NRNP 6635 WEEK 3 Assignment Assessing and Diagnosing Patients With Mood Disorders INSTRUCTIONS PLUS RUBRIC
Sample Answer for NRNP 6635 WEEK 3 Assignment Assessing and Diagnosing Patients With Mood Disorders INSTRUCTIONS PLUS RUBRIC Included After Question
Accurately diagnosing depressive disorders can be challenging given their periodic and, at times, cyclic nature. Some of these disorders occur in response to stressors and, depending on the cultural history of the client, may affect their decision to seek treatment. Bipolar disorders can also be difficult to properly diagnose. While clients with a bipolar or related disorder will likely have to contend with the disorder indefinitely, many find that the use of medication and evidence-based treatments have favorable outcomes.
To Prepare:
• Review this week’s Learning Resources. Consider the insights they provide about assessing and diagnosing mood disorders.
• Download the Comprehensive Psychiatric Evaluation Template, which you will use to complete this Assignment. Also review the Comprehensive Psychiatric Evaluation Exemplar to see an example of a completed evaluation document.
• By Day 1 of this week, select a specific video case study to use for this Assignment from the Video Case Selections choices in the Learning Resources. View your assigned video case and review the additional data for the case in the “Case History Reports” document, keeping the requirements of the evaluation template in mind.
• Consider what history would be necessary to collect from this patient.
• Consider what interview questions you would need to ask this patient.
• Identify at least three possible differential diagnoses for the patient.
By Day 7 of Week 3
Complete and submit your Comprehensive Psychiatric Evaluation, including your differential diagnosis and critical-thinking process to formulate a primary diagnosis. Incorporate the following into your responses in the template:
• Subjective: What details did the patient provide regarding their chief complaint and symptomology to derive your differential diagnosis? What is the duration and severity of their symptoms? How are their symptoms impacting their functioning in life?
• Objective: What observations did you make during the psychiatric assessment?
• Assessment: Discuss the patient’s mental status examination results. What were your differential diagnoses? Provide a minimum of three possible diagnoses with supporting evidence, listed in order from highest priority to lowest priority. Compare the DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for each differential diagnosis and explain what DSM-5 criteria rules out the differential diagnosis to find an accurate diagnosis. Explain the critical-thinking process that led you to the primary diagnosis you selected. Include pertinent positives and pertinent negatives for the specific patient case.
• Reflection notes: What would you do differently with this client if you could conduct the session over? Also include in your reflection a discussion related to legal/ethical considerations (demonstrate critical thinking beyond confidentiality and consent for treatment!), health promotion and disease prevention taking into consideration patient factors (such as age, ethnic group, etc.), PMH, and other risk factors (e.g., socioeconomic, cultural background, etc.).
Submission and Grading Information
To submit your completed Assignment for review and grading, do the following:
• Please save your Assignment using the naming convention “WK3Assgn+last name+first initial.(extension)” as the name.
• Click the Week 3 Assignment Rubric to review the Grading Criteria for the Assignment.
• Click the Week 3 Assignment link. You will also be able to “View Rubric” for grading criteria from this area.
• Next, from the Attach File area, click on the Browse My Computer button. Find the document you saved as “WK3Assgn+last name+first initial.(extension)” and click Open.
• If applicable: From the Plagiarism Tools area, click the checkbox for I agree to submit my paper(s) to the Global Reference Database.
• Click on the Submit button to complete your submission.
NRNP 6635 WEEK 3 Assignment Assessing and Diagnosing Patients With Mood Disorders INSTRUCTIONS PLUS RUBRIC Grading Criteria
To access your rubric:
Week 3 Assignment Rubric
Check Your Assignment Draft for Authenticity
To check your Assignment draft for authenticity:
Submit your Week 3 Assignment draft and review the originality report.
Submit Your Assignment by Day 7 of Week 3
To participate in this Assignment:
Week 3 Assignment
A Sample Answer For the Assignment: NRNP 6635 WEEK 3 Assignment Assessing and Diagnosing Patients With Mood Disorders INSTRUCTIONS PLUS RUBRIC
Title: NRNP 6635 WEEK 3 Assignment Assessing and Diagnosing Patients With Mood Disorders INSTRUCTIONS PLUS RUBRIC
Subjective:
CC (chief complaint): “I sometimes forget to take my medications”
HPI: A.T. is a 27-year-old female patient who came to the psychiatric clinic with a history of mood disorder. She reports that she has been missing her doses due to forgetfulness. She has a history of hypertension which she manages with Trandate 100mg twice daily. She denies previous suicidal gestures.
