wordpress-seo domain was triggered too early. This is usually an indicator for some code in the plugin or theme running too early. Translations should be loaded at the init action or later. Please see Debugging in WordPress for more information. (This message was added in version 6.7.0.) in /home/intelligentwr/nursingassignmentcrackers/wp-includes/functions.php on line 6114Problem Set I Biochemistry of Cells TBIOL 130 (Winter \u201823) Name: Score: Answer the following questions to the best of your ability; this exercise is worth 30 points and must be uploaded to Canvas by midnight on Friday of Week 2 (Jan. 13th). You may work together with a group to complete this exercise, but everyone must submit their completed problem sets separately. Please note that \u201cwork together with a group\u201d does not mean that you can submit identical answers. In other words, you can consult with your peer(s) on the answer (or the means to come up with the answer) but you need to answer the questions in your own words. You may provide your answers in a separate file or within this worksheet (save as a .pdf file) but for the latter, remember to TYPE YOUR ANSWERS IN RED (or another color of your choice)! Part I: Please use the periodic table to answer the following questions. 1. (2 points) Fill in the missing boxes in Table 1 below (e- = electrons). Hydrogen Boron Carbon Nitrogen # of protons Valence? (# of e- in valence shell) Valency? (# of e- needed to \u201cfill\u201d valence shell) Valence Shell (total # of e- possible in valence shell) Valence\/Valence Shell Ratio? (Row 2 \u00f7 Row 3) 5 5 Oxygen Fluorine 8 9 7 1 2 8 0.5 7 \u00f7 8 = 0.875 Problem Set I Biochemistry of Cells TBIOL 130 (Winter \u201823) 2. (1.5 points) In your own words, briefly define electronegativity. 3. (1 point) Which atom\/element listed in Table 1 is the MOST electronegative? 4. (1 point) As the valence\/valence shell ratios in Table 1 approach 1, the electronegativity of the atom\/element\u2026(circle one) Increases Decreases Stays the Same 5. (1.5 points) Using the information from Table 1, draw in a \u201cgreater than (>)\u201d, \u201cless than (<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/strong><\/td>\n| Excellent<\/strong><\/td>\n | Good<\/strong><\/td>\n | Fair<\/strong><\/td>\n | Poor<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n\n | Main Postinga<\/strong><\/td>\n | 45\u00a0(45%)\u00a0– 50\u00a0(50%)<\/p>\n | Answers all parts of the discussion question(s) expectations with reflective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Supported by at least three current, credible sources.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Written clearly and concisely with no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.<\/td>\n 40\u00a0(40%)\u00a0– 44\u00a0(44%)<\/p>\n | Responds to the discussion question(s) and is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n At least 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Supported by at least three credible sources.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Written clearly and concisely with one or no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.<\/td>\n 35\u00a0(35%)\u00a0– 39\u00a0(39%)<\/p>\n | Responds to some of the discussion question(s).<\/p>\n <\/p>\n One or two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Post is cited with two credible sources.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Written somewhat concisely; may contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Contains some APA formatting errors.<\/td>\n 0\u00a0(0%)\u00a0– 34\u00a0(34%)<\/p>\n | Does not respond to the discussion question(s) adequately.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Contains only one or no credible sources.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Not written clearly or concisely.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n Main Post: Timeliness<\/strong><\/td>\n | 10\u00a0(10%)\u00a0– 10\u00a0(10%)<\/p>\n | Posts main post by day 3.<\/td>\n 0\u00a0(0%)\u00a0– 0\u00a0(0%)<\/td>\n | 0\u00a0(0%)\u00a0– 0\u00a0(0%)<\/td>\n | 0\u00a0(0%)\u00a0– 0\u00a0(0%)<\/p>\n | Does not post by day 3.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n First Response<\/strong><\/td>\n | 17\u00a0(17%)\u00a0– 18\u00a0(18%)<\/p>\n | Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.<\/td>\n 15\u00a0(15%)\u00a0– 16\u00a0(16%)<\/p>\n | Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.<\/td>\n 13\u00a0(13%)\u00a0– 14\u00a0(14%)<\/p>\n | Response is on topic and may have some depth.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.<\/td>\n 0\u00a0(0%)\u00a0– 12\u00a0(12%)<\/p>\n | Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Responses to faculty questions are missing.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n No credible sources are cited.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n Second Response<\/strong><\/td>\n | 16\u00a0(16%)\u00a0– 17\u00a0(17%)<\/p>\n | Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.<\/td>\n 14\u00a0(14%)\u00a0– 15\u00a0(15%)<\/p>\n | Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.<\/td>\n 12\u00a0(12%)\u00a0– 13\u00a0(13%)<\/p>\n | Response is on topic and may have some depth.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.<\/td>\n 0\u00a0(0%)\u00a0– 11\u00a0(11%)<\/p>\n | Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Responses to faculty questions are missing.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n No credible sources are cited.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n Participation<\/strong><\/td>\n | 5\u00a0(5%)\u00a0– 5\u00a0(5%)<\/p>\n | Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days.<\/td>\n 0\u00a0(0%)\u00a0– 0\u00a0(0%)<\/td>\n | 0\u00a0(0%)\u00a0– 0\u00a0(0%)<\/td>\n | 0\u00a0(0%)\u00a0– 0\u00a0(0%)<\/p>\n | Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n Total Points: 100<\/td>\n | <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | <\/td>\n | <\/td>\n | <\/td>\n | <\/td>\n | <\/td>\n | <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n | <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Biochemistry of Cells Problem Set I Biochemistry of Cells TBIOL 130 (Winter \u201823) Name: Score: Answer the following questions to the best of your ability; this exercise is worth 30 points and must be uploaded to Canvas by midnight on Friday of Week 2 (Jan. 13th). You may work together with a group to complete […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":11,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-29915","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"blocksy_meta":{"styles_descriptor":{"styles":{"desktop":"","tablet":"","mobile":""},"google_fonts":[],"version":6}},"yoast_head":"\n |