Want create site? With Free visual composer you can do it easy.

Discussion: Factors That Influence the Development of Psychopathology

Discussion: Factors That Influence the Development of Psychopathology

https://nursingassignmentcrackers.com/discussion-factors-that-influence-the-development-of-psychopathology/

WEEK 1 DISCUSSION

Introduction

Psychopathology involves the scientific study of mental conditions. Psychopathology helps in understanding how the mind of an individual works. There are various ways an individual may develop mental disorders; thus, the study of psychopathology helps understand how an individual develops mental disorders (Beauchaine, Constantino & Hayden, 2018). Psychopathology research seeks to present a better idea of how the various mental conditions need to be treated (Wright & Woods, 2020). Moreover, this study involves the study of mental illnesses and covers the treatment or diagnosis of mental illnesses. This paper will examine the factors that influence the development of psychopathology, including psychological, biological, social, interpersonal, and cultural factors.

Discussion: Factors That Influence the Development of Psychopathology

Biological Factors

The influence of biological factors on the development of psychopathology has been developed for some time. It is estimated that at least 40-70 percent of mental health disorders are linked to genetic factors (Ota et al., 2020). The clinician, therefore, needs to understand a patient’s family history of mental disorders to assist in treatment and diagnosis. For instance, gene expression has been found in various psychiatric disorders, including bipolar disorder, major depressive disorder, schizophrenia, alcoholism, and an autism spectrum disorder.

Research shows a connection between epigenetics and neurobiology that impact the development of a psychiatric disorder (Shrivastava, De Sousa & Lodha, 2019). Epigenetic mechanisms including histone modification and DNA methylation tend to determine the gene activity. The mental disorders may also result from the alternation of the gene expression in pathways. The environment also affects gene expression.

Psychological Factors

Also, the development of psychopathology is influenced by psychological factors. Psychological factors that result from stress and life experiences risk an individual developing mental disorder. Moreover, individuals genetically vulnerable to certain mental disorders are likely to develop a psychiatric disorder due to negative thinking. Various internal psychological factors influence the development of psychopathology (Malim, 2017). For instance, the various parts of the brain are known to influence psychology. The limbic system regulates anxiety, fear, or emotional response linked to anxiety disorders, post-traumatic stress disorders, and depression. Moreover, the factors related to psychological development influence psychopathology. For example, puberty timing can result in depression among adolescents.

Social/ Cultural/ Interpersonal Factors

Various external factors such as social influence, interpersonal relationships, and culture impact the development of psychopathology. Pediatrics or adolescents exposed to external factors such as domestic violence and maltreatment are at an increased risk of developing various psychiatric conditions (McCrory, Gerin & Viding, 2017). Moreover, growing in an environment with limited economic resources may influence the development of psychopathology. Poor interpersonal relationships that result in isolation by peers may influence the development of psychopathology (Luyten, 2017). Different cultures have diverse views regarding the development of mental conditions (Moleiro, 2018). Cultural factors affect how an individual deals with certain mental illnesses (Cheung & Mak, 2018). For instance, in some cultures, mental illnesses may be linked to evil spirits. Moreover, some people such as the immigrant’s may suffer difficulty adapting to new cultures, which in turn contributes to the development of psychopathology.

Conclusion

In conclusion, psychopathology impacts how individuals react in real-life situations since the body is closely related to the mind. Psychopathology impacts the functioning of an individual’s mind. The study of psychopathology helps to understand how an individual develops various mental disorders. Understanding the development of psychopathology helps the medical practitioner develop a treatment plan and diagnosis of a patient. As a nurse practitioner, there is a need to consider the psychological, cultural, social, interpersonal, and biological factors that influence the development of psychopathology.

 

References

Beauchaine, T. P., Constantino, J. N., & Hayden, E. P. (2018). Psychiatry and developmental psychopathology: Unifying themes and future directions. Comprehensive psychiatry87, 143-152.

Cheung, F. M., & Mak, W. W. (2018). Sociocultural factors in psychopathology.

Luyten, P. (2017). Personality, psychopathology, and health through the lens of interpersonal relatedness and self-definition. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 65(3), 473-489.

Malim, T. (2017). Introductory psychology. Macmillan International Higher Education.

