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

NRNP 6640 Discussion: Week 1: Foundations of Psychotherapy

NRNP 6640 Discussion: Week 1: Foundations of Psychotherapy

“Unexpressed emotions will never die. They are buried alive and will come forth later in
uglier ways.”
—Sigmund Freud
While working with a patient in the late 1800s, Sigmund Freud discovered the health
benefits of talking about emotions and illnesses. When Sigmund Freud introduced his
“talking cure” (fundamental psychotherapy), his efforts were met with considerable
skepticism. However, as more and more psychiatrists learned that Freud’s methods
brought about change in patients who suffered from a variety of mental health issues, his
methods were adopted and refined. Today, psychotherapy is recognized as a viable
treatment for a wide variety of mental health issues, many of which are examined
throughout this course.
This week, as you explore the foundations of psychotherapy, you consider its biological
basis. You also examine the influence of culture, religion, and socioeconomics on
psychotherapy treatments.
Photo Credit: Joe Houghton – www.joehoughtonphotography.ie / Moment / Getty Images

Learning Resources
Required Readings
American Nurses Association. (2014). Psychiatric-mental health nursing: Scope and
standards of practice (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
 Standard 1 “Assessment” (pages 44 & 45)
Note: Throughout the program you will be reading excerpts from the ANA’s Scope &
Standards of Practice for Psychiatric-Mental Health Nursing. It is essential to your success
on the ANCC board certification exam for Psychiatric/Mental Health Nurse Practitioners
that you know the scope of practice of the advanced practice psychiatric/mental health
nurse. You should also be able to differentiate between the generalist RN role in
psychiatric/mental health nursing and the advanced practice nurse role.
Wheeler, K. (Eds.). (2014). Psychotherapy for the advanced practice psychiatric nurse: A
how-to guide for evidence-based practice (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Springer Publishing
Company.
 Chapter 1, “The Nurse Psychotherapist and a Framework for Practice” (pp. 3–52)

Fournier, J. C., & Price, R. B. (2014). Psychotherapy and neuroimaging. Psychotherapy:
New Evidence and New Approaches, 12(3), 290–298. Retrieved from

NRNP 6640 Discussion Week 1 Foundations of Psychotherapy

NRNP 6640 Discussion Week 1 Foundations of Psychotherapy

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS:NRNP 6640 Discussion: Week 1: Foundations of Psychotherapy

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4207360/

Holttum, S. (2014). When bad things happen our brains change but psychotherapy and
support can help the recovery of our brains and our lives. Mental Health and Social
Inclusion, 18(2), 52–58. doi:10.1108/MHSI-02-2014-0006

Petiprin, A. (2016). Psychiatric and mental health nursing. Nursing Theory. Retrieved from
http://www.nursing-theory.org/theories-and-models/psychiatric-and-mental-health-
nursing.php

Fisher, M. A. (2016). Introduction. In Confidentiality limits in psychotherapy: Ethics
checklists for mental health professionals (pp. 3–12). Washington, DC: American
Psychological Association. doi:10.1037/14860-001

Document: Midterm Exam Study Guide (Word document)

Document: Final Exam Study Guide (Word document)

Required Media
Laureate Education (Producer). (2016). Introduction to psychotherapy with individuals
[Video file]. Baltimore, MD: Author.

Note: The approximate length of this media piece is 2 minutes.

Accessible player
Laureate Education (Producer). (2015e). Therapies are helpful: Dodo bird conjecture [Video
file]. Baltimore, MD: Author.
Provided courtesy of the Laureate International Network of Universities.

Note: The approximate length of this media piece is 2 minutes.

Accessible player
Credit: Provided courtesy of the Laureate International Network of Universities.
Laureate Education (Producer). (2015f). Therapies change and integrate different
approaches over time [Video file]. Baltimore, MD: Author.
Provided courtesy of the Laureate International Network of Universities.

Note: The approximate length of this media piece is 1 minute.

Accessible player
Credit: Provided courtesy of the Laureate International Network of Universities.

Sommers-Flanagan, J., & Sommers-Flanagan, R. (2012). Clinical interview: Intake,
assessment, & therapeutic alliance [Video file]. Mill Valley, CA: Psychotherapy.net.

Sommers-Flanagan, J., & Sommers-Flanagan, R. (2013). Counseling and psychotherapy
theories in context and practice [Video file]. Mill Valley, CA: Psychotherapy.net.

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.