Boyer's four scholarships, applied to one nurse manager's mobility project, show in NU703's Unit 3 paper where practice-based work belongs and how it becomes scholarship through peer review. Searches like "nu 703 unit 3 assignment example", "nu703 unit 3 sample" and "nu703 unit 3 example" land here.
What a finished NU703 Unit 3 scholarship model application looks like
A four-quadrant figure and a standards table sit inside five APA pages. The introduction cites Boyer's 1990 Carnegie report, Scholarship Reconsidered, and summarizes its four forms in a sentence each: discovery, integration, application and teaching, with application later described as engagement. The figure places each planned activity in a quadrant: a synthesis of mobility literature across nursing, physical therapy and geriatrics under integration; the protocol, staff roles and outcome tracking under application; a competency module for aides under teaching; and, under discovery, only a note that any new knowledge would come through partnership with a nurse scientist. A table then tests the project against the six standards of Glassick, Huber and Maeroff (1997), from clear goals to reflective critique. A conclusion connects the pattern to AACN's position on defining scholarship.
How a NU703 Unit 3 example is structured
The paper treats Boyer as a tool for locating work, not a list to be filled evenly. Its introduction explains why a practice doctorate needs such a tool: without it, implementation work is easily dismissed as project management rather than scholarship. Each quadrant receives a paragraph naming the activity, the product it will leave behind, and who could review it. The near-empty discovery quadrant gets the longest paragraph, since explaining why the manager is not generating new knowledge is the paper's most doctoral move. The Glassick standards then answer a skeptic's question, what makes this work scholarly at all, by showing each standard met or planned: goals stated, preparation through the integration review, methods drawn from improvement science, results measured, presentation at a regional conference, and critique in a closing reflection. That pattern is finally tied to the 2021 Essentials domain on scholarship.
Boyer as a map
The four scholarships are summarized from the 1990 report in a sentence each, with engagement noted as Boyer's later term for application. The paper uses them to locate work, not to rank it.
Integration: three disciplines read together
Mobility studies from nursing, physical therapy and geriatric medicine are synthesized into one practice rationale. The product is a review a colleague could evaluate, which is what places it among the scholarships.
Application: the unit as the site
The protocol, aide roles, a daily mobility goal and outcome tracking form the project's core. The paragraph names falls as a balancing measure and length of stay as an outcome, with baselines bracketed.
A nearly empty quadrant
Discovery holds only a planned partnership with a nurse scientist. Explaining that absence shows the author understands the practice doctorate's focus and does not overclaim a research role.
Six standards applied
Glassick, Huber and Maeroff's standards, from clear goals to reflective critique, are each matched to a feature of the project. The table answers the question of what makes implementation work scholarly.
Where marks go in NU703 Unit 3
Boyer's model has to be used accurately before anything else in this NU703 paper counts, and one that misnames the four forms, dates the model wrongly or treats teaching as classroom work only has misread its source. Application to a real project with named products is where credit accrues; a summary of the four scholarships followed by a paragraph of intentions reads as a literature note. Forcing activity into every quadrant is a subtler error, since claiming discovery for implementation work overstates the practice doctorate. The link between scholarship and dissemination matters: work that stays inside one unit, never reviewed or shared, is hard to call scholarship at all, and a paper silent on peer review misses that point. Sources beyond Boyer, such as the Glassick standards or AACN's statement on scholarship, generally strengthen the analysis.
Get a NU703 Unit 3 example written to your instructions
Share a practice project you are considering, even at the idea stage, along with the Unit 3 prompt and its rubric. The paper locates each part of that project in Boyer's model, explains any quadrant left thin, and tests the work against published standards for scholarship. The first request costs nothing; allow 24-48h.
NU703 Unit 3 questions, answered
What are Boyer's four scholarships?
Ernest Boyer's 1990 report for the Carnegie Foundation, Scholarship Reconsidered, described discovery (generating new knowledge), integration (connecting knowledge across disciplines), application (using knowledge to address real problems, later often called engagement) and teaching (transmitting and transforming knowledge). Nursing adopted the model widely, and AACN has drawn on it in defining scholarship for academic nursing.
Does DNP work count as scholarship?
It can, when it meets the standards that define scholarship generally: clear goals, adequate preparation, appropriate methods, significant results, effective presentation and reflective critique, as Glassick and colleagues described in 1997. Making the work public and open to peer review is central. A paper that shows how a project will meet those standards makes the case far better than one that simply asserts it.
Should every quadrant of the model contain an activity?
Not necessarily. Many DNP projects sit mainly in application and integration, with teaching as a secondary product. Leaving discovery thin, and explaining why, often shows better understanding than forcing a research claim into it. If your prompt requires all four, describe realistic contributions, such as partnering with a nurse scientist, rather than inventing a study.