McCrory, E. J., Gerin, M. I., & Viding, E. (2017). Annual research review: childhood maltreatment, latent vulnerability and the shift to preventative psychiatry–the contribution of functional brain imaging. Journal of child psychology and psychiatry58(4), 338-357.

Moleiro, C. (2018). Culture and psychopathology: New perspectives on research, practice, and clinical training in a globalized world. Frontiers in psychiatry, 9, 366.

Ota, V. K., Santoro, M. L., Spindola, L. M., Pan, P. M., Simabucuro, A., Xavier, G., … & Belangero, S. I. (2020). Gene expression changes associated with trajectories of psychopathology in a longitudinal cohort of children and adolescents. Translational psychiatry10(1), 1-9.

Shrivastava, A., De Sousa, A., & Lodha, P. (2019). Resilience as a psychopathological construct for psychiatric disorders. In Frontiers in Psychiatry (pp. 479-489). Springer, Singapore.

Wright, A. G., & Woods, W. C. (2020). Personalized models of psychopathology. Annual review of clinical psychology, 16, 49-74.

In many realms of medicine, objective diagnoses can be made: A clavicula is broken.  An infection is present. TSH levels meet the diagnostic criteria for hypothyroidism. Psychiatry, on the other hand, deals with psychological phenomena and behaviors. Can these, too, be “defined objectively and by scientific criteria (Gergen, 1985), or are they social constructions?” (Sadock et al., 2015).

Thanks to myriad advances during recent decades, we know that psychopathology is caused by many interacting factors. Theoretical and clinical contributions to the field have come from the neural sciences, genetics, psychology, and social-cultural sciences. How do these factors impact the expression, classification, diagnosis, and prevalence of psychopathology, and why might it be important for a nurse practitioner to take a multidimensional, integrative approach?

To Prepare:

  • Review this week’s Learning Resources, considering the many interacting factors that contribute to the development of psychopathology.
  • Consider how theoretical perspective on psychopathology impacts the work of the PMHNP.
By Day 3 of Week 1

Explain the biological (genetic and neuroscientific); psychological (behavioral and cognitive processes, emotional, developmental); and social, cultural, and interpersonal factors that influence the development of psychopathology.

Read
 a selection of your colleagues’ responses

By Day 6 of Week 1

Respond to at least two of your colleagues on 2 different days by explaining the implications of why, as an advanced practice nurse, it is important to adopt a multidimensional, integrative model of psychopathology.

Note: For this Discussion, you are required to complete your initial post before you will be able to view and respond to your colleagues’ postings. Begin by clicking on the “Post to Discussion Question” link, and then select “Create Thread” to complete your initial post. Remember, once you click on Submit, you cannot delete or edit your own posts, and you cannot post anonymously. Please check your post carefully before clicking on Submit!

Submission and Grading Information

Grading Criteria

To access your rubric:

Week 1 Discussion Rubric

Post by Day 3 of Week 1 and Respond by Day 6 of Week 1

To Participate in this Discussion:

Week 1 Discussion


Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS:Discussion: Factors That Influence the Development of Psychopathology

In Week 2, you will be introduced to assessment and diagnosis of the psychiatric patient. You will explore elements of the psychiatric

Discussion Factors That Influence the Development of Psychopathology

Discussion Factors That Influence the Development of Psychopathology

interview, history, and examination as well as psychiatric rating scales. You also will review the classification system of psychiatric disorders in the DSM-5 and the role the DSM-5 plays in diagnosis.

Photo Credit: [BrianAJackson]/[iStock / Getty Images Plus]/Getty Images

Practicum – Upcoming Deadline

In the Nurse Practitioner programs of study (FNP, AGACNP, AGPCNP, and PMHNP) you are required to take several practicum courses. If you plan on taking a practicum course within the next two terms, you will need to submit your application via Meditrek .

For information on the practicum application process and deadlines, please visit the Field Experience: College of Nursing: Application Process – Graduate web page.

Please take the time to review the Appropriate Preceptors and Field Sites for your courses.

Please take the time to review the practicum manuals, FAQs, Webinars and any required forms on the Field Experience: College of Nursing: Student Resources and Manuals web page.

