DISCUSSION: NRNP 6541 WEEK 1 GETTING STARTED WITH PEDIATRICS

DISCUSSION: NRNP 6541 WEEK 1 GETTING STARTED WITH PEDIATRICS

DISCUSSION: NRNP 6541 WEEK 1 GETTING STARTED WITH PEDIATRICS

Primary care of children from newborns to those on the cusp of adulthood requires considerable knowledge, as well as the finesse to manage parents and families of all types, and the changing needs, attitudes, and independence of young people as they grow and mature. Considering that this week—in fact, this entire first module—is focused on growth and development, it is fitting for you to reflect on your current and anticipated growth and development in advanced nursing, and specifically, in pediatric care. When you made your decision to pursue training as a Family Nurse Practitioner, how did pediatrics factor in your thinking? Is the opportunity to work with children and adolescents a strong motivator, or does it rank for you as more of a concern?

ORDER A CUSTOMIZED, PLAGIARISM-FREE DISCUSSION: NRNP 6541 WEEK 1 GETTING STARTED WITH PEDIATRICS HERE

Thanks for stopping by this assessment. We can assist you in completing it and other subsequent ones. Our expert writers will comprehensively review instructions, synthesize external evidence sources, and customize an A-grade paper for YOU!!!

As you get started with this course, take time to reflect on your present capacity as you prepare to immerse yourself in the requirements of pediatric care as a nurse practitioner. How can you benefit most from this course, and how can it further you along the professional path you have chosen or in achieving your career goals?

This Discussion can be a catalyst for self-assessment and offer valuable insights from your colleagues. It is also an opportunity to get to know them and to introduce yourself, in anticipation of further interaction as you engage in the course i-Human Assignments.

RESOURCES

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

Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.

WEEKLY RESOURCES

LEARNING RESOURCES

Required Readings

Maaks, D. G., Starr, N., Brady, M., Gaylord, N. Driessnack, M., & Duderstadt, K. (Eds.). (2020). Burns’ pediatric primary care (7th ed.). Elsevier.

Chapter 5, “Child and Family Assessment” (pp. 39–44)

Chapter 6, “Cultural Considerations for Pediatric Primary Care” (pp. 45–55)

Chapter 8, “Principles of Developmental Management of Children” (pp. 63–72)

Chapter 14, “Introduction to Health Promotion and Health Protection” (pp. 161–163)

Chapter 20, “Sleep ” (pp. 281–292)

Chapter 21, “Sexuality, Sex, and Gender Identity” (pp. 293–305)

Chapter 32, “Congenital and Inherited Disorders” (pp. 511–519)

Chapter 44, “Common Pediatric Injuries and Toxic Exposures” (pp. 919–939)

National Association of Pediatric Nurse Practitioners, Professional Issues Committee. (2019). NAPNAP position statement on age parameters for pediatric nurse practitioner practiceLinks to an external site.. Journal of Pediatric Healthcare, 33(2), A9–A11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pedhc.2018.10.007

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2020). Healthy people 2020 topics and objectivesLinks to an external site.. https://www.healthypeople.gov/2020/topics-objectives

Required Media

Course Welcome

Dr. Dawn Garzon discusses the importance of primary care for children and adolescents. (4m)

Introduction to Pediatrics

In this video, Dr. Wilhelm provides an overview of pediatrics as well as an introduction to developmental norms. (14 min)

Walden University, LLC. (2021). Pediatric patients: A “vulnerable” population [Video]. Walden University Canvas. https://waldenu.instructure.com

Time Estimate: 11 minutes

Transcript – Pediatric Patients: A “Vulnerable” Population [PDF]Download Pediatric Patients: A “Vulnerable” Population [PDF]

i-Human Patient Cases. (2014).

You will access i-Human from the Access i-Human link located in the Start Here module.

You are HIGHLY encouraged to explore this practice case to become familiar with the i-Human Patients interface and transition to a virtual patient encounter. (No grade will be assigned, but it must be completed in Week 1 in order to receive feedback.)

To prepare:

Review this week’s Learning Resources, and particularly Chapters 5, 6, 8, and 14 of the Burns’ Pediatric Primary Care text.

Consider the roles and responsibilities of a nurse practitioner providing pediatric primary care. Work to define the strengths you bring to the position of Family Nurse Practitioner and the challenges you face.

Reflect on this course and what you expect to learn and do, such as by reviewing the course description, outcomes, and course introduction. Consider how the next 11 weeks can help build your strengths and address your challenges.

Also consider your career goals and objectives and how this course can support and/or further them. Be detailed in your thinking.

BY DAY 3 OF WEEK 1

Post a brief introduction of yourself that includes an explanation of your strengths and challenges as they apply to pediatrics and the role of a Family Nurse Practitioner. Also explain your career goals and objectives, and how your work in this course can help to accomplish those goals and objectives as a Family Nurse Practitioner. Use your research to support your explanations by providing credible and scholarly sources.

Read a selection of your colleagues’ responses.

BY DAY 6 OF WEEK 1

Respond to at least two of your colleagues’ posts on two different days by offering suggestions or resources to help your colleagues in addressing their professional strengths, challenges, or career goals and objectives. Use your research to support your suggestions. Provide at least 3 credible and current scholarly sources.

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!

NRNP_6541_Week1_Discussion_Rubric

NRNP_6541_Week1_Discussion_Rubric

Criteria Ratings Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMain 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

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 3 current credible sources.

39 to >34.0 pts

Good

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 3 current credible references.

34 to >30.0 pts

Fair

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 2 credible references.

30 to >0 pts

Poor

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 1 or no credible references.

44 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMain Posting:Writing

6 to >5.0 pts

Excellent

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

5 to >4.0 pts

Good

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

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

3 to >0 pts

Poor

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

ORDER A CUSTOMIZED, PLAGIARISM-FREE DISCUSSION: NRNP 6541 WEEK 1 GETTING STARTED WITH PEDIATRICS HERE

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMain Posting:Timely and full participation
10 to >8.0 pts

Excellent

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

8 to >7.0 pts

Good

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

7 to >6.0 pts

Fair

Posts main Discussion by due date.

6 to >0 pts

Poor

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

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

9 to >8.0 pts

Excellent

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

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

7 to >6.0 pts

Fair

Response is on topic, may have some depth.

6 to >0 pts

Poor

Response may not be on topic, lacks depth.
9 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFirst Response:Writing
6 to >5.0 pts

Excellent

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

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

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

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 OutcomeFirst Response:Timely and full participation

5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent

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

4 to >3.0 pts

Good

Meets requirements for full participation. Posts by due date.

3 to >2.0 pts

Fair

Posts by due date.

2 to >0 pts

Poor

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

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

9 to >8.0 pts

Excellent

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

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

7 to >6.0 pts

Fair

Response is on topic, may have some depth.

6 to >0 pts

Poor

Response may not be on topic, lacks depth.
9 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSecond Response:Writing

6 to >5.0 pts

Excellent

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

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

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

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 OutcomeSecond Response:Timely and full participation
5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent

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

4 to >3.0 pts

Good

Meets requirements for full participation. Posts by due date.

3 to >2.0 pts

Fair

Posts by due date.

2 to >0 pts

Poor

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

Total Points: 100