitive levels using the revised taxonomy and add the clinical judgment model for higher levels. A table shows six original objectives beside their rewritten versions. A second table aligns each rewritten objective with an Essentials domain, a level and an assessment method. The paper ends with what the rewritten objectives demand of the unit's tests and clinical evaluation, setting up the item writing assignment the next week.
NURS 766 Week 1 grading rubric: where the points go
Expect a written assignment on objectives to be judged on correct use of the textbook's guidance, objectives that are measurable and leveled appropriately for the learners, alignment between objectives and assessment methods, use of current evidence, clear organization and graduate-level APA writing. Faculty read objectives closely: a single unmeasurable verb, or an objective that tries to measure two behaviors at once, is noticed. They also look for alignment, meaning that an objective written at the application or analysis level is not tested only with recall questions. Showing the revision process, from a weak objective to a strong one, demonstrates understanding better than listing finished objectives alone.
NURS 766 Week 1 help: mistakes that cost points
Start from objectives you already have, since repairing real objectives teaches more than writing new ones from nothing. Test each verb by asking whether you could watch or read a student doing it. Keep one behavior per objective, and set the level to match what students will actually be asked to do on the exam or in clinical. Use a table for the objectives so the prose can explain your choices, and show at least one objective before and after revision so the reader can see your reasoning at work. Cite McDonald for the rules and a recent article for why clinical judgment matters now. Before submitting, compare your objectives with your last exam: if most questions test recall, either the objectives or the exam needs to change.
Related NURS 766 sample papers
Other NURS 766 weeks
- NURS 766 Week 2: Item Writing
- NURS 766 Week 3: Appraising Item Varieties
- NURS 766 Week 4: Developing a Rubric
- NURS 766 Week 5: Test Administration Paper
- NURS 766 Week 6: Philosophy of Grading Paper
- NURS 766 Week 7: Assessing Clinical Learning
- NURS 766 Week 8: Clinical Evaluation Tool
More PhD in Nursing sample papers
NURS 766 Week 1 questions, answered
What is NURS 766 Written Assignment 1?
The 75-point Module/Week 1 written assessment in Liberty's PhD course on nursing evaluation, focused on writing and analyzing learning objectives, in current APA format.
Where can I find a free NURS 766 Week 1 sample paper?
A full NURS 766 Week 1 paper on learning objectives for a heart failure unit appears on this page, before-and-after table included, free for students to read.
What makes a learning objective measurable?
It names one observable behavior with an action verb, such as prioritize, calculate or explain, and could be checked by a test item, a rubric or an instructor's observation.
What is the revised Bloom's taxonomy?
Anderson and Krathwohl's 2001 revision, which names six cognitive processes from remember to create and pairs them with types of knowledge, used to set the level of objectives.
Why use the NCSBN clinical judgment model in objectives?
Its steps, such as recognizing cues, prioritizing hypotheses and taking action, describe observable thinking that matches what the Next Generation NCLEX measures.
Use it as a model, or ask for your own
This paper is an original model written by our desk for study. It is not a submitted student paper and not an official Liberty University document. Read it for structure and reasoning, then write your own to the instructions in your Canvas course. If you want a version built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.
Ask for a custom NURS 766 Week 1 sample · All NURS 766 weeks · All courses