Next Week

To go to the next week:

Week 1: History and Theories of Psychopathology
The history of the diagnosis of mental disorders is fraught with examples of how cultural norms and prejudices interfere with and warp a diagnosis. The result is that normal behavior and orientations have been pathologized as an illness or disease. An example of this would be the story of Alan Turing, the famous British computer scientist of the 20th century, who was instrumental in inventing modern computers and deciphering German code in World War II. He was convicted in 1952 in England of gross indecency for being gay. Turing was forced by the courts to undergo 12 months of hormone therapy and could no longer work for the British government. At the time, homosexuality was pathologized as a mental disorder in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders and was criminalized in most Western countries. It was not until 1973 that the American Psychiatric Association (APA) finally removed homosexuality from the DSM.
Historically, the process of rendering a diagnosis has been used to pathologize those who fell outside what was considered the cultural norm of human behavior. This process often marginalized diagnosed populations and prevented individuals from receiving appropriate care. It is of utmost importance to consider cultural issues that influence how you as a clinician interpret a client’s behavior and how cultural issues influence how a client may express behavior. This week, you explore the history of psychopathology and the evolution of theoretical perspectives in the field. Discussion: Factors That Influence the Development of Psychopathology

Learning Objective
Students will:

Analyze historical and currently recognized biological, psychological, and sociocultural factors that inform the expression, course, and prevalence of psychopathology
Learning Resources
Required Readings (click to expand/reduce)

Sadock, B. J., Sadock, V. A., & Ruiz, P. (2015). Kaplan & Sadock’s synopsis of psychiatry (11th ed.). Wolters Kluwer.

Chapter 1, Neural Sciences
Chapter 2, Contributions of the Psychosocial Sciences
Chapter 3, Contributions of the Sociocultural Sciences
Chapter 4, Theories of Personality and Psychopathology
Chapter 31.17c, Child Psychiatry: Other Conditions: Identity Problem
Butcher, J. N., & Kendall, P. C. (2018). Introduction to childhood and adolescent psychopathology. In J. N. Butcher & P. C. Kendall (Eds.), APA handbook of psychopathology: Child and adolescent psychopathology., Vol. 2. (pp. 3–14). American Psychological Association. https://doi-org.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/10.1037/0000065-001

Cheung, F. M., & Mak, W. W. S. (2018). Sociocultural factors in psychopathology. In J. N. Butcher & J. M. Hooley (Eds.), APA handbook of psychopathology: Psychopathology: Understanding, assessing, and treating adult mental disorders., Vol. 1. (pp. 127–147). American Psychological Association. https://doi-org.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/10.1037/0000064-006

Jackson, C. E., & Milberg, W. P. (2018). Examination of neurological and neuropsychological features in psychopathology. In J. N. Butcher & J. M. Hooley (Eds.), APA handbook of psychopathology: Psychopathology: Understanding, assessing, and treating adult mental disorders., Vol. 1. (pp. 65–90). American Psychological Association. https://doi-org.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/10.1037/0000064-004

Masten, A. S., & Kalstabakken, A. W. (2018). Developmental perspectives on psychopathology in children and adolescents. In J. N. Butcher & P. C. Kendall (Eds.), APA handbook of psychopathology: Child and adolescent psychopathology., Vol. 2. (pp. 15–36). American Psychological Association. https://doi-org.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/10.1037/0000065-002

Document: NRNP 6635 Mid-term Study Guide

Assignment
Practicum Manual Acknowledgment
The Practicum Manual describes the structure and timing of the classroom-based and practicum experiences and the policies students must follow to be successful in the nurse practitioner (NP) specialties.

Field Experience: MSN Nurse Practitioner Practicum Manual
Click here and follow the instructions to confirm you have downloaded and read the entire MSN Nurse Practitioner Practicum Manual and will abide by the requirements described in order to successfully complete this program.

Rubric Detail

Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.

Name: NRNP_6635_Week1_Discussion_Rubric
Grid View
List View
Excellent Good Fair Poor
Main Posting:

Response to the discussion question is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.
40 (40%) – 44 (44%)
Thoroughly responds to the discussion question(s).

Is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.

No less than 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth.

Supported by at least 3 current credible sources.
35 (35%) – 39 (39%)
Responds to most of the discussion question(s).

Is somewhat reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

50% of the post has exceptional depth and breadth.

