| Course | NUR 635 Teaching and Learning for Nurse Educator |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 7 |
| Paper type | Milestone: assessment plan with blueprint and item analysis |
| Length | About 1,040 words, 6 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Southern New Hampshire University |
| Program | MSN |
| Updated | September 2026 |
Free sample paper for NUR 635 Module 7
Milestone Three: Blueprinting, Writing and Analyzing the Assessment for the Anticoagulant Safety Lesson
[Student Name]
Southern New Hampshire University
NUR 635: Teaching and Learning for Nurse Educator
Milestone Three
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
The organization, setting and figures below are a composite written as a model document. No real employer, client, colleague or patient is described.
Milestone Three: Blueprinting, Writing and Analyzing the Assessment for the Anticoagulant Safety Lesson
A test is a claim about what students have learned. If it overrepresents easy recall, contains flawed items or is never checked after it is given, the claim is weak, and grades reward the wrong things. This milestone plans the assessment for the anticoagulant safety lesson in three stages: a blueprint built from the objectives, rules for writing and reviewing items and an analysis of the results before grades are final. It argues that assessment designed and checked this way will measure the safety knowledge and judgment the lesson aims to build, and will be fairer to all students.
The Blueprint
A test blueprint is a table that allocates items to objectives and cognitive levels in proportion to their importance. The anticoagulant exam will have 30 items. The learner assessment found that students' main weakness was applying knowledge, so the blueprint weights higher levels accordingly: about a third of items at remember and understand, for the objectives on monitoring tests and why direct oral anticoagulants generally need no routine monitoring; about a third at apply, for selecting reversal agents and carrying out pre-administration checks; and about a third at analyze and evaluate, for distinguishing when to hold a dose and judging a discharge plan. Each objective receives at least four items so that a single flawed item does not decide whether an objective has been met. Placing items by level follows the revised Bloom's taxonomy, whose cognitive process dimension runs from remember to create (Krathwohl, 2002).
Writing the Items
A review of item-writing guidelines, drawn from textbooks and research on classroom assessment, identified practices supported by evidence or broad consensus (Haladyna et al., 2002). The anticoagulant items will follow several of them. Each stem will pose a clear question and contain the central idea, so that a student could answer before reading the options. Items will avoid negative wording such as not and except, and will avoid options such as all of the above. Options will be similar in length and grammatical form, so that the correct answer does not stand out. Distractors will be plausible, drawn from the misconceptions found in the pretest, such as choosing the INR to monitor heparin. Vocabulary will be simple except for the nursing terms being tested, which the previous milestone showed matters for multilingual students. Application and analysis items will present brief patient scenarios, mirroring the case-based format of the licensure examination.
Review Before Use
Before the exam, each item will be reviewed by a second faculty member and by the clinical pharmacist who reviewed the pretest. The reviewers will check accuracy, match to the intended objective and level, clarity of wording and the presence of any cue that gives away the answer. A draft item that asked which anticoagulant requires aPTT monitoring and listed heparin as the only option with an abbreviation beside it, for example, would be revised because the format cues the answer. Items will be kept in a secure bank with their objective, level and later statistics recorded.
Fairness also shapes the testing conditions. The six students with documented accommodations will test with extended time in a quieter room, as their accommodation plans specify. The exam will be given on the learning management system with the same item order randomized across students, which reduces the chance of copying without disadvantaging anyone. Students will receive the blueprint, though not the items, two weeks before the exam, so they know how the test is weighted and can focus their preparation on application rather than memorizing lists. Sharing the blueprint is a deliberate choice: it signals what matters and discourages the belief that success depends on guessing what the instructor will ask.
Assessing Skills and Attitudes
Written items cannot measure everything the lesson intends. The psychomotor objective, carrying out a pre-administration check for enoxaparin, will be assessed at a skills station where each student reviews a simulated chart and states whether to give the dose, rated on a checklist of platelet count, renal function, procedure timing and dose. The attitude the lesson hopes to build, holding firm on a safety concern when someone pushes back, will be assessed in a three-minute role-play with a faculty member playing a hurried staff nurse, rated as met or not met on whether the student holds the dose and explains why. These assessments are formative in this course, with feedback given immediately, because their purpose is to build habits before students reach the medical-surgical rotation.
Analyzing the Results
After the exam, and before grades are released, the results will be analyzed item by item. A guide to post-examination analysis describes the core statistics (Tavakol & Dennick, 2011). Item difficulty, simply the share of the class that got an item right, flags questions that nearly everyone or nearly no one answered correctly. The discrimination index, which compares the performance of higher- and lower-scoring students on each item, shows whether an item separates students who have learned the material from those who have not; items with negative discrimination, where lower scorers do better, usually signal a flaw such as an ambiguous stem or a wrong key. Distractor analysis shows whether each wrong option attracted some students; a distractor no one chooses adds nothing. Finally, a reliability coefficient for the whole test, such as Cronbach's alpha, estimates how consistently the items measure the same body of knowledge. Items with negative discrimination or keying errors will be reviewed, and flawed items will be credited to all students or removed before scores are finalized.
Using the Results for Teaching
Item analysis also informs teaching. If most students miss the items on neuraxial timing, the lesson's case segment on that topic needs revision next term. Results will be compared with the pretest to see which misconceptions were corrected and which persisted, and the spaced retrieval quizzes will be adjusted to target those that remain.