Past Psychiatric History:
- General Statement: The patient’s psychiatric history is unremarkable. She was diagnosed with bipolar disorder ever since she was a young girl.
- Caregivers (if applicable): The patient’s parents got divorced about 10 years ago, and she has been staying with her mother ever since. She recently got her first child about 2 months ago.
- Hospitalizations: No hospitalization history.
- Medication trials: The patient has been taking mood stabilizers, but she has not been compliant due to forgetfulness.
- Psychotherapy or Previous Psychiatric Diagnosis: Denies any history of psychotherapy for her current or past mental condition.
Substance Current Use and History: The patient claims to have never taken alcohol or smoked cigarettes. She also denies using any other illicit drug of abuse.
Family Psychiatric/Substance Use History: The patient reports that her brother committed suicide through GSW. She also reports that her brother was addicted to methamphetamine.
Psychosocial History: The patient recently got her fast child two months ago. She worked in the community library for 5 years, but currently lives with her mother. The patient’s parents got divorced about 10 years ago, and she has been staying with her mother ever since. She has two sisters who live in a different town. She is a bachelor’s degree graduate, majoring in Literature.
Medical History:
- Current Medications: Trandate 100mg PO twice daily for HTN
- Allergies: Denies food or environmental allergies.
- Reproductive Hx: Heterosexual with the first child 2 months old.
ROS:
- GENERAL: The patient is healthy with no fever, headache, dizziness, urination issue, or chest pain.
- HEENT: Head: atraumatic. Eyes: No visual changes, blurred vision, use of corrective lenses, or red/itchy eyes. Nose: No congestion, irritations, inflammation, nose bleeding, or sinus problems. Throat & Mouth: No sore throat, bleeding gums, or swallowing difficulties.
- SKIN: Denies discoloration, hives, rashes, blisters, lumps, or ulcers.
- CARDIOVASCULAR: Denies chest pressure, pain, edema, or palpitations.
- RESPIRATORY: No wheezing, sneezing, dyspnea, coughing, or chest congestion.
- GASTROINTESTINAL: No abdominal pain, hernia, constipation, diarrhea, or changes in bowel movement.
- GENITOURINARY: No changes in urine frequency, urgency, or burning sensation when urination. Report normal vaginal discharge.
- NEUROLOGICAL: No headache, changes in vision, loss of consciousness, or dizziness.
- MUSCULOSKELETAL: exhibits full ranges of movement in both upper and lower extremities. No joint stiffness or pain.
- HEMATOLOGIC: No bleeding problems or prolonged healing of wounds.
- LYMPHATICS: No signs of enlarged lymph nodes.
- ENDOCRINOLOGIC: Denies polyuria, polyphagia, or polydipsia. No hypothyroidism.
Objective:
Vital Signs: T- 98.9 P- 97 R 22 150/88 Ht 5’5 Wt. 135lbs
Physical exam
HEENT: Head is atraumatic and normocephalic. Pupils are equal in size, round, and equally reactive to light. No erythema or effusion on the tympanic membrane. No discharge or swelling was noted in the ear canals. The neck is supple with anterior cervical lymphadenopathy. The throat is clear with no swelling and exudates. Tonsils are not swollen.
Chest/lungs: Breathing sounds clear to auscultation
Heart: Regular heart rate, with S1 and S2 sounds. S3 absent. No gallop, rales or murmurs.
Abdomen: Non-distended and soft abdomen with no hernia. Normal sounds were noted in all four abdominal quadrants.
Diagnostic results: No tests ordered.
Assessment:
Mental Status Examination: The 27-year-old female patient walked in well-groomed in age-appropriate clothes. The patient maintains eye contact during the interview with appropriate facial expressions. Communicates in a clear language, in a normal tone, and rate of speaking. Her thought process is coherent and logical. She denies delusion, hallucinations, and suicidal ideation. She confirms being forgetful, but her long-term memory is intact. Her insight is absent. The patient displays limited ability to identify the consequences of her actions. Denies suicidal ideation, or a history of suicidal attempts.