Supported by at least 3 credible references.
31 (31%) – 34 (34%)
Responds to some of the discussion question(s).

One to two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed.

Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.

Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

Post is cited with fewer than 2 credible references.
0 (0%) – 30 (30%)
Does not respond to the discussion question(s).

Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria.

Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.

Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

Contains only 1 or no credible references.
Main Posting:

Writing
6 (6%) – 6 (6%)
Written clearly and concisely.

Contains no grammatical or spelling errors.

Further adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Written concisely.

May contain one to two grammatical or spelling errors.

Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.
4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Written somewhat concisely.

May contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors.

Contains some APA formatting errors.
0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Not written clearly or concisely.

Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors.

Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style.
Main Posting:

Timely and full participation
9 (9%) – 10 (10%)
Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation.

Posts main discussion by due date.
8 (8%) – 8 (8%)
Posts main discussion by due date.

Meets requirements for full participation.
7 (7%) – 7 (7%)
Posts main discussion by due date.
0 (0%) – 6 (6%)
Does not meet requirements for full participation.

Does not post main discussion by due date.
First Response:

Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.
9 (9%) – 9 (9%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.

Responds to questions posed by faculty.

The use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.
8 (8%) – 8 (8%)
Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting.
7 (7%) – 7 (7%)
Response is on topic, may have some depth.
0 (0%) – 6 (6%)
Response may not be on topic, lacks depth.
First Response:

Writing
6 (6%) – 6 (6%)
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

Response to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.

Response is effectively written in Standard, Edited English.
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues.

Response to faculty questions are mostly answered, if posed.

Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources.

Response is written in Standard, Edited English.
4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Response posed in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.

Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.

Few or no credible sources are cited.
0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective communication.

Response to faculty questions are missing.

No credible sources are cited.
First Response:

Timely and full participation
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation.

Posts by due date.
4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Meets requirements for full participation.

Posts by due date.
3 (3%) – 3 (3%)
Posts by due date.
0 (0%) – 2 (2%)
Does not meet requirements for full participation.

Does not post by due date.
Second Response:

Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.
9 (9%) – 9 (9%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.

Responds to questions posed by faculty.

The use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.
8 (8%) – 8 (8%)
Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting.
7 (7%) – 7 (7%)
Response is on topic, may have some depth.
0 (0%) – 6 (6%)
Response may not be on topic, lacks depth.
Second Response:

Writing
6 (6%) – 6 (6%)
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

Response to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.

Response is effectively written in Standard, Edited English.
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues.

Response to faculty questions are mostly answered, if posed.

Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources.

Response is written in Standard, Edited English.
4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Response posed in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.

Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.

Few or no credible sources are cited.
0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective communication.

Response to faculty questions are missing.

No credible sources are cited.
Second Response:

Timely and full participation
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation.

Posts by due date.
4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Meets requirements for full participation.

Posts by due date.
3 (3%) – 3 (3%)
Posts by due date.
0 (0%) – 2 (2%)
Does not meet requirements for full participation.

Does not post by due date.
Total Points: 100
Name: NRNP_6635_Week1_Discussion_Rubric

Week 1 Discussion – Initial post

Psychopathology is defined by Merriam-Webster, 2020 as “the study of psychological and behavioral dysfunction occurring in mental illness or social disorganization.”  The purpose of this discussion is to explain the biological, psychological, social, cultural, and interpersonal factors that influence the development of psychopathology.

There is much activity regarding research being completed on how genetics and neuroscience may relate to mental illnesses in people.  A recent study by Allegrini et al., (2020) discusses the “p factor” and how “diverse behavior problems in childhood were consistently correlated phenotypically and genetically…the p factor is substantially heritable (50-60%) and manifests consistently…”(p. 34).  This study included 7,206 twin pairs from the Twins Early Development Study (TEDS) and included a diverse measure of behavior problems rated by the child, parent, and teacher at ages 7, 9, 12, and 16 (depressive traits, emotional problems, peer problems, autism traits, hyperactivity, antisocial behavior, conduct problems, and psychopathic tendencies).  Another study completed by Homan et al., (2019) reports, “mothers diagnosed with any psychiatric disorder, especially a depressive or adjustment disorder, before the child’s birth are at increased risk to have a child with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)…Mothers of children with ADHD, without the psychiatric disorder, before birth, are at increased risk to develop any psychiatric disorder, especially a depressive or adjustment disorder after the birth of a child” (p.1049).  Both studies show how biology, including genetics and neuroscience, plays a part in psychopathology.

