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

NURS 6630 Week 9 Discussion : Influencing Social Change

NURS 6630 Week 9 Discussion : Influencing Social Change

Individuals with psychiatric mental health disorders are frequently stigmatized not only
by society as a whole, but also by their friends, family, and sometimes healthcare
providers. In your role, however, you have the opportunity to become a social change
agent for these individuals. For this Discussion, consider how you might make a positive
impact for your clients and advocate for social change within your own community.
Learning Objectives
Students will:
 Apply strategies to become a social change agent for psychiatric mental health
Learning Resources
Note: To access this week’s required library resources, please click on the link to the
Course Readings List, found in the Course Materials section of your Syllabus.
Required Readings
Angermeyer, M. C., Matschinger, H., & Schomerus, G. (2013). Attitudes towards
psychiatric treatment and people with mental illness: Changes over two decades. The

British Journal of Psychiatry, 203(2), 146–151. Retrieved from
http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/203/2/146.full

Bui, Q. (2012). Antidepressants for agitation and psychosis in patients with dementia.
American Family Physician, 85(1), 20-22.

Dingfelder, S. F. (2009). Stigma: Alive and well. American Psychological Association,
40(6), 56. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/monitor/2009/06/stigma.aspx

Jenkins, J. H. (2012). The anthropology of psychopharmacology: Commentary on
contributions to the analysis of pharmaceutical self and imaginary. Culture, Medicine
and Psychiatry, 36(1), 78-79. doi:10.1007/s11013-012-9248-0

NURS 6630 Week 9 Discussion  Influencing Social Change

NURS 6630 Week 9 Discussion  Influencing Social Change

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS:NURS 6630 Week 9 Discussion : Influencing Social Change

Price, L. H. (2010). Violence in America: Is psychopharmacology the answer? Brown
University Psychopharmacology Update, 21(5), 5.
Optional Resources
Bennett, T. (2015). Changing the way society understands mental health. National
Alliance on Mental Illness. Retrieved from http://www.nami.org/Blogs/NAMI-Blog/April-
2015/Changing-The-Way-Society-Understands-Mental-Health
Mechanic, D. (2007). Mental health services then and now. Health Affairs, 26(6),
1548–1550. Retrieved from
https://web.archive.org/web/20170605094514/http://content.healthaffairs.org/content/26/
6/1548.full
Rothman, D. J. (1994). Shiny, happy people: The problem with "cosmetic
psychopharmacology.” New Republic, 210(7), 34–38.
To prepare for this Discussion:
 Reflect on how you might influence social change for psychiatric mental health.
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!
By Day 3
Post an explanation of how you, as a nurse practitioner, might become a social change
agent for psychiatric mental health. Include how you might advocate for change within
your own community.
Read a selection of your colleagues' responses.
By Day 6
Respond to at least two of your colleagues by providing additional insights or
alternative perspectives.
Submission and Grading Information
Grading Criteria
To access your rubric:
Week 10 Discussion Rubric
Post by Day 3 and Respond by Day 6
To participate in this Discussion:
Week 10 Discussion

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.