Differential Diagnoses:
- Bipolar Disorder: According to the DSM-V. bipolar disorder has been defined as a group of mental disorders characterized by extreme fluctuations in the patient’s mood, ability to function, and energy level. There are three main types, but the patient in the provided case study presented with signs of bipolar 1 disorder, which is characterized by manic-depressive episodes (Miskowiak et a., 2018). DSM-V requires the patient to display at least 3 of the following symptoms, racing thoughts, talkativeness, lack of sleep, inflated self-esteem, distracted easily, and psychomotor agitation among others.
- Schizophrenia: according to the DSM-V diagnostic criteria, schizophrenia disorder is diagnosed when the patient displays at least two of the following 5 symptoms, incoherent or disorganized speaking, hallucination, delusion, unusual or disorganized movement, and negative symptoms (Tulacı, 2018). The patient in the provided case study does not meet the diagnosis of this disorder.
- Major Depressive Disorder (MDD): For a patient to qualify for the diagnosis of MDD, the DSM-V require the presence of at least 5 of the following symptoms within the same two-week period, sleep disturbance, fatigue, worthlessness, weight changes, depressed mood, loss of pleasure and indecisiveness among others (Hasin et al., 2018). The patient in the provided case study presented with a depressed mood, but does not qualify for this diagnosis.
Reflections: The provided patient information is quite substantial to make a diagnosis of bipolar disorder. The clinician did an excellent job collecting information that provides a clear picture of the patient’s symptoms, such as manic and depressive episodes. However, additional information is still missing, to determine the severity of the condition (McIntyre & Calabrese, 2019). The PMHNP also needs to consider the use of screening tools such as mood disorder questionnaires to confirm the primary diagnosis and rule out the differentials (Andersson et al., 2019). Additionally, given that the patient’s condition might affect her life at home, it is necessary to inform the patient mother about her symptoms and how to manage her condition, with her consent. Her mother will help by reminding her to take her medication every time she forgets to promote a positive outcome.
NRNP 6635 WEEK 3 Assignment Assessing and Diagnosing Patients With Mood Disorders INSTRUCTIONS PLUS RUBRIC References
Andersson, G., Carlbring, P., Titov, N., & Lindefors, N. (2019). Internet interventions for adults with anxiety and mood disorders: a narrative umbrella review of recent meta-analyses. The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 64(7), 465-470. https://doi.org/10.1177/0706743719839381
Hasin, D. S., Sarvet, A. L., Meyers, J. L., Saha, T. D., Ruan, W. J., Stohl, M., & Grant, B. F. (2018). Epidemiology of adult DSM-5 major depressive disorder and its specifiers in the United States. JAMA Psychiatry, 75(4), 336-346. doi:10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2017.4602
McIntyre, R. S., & Calabrese, J. R. (2019). Bipolar depression: the clinical characteristics and unmet needs of a complex disorder. Current medical research and opinion, 35(11), 1993-2005. https://doi.org/10.1080/03007995.2019.1636017
Miskowiak, K. W., Burdick, K. E., Martinez‐Aran, A., Bonnin, C. M., Bowie, C. R., Carvalho, A. F., … & Vieta, E. (2018). Assessing and addressing cognitive impairment in bipolar disorder: the International Society for Bipolar Disorders Targeting Cognition Task Force recommendations for clinicians. Bipolar disorders, 20(3), 184-194. https://doi.org/10.1080/03007995.2019.1636017
Tulacı, Ö. D. (2018). Differences in psychopharmacology of pediatric schizophrenia and adult schizophrenia. Klinik Psikofarmakoloji Bulteni, 28, 338-339. https://www.proquest.com/openview/0d5cf61a680c733184a8abce17abb31b/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=28708
Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: NRNP 6635 WEEK 3 Assignment Assessing and Diagnosing Patients With Mood Disorders INSTRUCTIONS PLUS RUBRIC
Assignment: Assessing and Diagnosing Patients With Mood Disorders
Photo Credit: Getty Images
Accurately diagnosing depressive disorders can be challenging given their periodic and, at times, cyclic nature. Some of these disorders occur in response to stressors and, depending on the cultural history of the client, may affect their decision to seek treatment. Bipolar disorders can also be difficult to properly diagnose. While clients with a bipolar or related disorder will likely have to contend with the disorder indefinitely, many find that the use of medication and evidence-based treatments have favorable outcomes.