Conclusion
The anticoagulant assessment will be built from a blueprint weighted toward application, written and reviewed against evidence-based guidelines, supplemented by performance checks for skills and attitudes and analyzed before grades are released. Designed and checked this way, the test becomes a credible claim about whether students can give these high-risk drugs safely.
References
Haladyna, T. M., Downing, S. M., & Rodriguez, M. C. (2002). A review of multiple-choice item-writing guidelines for classroom assessment. Applied Measurement in Education, 15(3), 309-333. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15324818AME1503_5
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom's taxonomy: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(4), 212-218. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2
Tavakol, M., & Dennick, R. (2011). Post-examination analysis of objective tests. Medical Teacher, 33(6), 447-458. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2011.564682
What the NUR 635 Module 7 instructions ask for
Milestone Three of the NUR 635 teaching plan asks how you will assess learning: the assessment methods, how they align with your objectives and how you will judge their quality. Some prompts ask for a test blueprint, sample items or a rubric, and some ask specifically about item analysis. Expect three to five pages in APA 7, with a blueprint table or appendix. Build the blueprint from your objectives and their cognitive levels, follow evidence-based item-writing rules, use performance assessments for skills and attitudes, plan a review before the test and an item analysis after it and explain what you will do with flawed items, since assessment plans are graded on alignment, quality control and fairness. Share the blueprint with students.
How this NUR 635 Module 7 milestone three example is built
This sample plans a 30-item exam for a composite anticoagulant lesson, weighted about a third each to remember and understand, apply and analyze and evaluate, with at least four items per objective, following the revised taxonomy. Item-writing rules from the Haladyna review include clear stems, no negatives, plausible distractors drawn from pretest misconceptions and simple wording for multilingual students. A pharmacist and a colleague review items for accuracy and cueing. A skills checklist and a pressure role-play assess the psychomotor and affective objectives. Post-exam analysis of difficulty, discrimination, distractors and reliability follows Tavakol and Dennick, and results feed back into teaching next term, with accommodations and a shared blueprint supporting fairness.
Where the NUR 635 Module 7 rubric puts the points
When NUR 635 instructors grade an assessment plan, they look first at whether each assessment matches an objective, appropriate methods for different kinds of learning, item quality, fairness, quality control through review and analysis and APA 7 writing. High-scoring plans include a blueprint that allocates items by objective and cognitive level, apply specific item-writing rules and explain difficulty, discrimination and reliability correctly. Graders reward plans that handle flawed items fairly before grades are final and that use results to improve teaching. Including performance assessments for skills and attitudes shows that assessment was matched to the kind of learning, not only to what is easiest to test.
NUR 635 Module 7 help: the mistakes that cost points
Assessment plans lose points when tests are built without a blueprint, when all items test recall, when item-writing flaws such as negative stems and cueing are ignored, when skills are assessed only with written items or when no analysis happens after the test. Another frequent gap is misdefining item statistics. Blueprint by objective and level, write items against evidence-based guidelines, review them before use, add performance assessments where needed, analyze difficulty, discrimination, distractors and reliability and correct flawed items before grading. If your plan uses rubrics for papers or clinical evaluation instead, send the milestone guidelines and objectives for a plan built around those tools.
Get NUR 635 Module 7 written to your instructions
Send your objectives, any draft items and the milestone guidelines, along with the rubric. The plan you receive will include a blueprint by objective and level, item-writing and review rules, performance assessments and a post-exam analysis plan, within 24 to 48 hours, free of charge the first time. The paper above is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Southern New Hampshire University document.
More NUR 635 papers and related MSN samples
- NUR 635 Module 1 Discussion: The Learning Styles Myth
- NUR 635 Module 2 Theory Comparison: Four Learning Theories, One Skill
- NUR 635 Module 3 Milestone One: Learner Assessment for Anticoagulant Safety
- NUR 635 Module 4 Objectives Paper: Objectives With the Revised Bloom's Taxonomy
- NUR 635 Module 5 Milestone Two: Retrieval, Spacing and a Real Near-Miss
- NUR 635 Module 6 Diverse Learners Paper: Teaching Multilingual Nursing Students Fairly
- NUR 603 Module 4 Study Design Critique: Vitamin D Cohorts Versus the VITAL Trial
- NUR 602 Module 1 Discussion: Prescribing When Trials Left the Patient Out
- NUR 502 Module 5 Evaluation of Learning Paper
- NUR 530 Module 8 Stakeholder Memo: A Memo to Senior Leaders Requesting Support for a Discharge Pilot
NUR 635 Module 7 questions, answered
Where can I find a free NUR 635 Module 7 Milestone Three sample?
A full assessment milestone is shown here: a 30-item anticoagulant test blueprint, item-writing and review rules, performance checks and a post-exam item analysis plan.
What is a test blueprint?
A table that allocates test items to objectives and cognitive levels in proportion to their importance, so the test reflects what the lesson intended students to learn.
What are good rules for writing multiple-choice items?
Put the central idea in the stem, avoid negative wording and all of the above, keep options similar in length and form, use plausible distractors and keep vocabulary simple except for tested terms.
What do difficulty and discrimination indices show?
Difficulty is the proportion of students answering correctly. Discrimination shows whether an item separates higher and lower scorers; negative values usually signal a flawed item.
What should faculty do with flawed test items?
Review items with negative discrimination or keying errors before grades are released, and credit them to all students or remove them if they are flawed.