Jean Piaget developed the cognitive development stages which indicate one cannot move to the next without completion of the previous stage.  From Piaget’s work, Susan Harter developed intervention techniques using conflicting emotions and Aaron Beck developed a school of cognitive therapy that uses the role of cognition in causing or maintaining psychopathology.  The attachment theory by Bowlby stated that skin-to-skin contact with mom and baby immediately after birth was required for bonding to take place (Sadock et al., 2015).   This is now something that is done immediately after giving birth on a routine basis.  A study by Liu et al., (2019) revealed, “…emotional distress…significant indirect effects of unmet psychosocial concerns, motivation, and medication side effects on emotional distress and physical/mental quality of life (QOL) impairment in patients diagnosed with schizophrenia” (p. 1031-1032).  All these examples show how psychological factors such as behavioral, cognitive, emotional, and developmental processes play a part in psychopathology.

A study by Oliver-Parra et al., (2020) reports, “Developmental psychopathology includes consideration of sex differences and, especially differences in the socialization of males and females.  Examples:  childhood:  higher prevalence of conduct disorder among boys than girls; adolescence:  girls have a much higher prevalence of depression and eating disorders than boys, while boys present with more anger problems and high-risk behaviors.  Anxiety disorders and impulse control disorders have an earlier onset than substance use disorders and mood disorders.  There are also gender differences in the age of onset of severe mental disorders, men typically having an earlier onset of schizophrenia and women are more likely to have serious forms of bipolar depression” (p. 2).  “Genetic susceptibility and environmental exposure play an important role in the development of Mental Disorders (MD).  Low socioeconomic status (SES) was associated with increased odds of children’s MD.  Offspring of a parent with MD were at more risk of presenting MD than offspring of parents without these problems.  The mothers SES and MD showed a higher association with the offspring’s MDs than the fathers” (p. 12).  A study by Franklin (2019) reports, “the primitive-based approach accounts for biopsychosocial complexity, ties clinical science more directly to basic psychological science, and could facilitate progress in understanding, predicting and preventing psychopathology” (p. 7).  A study by Sypher et al., (2019) reports, “low levels of positive parenting and higher levels of harsh parenting predicted greater child endorsement of dominance and revenge goals…exposure to indirect and direct violence was associated with greater endorsement of avoidance goals, with some indication that exposure to indirect violence also was related to increased revenge and dominance goals” (p. 1007).  These studies show how social, cultural, and interpersonal factors influence the development of psychopathology.

In conclusion, I have discussed the biological, psychological, social, cultural ad interpersonal factors influencing psychopathology.

References:

Allegrini, A. G., Cheesman, R., Rimfeld, K., Selzam, S., Pingault, J. B., Eley, T. C., & Plomin, R. (2019). The p factor: genetic analyses support a general dimension of psychopathology in childhood and adolescence. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 61(1), 30–39. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.13113

Franklin, J. C. (2019). Psychological primitives can make sense of biopsychosocial factor complexity in psychopathology. BMC Medicine, 17(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-019-1435-1

Homan, K. J., Barbaresi, W. J., Mellon, M. W., Weaver, A. L., Killian, J. M., Lucchetti, A. R., & Katusic, S. K. (2019). Psychiatric Disorders in Mothers of Children with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: A Population-Based Perspective. Journal of Child & Family Studies28(4), 1042–1051. https://doi-org.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/10.1007/s10826-019-01334-7

Liu, J., Abdin, E., Verma, S., Sim, K., Chong, S. A., & Subramaniam, M. (2019). Clarifying pathways to poor psychological health: The mediating role of psychosocial factors in the relationship between general psychopathology and quality of life impairment in patients diagnosed with schizophrenia. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 75(6), 1022–1033. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.22747

Merriam-Webster. (2021). Psychopathology. Merriam-Webster. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/psychopathology.

