Improvement Plan In-Service Presentation Guide
Part 5 asks how you would collect feedback and use it. Most decks end with 'any questions?', which is not a feedback mechanism.
Editorial process
Last reviewed · August 16, 2026
Five parts, and the feedback part is the one asked about
This assessment builds on your own earlier improvement plan, so the in-service has a specific job: not to teach medication safety in general but to equip this audience to carry out that plan. That distinction should be visible on the first slide. The audience is staff nurses, which sets the register — they know the clinical content and need the change, the reason, and their part in it. Speaker's notes are required and they are marked, so write what you would actually say rather than expanding the bullet points; a note that repeats the slide tells an assessor you did not think about delivery. Eight to fourteen slides across five parts leaves roughly two or three slides each, which forces the discipline the assignment is really teaching: an in-service is a working session, not a lecture, and the interactive element belongs on the timeline rather than at the end if there is time.
Part 5 is the question the discussion asks about, and it needs a mechanism rather than an intention. Soliciting feedback means saying who is asked, when, how, and about what: a one-minute anonymous card at the end asking what will be hardest to do on Monday; a short confidence rating before and after so you can see whether the session moved anything; a follow-up check with the unit council at two weeks; observation of the practice change itself, which is the only feedback that measures transfer rather than satisfaction. Then answer the second half, integration, which is where most answers stop. Feedback that changes nothing is a survey. Say who reviews it, on what cycle, and what would trigger a revision to the plan or a repeat session — and account for the time, because the assignment reminds you to allow for activity and discussion, and a fourteen-slide deck with a five-minute slot for feedback has not.
Likely learning objectives
Inferred from the brief — check these against your own rubric.
- 01Design an in-service around a specific improvement plan rather than a topic.
- 02Write speaker's notes that add delivery rather than repeat slides.
- 03Specify a feedback mechanism with audience, timing and method.
- 04Describe how feedback is integrated, by whom and on what cycle.
Read the full question
Review every instruction before using the planning guidance that follows.
Turn the brief into deliverables
- 018-14 slides with thorough speaker's notes.
- 02The purpose and goals of the session.
- 03The evidence and rationale for the improvement plan.
- 04An interactive activity with time allocated.
- 05A feedback mechanism with who, when, how and about what.
- 06An integration plan naming reviewers and triggers.
Purpose, evidence, activity, then feedback and integration
Purpose and what changes on Monday
State the plan and what staff will do differently.
Why: the evidence and the local data
Give the rationale from evidence and from your own setting.
The change, step by step
Walk staff through the new process.
Interactive activity
Design a practice or simulation element with time allocated.
Soliciting feedback
Specify who, when, how and about what.
Integrating feedback
Say who reviews it and what triggers a change.
Evidence for in-service design, not just for the topic
Recommended databases
- AHRQ Patient Safety Network
- NCBI Bookshelf
- PubMed Central
- Your own Assessment 2 plan
Search sequence
- 1.Reread your own improvement plan; the in-service has to serve it.
- 2.Search for in-service and staff education effectiveness evidence.
- 3.Look for evaluation levels that distinguish satisfaction from behaviour change.
- 4.Find local data from your own unit if you can use it.
Reference shortlist
These are authoritative starting points, not a ready-made bibliography. A qualified reviewer must confirm that each source fits the assignment and supports the claim beside which it is cited.
Nothing here is cleared for citation until you have read it.
- 01
TEACHING & LEARNING
Nursing Advanced Skills, Open RN, NCBI Bookshelf · 2024
Teaching and learning design, including evaluating whether learning transferred.
- 02
Medication Errors and Adverse Drug Events
AHRQ Patient Safety Network · 2024
The evidence base your improvement plan rests on.
- 03
Section 4: Ways To Approach the Quality Improvement Process
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality · 2024
The improvement cycle feedback should feed back into.
- 04
Continuous Quality Improvement
StatPearls, NCBI Bookshelf · 2023
Continuous improvement, for the integration half of Part 5.
- 05
Interactive Evidence-Based Pressure Injury Education Program for Hospice Nursing: A Quality Improvement Project
Journal of Wound, Ostomy and Continence Nursing · 2022
An education intervention evaluated as a quality improvement project.
Review before submission
Common mistakes
- Teaching the clinical topic instead of the improvement plan.
- Writing speaker's notes that restate the slide text.
- Offering 'questions at the end' as the feedback mechanism.
- Leaving no time for the activity and discussion the assignment requires.
Submission checklist
- Is the session about your own improvement plan?
- Do the speaker's notes say what you would actually say?
- Does the feedback mechanism specify timing and method?
- Is there a stated trigger for revising the plan?
Use this guide to plan and review your own work. Follow your institution's rules and read our academic-integrity policy.

Written by
Aaron Bishop
MA, Education
assignment interpretation and research-methods coaching across disciplines
Aaron leads the EssayCrackers editorial desk. He works on how assignment briefs are read — what a rubric is actually asking for, and where students most often answer a different question than the one set.

Reviewed by
Dr. Nathan Cole
PhD, Rhetoric & Composition
Argumentation and thesis development
Nathan teaches first-year composition and directs a university writing center. He reviews EssayCrackers guides for argumentative soundness and citation accuracy.