To Prepare:
• Review this week’s Learning Resources. Consider the insights they provide about assessing and diagnosing mood disorders.
• Download the Comprehensive Psychiatric Evaluation Template, which you will use to complete this Assignment. Also review the Comprehensive Psychiatric Evaluation Exemplar to see an example of a completed evaluation document.
• By Day 1 of this week, select a specific video case study to use for this Assignment from the Video Case Selections choices in the Learning Resources. View your assigned video case and review the additional data for the case in the “Case History Reports” document, keeping the requirements of the evaluation template in mind.
• Consider what history would be necessary to collect from this patient.
• Consider what interview questions you would need to ask this patient.
• Identify at least three possible differential diagnoses for the patient.
By Day 7 of Week 3
Complete and submit your Comprehensive Psychiatric Evaluation, including your differential diagnosis and critical-thinking process to formulate a primary diagnosis. Incorporate the following into your responses in the template:
• Subjective: What details did the patient provide regarding their chief complaint and symptomology to derive your differential diagnosis? What is the duration and severity of their symptoms? How are their symptoms impacting their functioning in life?
• Objective: What observations did you make during the psychiatric assessment?
• Assessment: Discuss the patient’s mental status examination results. What were your differential diagnoses? Provide a minimum of three possible diagnoses with supporting evidence, listed in order from highest priority to lowest priority. Compare the DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for each differential diagnosis and explain what DSM-5 criteria rules out the differential diagnosis to find an accurate diagnosis. Explain the critical-thinking process that led you to the primary diagnosis you selected. Include pertinent positives and pertinent negatives for the specific patient case.
• Reflection notes: What would you do differently with this client if you could conduct the session over? Also include in your reflection a discussion related to legal/ethical considerations (demonstrate critical thinking beyond confidentiality and consent for treatment!), health promotion and disease prevention taking into consideration patient factors (such as age, ethnic group, etc.), PMH, and other risk factors (e.g., socioeconomic, cultural background, etc.).
Submission and Grading Information
To submit your completed Assignment for review and grading, do the following:
• Please save your Assignment using the naming convention “WK3Assgn+last name+first initial.(extension)” as the name.
• Click the Week 3 Assignment Rubric to review the Grading Criteria for the Assignment.
• Click the Week 3 Assignment link. You will also be able to “View Rubric” for grading criteria from this area.
• Next, from the Attach File area, click on the Browse My Computer button. Find the document you saved as “WK3Assgn+last name+first initial.(extension)” and click Open.
• If applicable: From the Plagiarism Tools area, click the checkbox for I agree to submit my paper(s) to the Global Reference Database.
• Click on the Submit button to complete your submission.
NRNP 6635 WEEK 3 Assignment Assessing and Diagnosing Patients With Mood Disorders INSTRUCTIONS PLUS RUBRIC Grading Criteria
To access your rubric:
Week 3 Assignment Rubric
Check Your Assignment Draft for Authenticity
To check your Assignment draft for authenticity:
Submit your Week 3 Assignment draft and review the originality report.
Submit Your Assignment by Day 7 of Week 3
To participate in this Assignment:
Week 3 Assignment
NRNP 6635 WEEK 3 Assignment Assessing and Diagnosing Patients With Mood Disorders INSTRUCTIONS PLUS RUBRIC Rubric Detail
Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.
Name: NRNP_6635_Week3_Assignment_Rubric
• Grid View
• List View
Excellent Good Fair Poor
Create documentation in the Comprehensive Psychiatric Evaluation Template about the patient you selected.
In the Subjective section, provide:
• Chief complaint
• History of present illness (HPI)
• Past psychiatric history
• Medication trials and current medications
• Psychotherapy or previous psychiatric diagnosis
• Pertinent substance use, family psychiatric/substance use, social, and medical history
• Allergies
• ROS 18 (18%) – 20 (20%)
The response throughly and accurately describes the patient’s subjective complaint, history of present illness, past psychiatric history, medication trials and current medications, psychotherapy or previous psychiatric diagnosis, pertinent histories, allergies, and review of all systems that would inform a differential diagnosis. 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)
The response accurately describes the patient’s subjective complaint, history of present illness, past psychiatric history, medication trials and current medications, psychotherapy or previous psychiatric diagnosis, pertinent histories, allergies, and review of all systems that would inform a differential diagnosis. 14 (14%) – 15 (15%)
The response describes the patient’s subjective complaint, history of present illness, past psychiatric history, medication trials and current medications, psychotherapy or previous psychiatric diagnosis, pertinent histories, allergies, and review of all systems that would inform a differential diagnosis, but is somewhat vague or contains minor innacuracies. 0 (0%) – 13 (13%)
The response provides an incomplete or inaccurate description of the patient’s subjective complaint, history of present illness, past psychiatric history, medication trials and current medications, psychotherapy or previous psychiatric diagnosis, pertinent histories, allergies, and review of all systems that would inform a differential diagnosis. Or, subjective documentation is missing.