Oliver-Parra, A., Dalmau-Bueno, A., Ruiz-Muñoz, D., & García-Altés, A. (2020). Relationship between parents’ mental disorders and socioeconomic status and offspring’s psychopathology: A cross-sectional study. PLOS ONE, 15(10). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0240681

Sadock, B. J., Sadock, V. A., & Ruiz, P. (2015). Kaplan & Sadock’s synopsis of psychiatry behavioral sciences/clinical psychiatry (11th ed.). Wolters Kluwer.

Sypher, I., Hyde, L. W., Peckins, M. K., Waller, R., Klump, K., & Alexandra Burt, S. (2019). Effects of Parenting and Community Violence on Aggression-Related Social Goals: a Monozygotic Twin Differences Study. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 47(6), 1001–1012. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-018-0506-7

Name:  Discussion Rubric

  Excellent

90–100

Good

80–89

Fair

70–79

Poor

0–69

Main Posting:

Response to the Discussion question is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.

40 (40%) – 44 (44%)

Thoroughly responds to the Discussion question(s).

Is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.

No less than 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth.

Supported by at least three current credible sources.

35 (35%) – 39 (39%)

Responds to most of the Discussion question(s).

Is somewhat reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

50% of the post has exceptional depth and breadth.

Supported by at least three credible references.

31 (31%) – 34 (34%)

Responds to some of the Discussion question(s).

One to two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed.

Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.

Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

Cited with fewer than two credible references.

0 (0%) – 30 (30%)

Does not respond to the Discussion question(s).

Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria.

Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.

Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

Contains only one or no credible references.

Main Posting:

Writing

6 (6%) – 6 (6%)

Written clearly and concisely.

Contains no grammatical or spelling errors.

Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Written concisely.

May contain one to two grammatical or spelling errors.

Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Written somewhat concisely.

May contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors.

Contains some APA formatting errors.

0 (0%) – 3 (3%)

Not written clearly or concisely.

Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors.

Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style.

Main Posting:

Timely and full participation

9 (9%) – 10 (10%)

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation.

Posts main Discussion by due date.

8 (8%) – 8 (8%)

Meets requirements for full participation.

Posts main Discussion by due date.

7 (7%) – 7 (7%)

Posts main Discussion by due date.

0 (0%) – 6 (6%)

Does not meet requirements for full participation.

Does not post main Discussion by due date.

First Response:

Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.

9 (9%) – 9 (9%)

Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.

Responds to questions posed by faculty.

The use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.

8 (8%) – 8 (8%)

Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting.

7 (7%) – 7 (7%)

Response is on topic and may have some depth.

0 (0%) – 6 (6%)

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.

First Response:

Writing

6 (6%) – 6 (6%)

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

Response to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues.

Response to faculty questions are mostly answered, if posed.

Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources.

Response is written in standard, edited English.

4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Response posed in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication.

Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.

Few or no credible sources are cited.

0 (0%) – 3 (3%)

Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective communication.

Response to faculty questions are missing.

No credible sources are cited.

First Response:

Timely and full participation

5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation.

Posts by due date.

4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Meets requirements for full participation.

Posts by due date.

3 (3%) – 3 (3%)

Posts by due date.

0 (0%) – 2 (2%)

Does not meet requirements for full participation.

Does not post by due date.

Second Response:
Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.
9 (9%) – 9 (9%)

Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.

Responds to questions posed by faculty.

The use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.

8 (8%) – 8 (8%)

Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting.

7 (7%) – 7 (7%)

Response is on topic and may have some depth.

0 (0%) – 6 (6%)

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.

Second Response:
Writing
6 (6%) – 6 (6%)

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

Response to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues.

Response to faculty questions are mostly answered, if posed.

Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources.

Response is written in standard, edited English.

4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Response posed in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication.

Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.

Few or no credible sources are cited.

0 (0%) – 3 (3%)

Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective communication.

Response to faculty questions are missing.

No credible sources are cited.

Second Response:
Timely and full participation
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation.

Posts by due date.

4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Meets requirements for full participation.

Posts by due date.

3 (3%) – 3 (3%)

Posts by due date.

0 (0%) – 2 (2%)

Does not meet requirements for full participation.

Does not post by due date.

Total Points: 100

Name:  Discussion Rubric

Did you find apk for android? You can find new Free Android Games and apps.