NU703 Unit 10 Doctoral Development Portfolio Example

Judged by What Changes in a System: A Doctoral Development Portfolio With a Scholarly Identity Statement, a Ten-Domain Matrix to Graduation, Captioned Artifacts and a Rewritten CV

[Student Name]

Purdue University Global

NU703: Professional Role Development of the DNP-Prepared Nurse

Unit 10 Doctoral Development Portfolio

[Instructor Name]

[Date]

The author, artifacts and plans are composite; dates and counts are bracketed.

Index

The portfolio contains six sections: the scholarly identity statement, the domain matrix, the captioned artifacts, the CV excerpt, the mentorship plan and the reassessment schedule. Each section begins on a new page, and the artifacts are numbered so the matrix can refer to them.

Section 1: Scholarly Identity Statement

When I began this course, I wrote in my Unit 1 post that the doctorate would make me responsible for the patients who never reach my exam room. I still believe that, but I would now say it differently. I am becoming a practice scholar, a nurse practitioner whose scholarly work is judged by what changes in a system of care, not by what I discover or by how well I care for one patient at a time.

This term showed me what that means in practice. Comparing the two doctorates taught me that my questions are about how to make known interventions work in a setting, not whether they work at all. Placing my project in Boyer's four forms of scholarship (Boyer, 1990) showed me that my work is application and integration, and that the discovery quadrant is left almost bare by design. My competency self-assessment showed that my clinical expertise does not transfer to the domains of systems, informatics and scholarship, where I am a beginner. And revising a single paragraph in the writing seminar showed me how often I had written what I wished the evidence said.

I am becoming a nurse practitioner whose work will be judged not by the visits I complete but by what changes in the system after I leave it.

The rest of this portfolio is evidence for that sentence and a plan to make it more true by graduation. An electronic portfolio of this kind lets a doctoral student show individual experiences, provide an objective record of achievement and demonstrate how the core doctoral competencies are integrated within a specialty (Moriber et al., 2014). I have organized mine around the ten domains of the 2021 Essentials (American Association of Colleges of Nursing, 2021).

Section 2: The Domain Matrix

The matrix has one row for each of the ten domains and three columns: evidence from this term, evidence planned during the project courses, and the target at graduation. Three rows illustrate how it works.

For Scholarship for the Nursing Discipline, this term's evidence is the Unit 5 literature synthesis, artifact 5. The planned evidence is an abstract on my DNP project submitted to a regional conference in [year]. The target at graduation is a manuscript submitted to a practice journal.

For Systems-Based Practice, this term's evidence is limited to the Unit 7 leadership statement, artifact 7, which maps where decisions sit in a network but analyzes no costs. The planned evidence is a cost analysis of a clinical workflow within my project. The target at graduation is a redesign proposal accepted by my organization's leadership.

For Person-Centered Care, this term's evidence is strong: a peer review summary and the Unit 4 self-assessment, artifact 4. The planned evidence is a patient advisory review of my project materials. The target is to maintain an expert rating while adding evidence from the project itself.

The other seven rows follow the same pattern, and the rows with the weakest evidence now, including Informatics and Healthcare Technologies, carry the most specific plans.

Section 3: Captioned Artifacts

Eight papers from the term are included, each with a two-line caption stating what it demonstrates. The Unit 2 role comparison, for example, is captioned as showing that I can distinguish research from quality improvement and choose methods accordingly. The Unit 9 problem statement is captioned as showing that I can define a practice problem with a measurable gap and without committing to a solution. Captions are written in the first person and limited to one claim each, so that a reviewer can check whether the artifact supports it.

Section 4: The CV, Before and After

My old CV was a clinical résumé: positions, certifications and clinical skills, in date order. The revised excerpt adds headings that doctoral readers look for: scholarship, presentations, professional service and quality improvement. Some headings are nearly empty, which is honest. Under professional service, the only entry is my role as a clinical preceptor, and under presentations there is nothing yet. The revision makes visible what the next two years must fill.

Section 5: Mentorship Plan

I have identified mentors by role rather than by name. A faculty mentor will guide the design of my DNP project. A practice mentor, a doctorally prepared nurse leader in my organization, will help me understand its systems and budgets. A peer mentor, a classmate a year ahead, will share what the project courses demand. I will meet the faculty mentor monthly, the practice mentor every [six] weeks, and the peer mentor as needed.

Section 6: Reassessment Schedule

I will repeat the competency self-assessment from Unit 4 at the end of each academic year until the project courses end, keeping the Unit 4 evidence rule unchanged. After each reassessment I will update the matrix and revise the identity statement if the evidence no longer supports it.

References

American Association of Colleges of Nursing. (2021). The essentials: Core competencies for professional nursing education.

Boyer, E. L. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate. Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.

Moriber, N. A., Wallace-Kazer, M., Shea, J., Grossman, S., Wheeler, K., & Conelius, J. (2014). Transforming doctoral education through the clinical electronic portfolio. Nurse Educator, 39(5), 221-226. https://doi.org/10.1097/NNE.0000000000000053