In the Objective section, provide:
• Physical exam documentation of systems pertinent to the chief complaint, HPI, and history
• Diagnostic results, including any labs, imaging, or other assessments needed to develop the differential diagnoses. 18 (18%) – 20 (20%)
The response thoroughly and accurately documents the patient’s physical exam for pertinent systems. Diagnostic tests and their results are thoroughly and accurately documented. 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)
The response accurately documents the patient’s physical exam for pertinent systems. Diagnostic tests and their results are accurately documented. 14 (14%) – 15 (15%)
Documentation of the patient’s physical exam is somewhat vague or contains minor innacuracies. Diagnostic tests and their results are documented but contain minor innacuracies. 0 (0%) – 13 (13%)
The response provides incomplete or inaccurate documentation of the patient’s physical exam. Systems may have been unnecessarily reviewed, or, objective documentation is missing.
In the Assessment section, provide:
• Results of the mental status examination, presented in paragraph form.
• At least three differentials with supporting evidence. List them from top priority to least priority. Compare the DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for each differential diagnosis and explain what DSM-5 criteria rules out the differential diagnosis to find an accurate diagnosis. Explain the critical-thinking process that led you to the primary diagnosis you selected. Include pertinent positives and pertinent negatives for the specific patient case. 23 (23%) – 25 (25%)
The response thoroughly and accurately documents the results of the mental status exam.
Response lists at least three distinctly different and detailed possible disorders in order of priority for a differential diagnosis of the patient in the assigned case study, and it provides a thorough, accurate, and detailed justification for each of the disorders selected. 20 (20%) – 22 (22%)
The response accurately documents the results of the mental status exam.
Response lists at least three distinctly different and detailed possible disorders in order of priority for a differential diagnosis of the patient in the assigned case study, and it provides an accurate justification for each of the disorders selected. 18 (18%) – 19 (19%)
The response documents the results of the mental status exam with some vagueness or innacuracy.
Response lists at least three different possible disorders for a differential diagnosis of the patient and provides a justification for each, but may contain some vaguess or innacuracy. 0 (0%) – 17 (17%)
The response provides an incomplete or inaccurate description of the results of the mental status exam and explanation of the differential diagnoses. Or, assessment documentation is missing.
Reflect on this case. Discuss what you learned and what you might do differently. Also include in your reflection a discussion related to legal/ethical considerations (demonstrate critical thinking beyond confidentiality and consent for treatment!), health promotion and disease prevention taking into consideration patient factors (such as age, ethnic group, etc.), PMH, and other risk factors (e.g., socioeconomic, cultural background, etc.). 9 (9%) – 10 (10%)
Reflections are thorough, thoughtful, and demonstrate critical thinking. 8 (8%) – 8 (8%)
Reflections demonstrate critical thinking. 7 (7%) – 7 (7%)
Reflections are somewhat general or do not demonstrate critical thinking. 0 (0%) – 6 (6%)
Reflections are incomplete, inaccurate, or missing.
Provide at least three evidence-based, peer-reviewed journal articles or evidenced-based guidelines that relate to this case to support your diagnostics and differential diagnoses. Be sure they are current (no more than 5 years old). 14 (14%) – 15 (15%)
The response provides at least three current, evidence-based resources from the literature to support the assessment and diagnosis of the patient in the assigned case study. The resources reflect the latest clinical guidelines and provide strong justification for decision making. 12 (12%) – 13 (13%)
The response provides at least three current, evidence-based resources from the literature that appropriately support the assessment and diagnosis of the patient in the assigned case study. 11 (11%) – 11 (11%)
Three evidence-based resources are provided to support assessment and diagnosis of the patient in the assigned case study, but they may only provide vague or weak justification. 0 (0%) – 10 (10%)
Two or fewer resources are provided to support assessment and diagnosis decisions. The resources may not be current or evidence based.
