Discussion: NURS 6630 Week 2 Foundational Neuroscience 

Discussion: NURS 6630 Week 2 Foundational Neuroscience

Discussion: NURS 6630 Week 2 Foundational Neuroscience

Foundational Neuroscience

As a psychiatric and mental health nurse practitioner, it is essential for you to have a strong background in foundational neuroscience. In order to diagnose and treat patients, you must not only understand the pathophysiology of psychiatric disorders but also how medications for these disorders impact the central nervous system. These concepts of foundational neuroscience can be challenging to understand. Therefore, this Discussion is designed to encourage you to think through these concepts, develop a rationale for your thinking, and deepen your understanding by interacting with your colleagues.

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE ON; Discussion: NURS 6630 Week 2 Foundational Neuroscience 

For this Discussion, review the Learning Resources and reflect on the concepts of foundational neuroscience as they might apply to your role as the psychiatric mental health nurse practitioner in prescribing medications for patients.

Resources

Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.

Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.

WEEKLY RESOURCES

By Day 3 of Week 2

Post a response to each of the following:

Explain the agonist-to-antagonist spectrum of action of psychopharmacologic agents, including how partial and inverse agonist functionality may impact the efficacy of psychopharmacologic treatments.

Compare and contrast the actions of g couple proteins and ion gated channels.

Explain how the role of epigenetics may contribute to pharmacologic action.

Explain how this information may impact the way you prescribe medications to patients. Include a specific example of a situation or case with a patient in which the psychiatric mental health nurse practitioner must be aware of the medication’s action.

Upload a copy of your discussion writing to the draft Turnitin for plagiarism check. Your faculty holds the academic freedom to not accept your work and grade at a zero if your work is not uploaded as a draft submission to Turnitin as instructed.

Read a selection of your colleagues’ responses.

By Day 6 of Week 2

Respond to at least two of your colleagues on two different days in one of the following ways:

If your colleagues’ posts influenced your understanding of these concepts, be sure to share how and why. Include additional insights you gained.

If you think your colleagues might have misunderstood these concepts, offer your alternative perspective and be sure to provide an explanation for them. Include resources to support your perspective.

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 Reply button to complete your initial post. Remember, once you click on Post Reply, you cannot delete or edit your own posts and you cannot post anonymously. Please check your post carefully before clicking on Post Reply!

NURS_6630_Week2_Discussion_Rubric

NURS_6630_Week2_Discussion_Rubric

Criteria Ratings Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome 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.

44 to >39.0 pts
Excellent Point range: 90–100

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.

39 to >34.0 pts
Good Point range: 80–89

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.

34 to >30.0 pts
Fair Point range: 70–79

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 two credible references.

30 to >0 pts
Poor Point range: 0–69

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.

44 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Main Posting:Writing

6 to >5.0 pts
Excellent Point range: 90–100

Written clearly and concisely…. Contains no grammatical or spelling errors…. Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

5 to >4.0 pts
Good Point range: 80–89

Written concisely…. May contain one to two grammatical or spelling errors…. Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

4 to >3.0 pts
Fair Point range: 70–79

Written somewhat concisely…. May contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors…. Contains some APA formatting errors.

3 to >0 pts
Poor Point range: 0–69

Not written clearly or concisely…. Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors…. Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style.

6 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Main Posting:Timely and full participation

10 to >8.0 pts
Excellent Point range: 90–100

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation…. Posts main Discussion by due date.

8 to >7.0 pts
Good Point range: 80–89

Posts main Discussion by due date…. Meets requirements for full participation.

7 to >6.0 pts
Fair Point range: 70–79

Posts main Discussion by due date.

6 to >0 pts
Poor Point range: 0–69

Does not meet requirements for full participation…. Does not post main Discussion by due date.

10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome First Response:Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.

9 to >8.0 pts
Excellent Point range: 90–100

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 to >7.0 pts
Good Point range: 80–89

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

7 to >6.0 pts
Fair Point range: 70–79

Response is on topic, may have some depth.

6 to >0 pts

Poor Point range: 0–69

Response may not be on topic, lacks depth.

9 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome First Response:Writing

6 to >5.0 pts
Excellent Point range: 90–100

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 to >4.0 pts
Good Point range: 80–89

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 to >3.0 pts
Fair Point range: 70–79

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

3 to >0 pts
Poor Point range: 0–69

Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective communication…. Response to faculty questions are missing…. No credible sources are cited.

6 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome First Response:Timely and full participation

5 to >4.0 pts
Excellent Point range: 90–100

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation…. Posts by due date.

4 to >3.0 pts
Good Point range: 80–89

Meets requirements for full participation…. Posts by due date.

3 to >2.0 pts
Fair Point range: 70–79

Posts by due date.

2 to >0 pts
Poor Point range: 0–69

Does not meet requirements for full participation…. Does not post by due date.

5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Second Response:Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.

9 to >8.0 pts
Excellent Point range: 90–100

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 to >7.0 pts
Good Point range: 80–89

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

7 to >6.0 pts
Fair Point range: 70–79

Response is on topic, may have some depth.

6 to >0 pts
Poor Point range: 0–69

Response may not be on topic, lacks depth.

9 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Second Response:Writing

6 to >5.0 pts
Excellent Point range: 90–100

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 to >4.0 pts
Good Point range: 80–89

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 to >3.0 pts
Fair Point range: 70–79

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.

3 to >0 pts
Poor Point range: 0–69

Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective communication…. Response to faculty questions are missing…. No credible sources are cited.

6 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Second Response:Timely and full participation

5 to >4.0 pts
Excellent Point range: 90–100

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation…. Posts by due date.

4 to >3.0 pts
Good Point range: 80–89

Meets requirements for full participation…. Posts by due date.

3 to >2.0 pts
Fair Point range: 70–79

Posts by due date.

2 to >0 pts
Poor Point range: 0–69

Does not meet requirements for full participation…. Does not post by due date.
5 pts

Total Points: 100