Written Expression and Formatting—Paragraph development and organization:
Paragraphs make clear points that support well-developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused—neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement and introduction are provided that delineate all required criteria. 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity.
A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion are provided that delineate all required criteria. 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time.
Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment are stated, yet they are brief and not descriptive. 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%–79% of the time.
Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is vague or off topic. 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity less than 60% of the time.
No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion were provided.
Written Expression and Formatting—English writing standards:
Correct grammar, mechanics, and punctuation 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Contains a few (one or two) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors 3 (3%) – 3 (3%)
Contains several (three or four) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors 0 (0%) – 2 (2%)
Contains many (≥ five) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding
Total Points: 100
Name: NRNP_6635_Week3_Assignment_Rubric
NRNP 6635 WEEK 3 Assignment Assessing and Diagnosing Patients With Mood Disorders INSTRUCTIONS PLUS RUBRIC Grading Rubric
| Performance Category | 100% or highest level of performance
100% 16 points |
Very good or high level of performance
88% 14 points |
Acceptable level of performance
81% 13 points |
Inadequate demonstration of expectations
68% 11 points |
Deficient level of performance
56% 9 points
|
Failing level
of performance 55% or less 0 points |
| Total Points Possible= 50 | 16 Points | 14 Points | 13 Points | 11 Points | 9 Points | 0 Points |
| Scholarliness
Demonstrates achievement of scholarly inquiry for professional and academic topics. |
Presentation of information was exceptional and included all of the following elements:
|
Presentation of information was good, but was superficial in places and included all of the following elements:
|
Presentation of information was minimally demonstrated in all of the following elements:
|
Presentation of information is unsatisfactory in one of the following elements:
|
Presentation of information is unsatisfactory in two of the following elements:
|
Presentation of information is unsatisfactory in three or more of the following elements
|
| 16 Points | 14 Points | 13 Points | 11 Points | 9 Points | 0 Points | |
| Application of Course Knowledge
Demonstrate the ability to analyze and apply principles, knowledge and information learned in the outside readings and relate them to real-life professional situations |
Presentation of information was exceptional and included all of the following elements:
|
Presentation of information was good, but was superficial in places and included all of the following elements:
|
Presentation of information was minimally demonstrated in the all of the following elements:
|
Presentation of information is unsatisfactory in one of the following elements:
|
Presentation of information is unsatisfactory in two of the following elements:
|
Presentation of information is unsatisfactory in three of the following elements
|
| 10 Points | 9 Points | 6 Points | 0 Points | |||
| Interactive Dialogue
Initial post should be a minimum of 300 words (references do not count toward word count) The peer and instructor responses must be a minimum of 150 words each (references do not count toward word count) Responses are substantive and relate to the topic. |
Demonstrated all of the following:
|
Demonstrated 3 of the following:
|
Demonstrated 2 of the following:
|
Demonstrated 1 or less of the following:
|
||
| 8 Points | 7 Points | 6 Points | 5 Points | 4 Points | 0 Points | |
| Grammar, Syntax, APA
Points deducted for improper grammar, syntax and APA style of writing. The source of information is the APA Manual 6th Edition Error is defined to be a unique APA error. Same type of error is only counted as one error. |
The following was present:
AND
AND
|
The following was present:
AND/OR
AND/OR
|
The following was present:
AND/OR
AND/OR
|
The following was present:
AND/OR
AND/OR
|
The following was present:
AND/OR
AND/OR
AND/OR
|
The following was present:
AND/OR
AND/OR
|
| 0 Points Deducted | 5 Points Lost | |||||
| Participation
Requirements |
Demonstrated the following:
|
Failed to demonstrate the following:
|
||||
| 0 Points Lost | 5 Points Lost | |||||
| Due Date Requirements | Demonstrated all of the following:
A minimum of one peer and one instructor responses are to be posted within the course no later than Sunday, 11:59 pm MT. |
Demonstrates one or less of the following.
A minimum of one peer and one instructor responses are to be posted within the course no later than Sunday, 11:59 pm MT. |