Promoting Good Self-Perception, Positive Behavior, and Mental Wellness Growth and development issues have a tremendous impact on self-perception, behavior, and mental wellness in pediatric patients. It is important for children to have a realistic perception of where they are in terms of growth and development to function socially and to have good overall health. A negative self-perception may cause children to develop behavioral and mental health issues or may make existing issues less manageable. In your role as the provider, you must promote good self-perception, positive behavior, and mental wellness in children. You must also support parents by offering strategies that will help their children understand themselves and grow into happy, healthy young adults. To prepare: Review this weeks media presentation, as well as Self-Perception Issues and Coping and Stress Tolerance: Mental Health and Illness in the Burns et al. text and the American Academy of Pediatrics article in the Learning Resources. Select one of the following age groups: infants, toddlers, preschoolers, school-age children, or adolescents. Select one self-perception, one behavior, and one mental health issue common among members of this age group. Consider strategies for mitigating each issue that promote good self-perception, positive behavior, and mental wellness in the age group you selected. Reflect on how you might educate parents on implementing these strategies with their children. Think about resources that you can recommend to parents for additional education and/or support. By Day 3 Post a brief explanation of one common self-perception, one behavior, and one mental health issue for the age group you selected. Then, explain strategies for mitigating each issue that promote good self-perception, positive behavior, and mental wellness in this age group. Explain how you might educate parents on implementing these strategies with their children. Finally, suggest resources that you might recommend to parents for additional education and/or support. Read a selection of your colleagues responses. By Day 6 Respond to at least two of your colleagues on two different days who selected different age groups than you did. Based on your personal and/or professional experiences, expand on your colleagues postings by providing additional insights or different perspectives. Rubric Outstanding Performance Excellent Performance Competent Performance Proficient Performance Room for Improvement 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 (44%) – 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. supported by at least 3 current, credible sources 40 (40%) – 43 (43%) Responds to the discussion question(s) is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth supported by at least 3 credible references 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 post has exceptional depth and breadth supported by at least 3 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. post is cited with fewer than 2 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 1 or no credible references Main Posting: Writing 6 (6%) – 6 (6%) Written clearly and concisely Contains no grammatical or spelling errors Fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style 5.5 (5.5%) – 5.5 (5.5%) Written clearly and concisely May contain one or no grammatical or spelling error Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Written concisely May contain one to two grammatical or spelling error Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style 4.5 (4.5%) – 4.5 (4.5%) Written somewhat concisely May contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors Contains some APA formatting errors 0 (0%) – 4 (4%) 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 10 (10%) – 10 (10%) Meets requirements for timely and full participation posts main discussion by due date 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) NA 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) NA 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) NA 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Does not meet requirement for full participation 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 8.5 (8.5%) – 8.5 (8.5%) Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings 7.5 (7.5%) – 8 (8%) Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting 6.5 (6.5%) – 7 (7%) Response is on topic, may have some depth 0 (0%) – 6 (6%) Response may not be on topic, 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%) – 5.5 (5.5%) Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues Response to faculty questions are 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 4.5 (4.5%) – 4.5 (4.5%) Responses posted 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%) – 4 (4%) Responses posted in the discussion lack effective 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 and full participation posts by due date 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) NA 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) NA 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) NA 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Does not meet requirement for full participation 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 8.5 (8.5%) – 8.5 (8.5%) Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings 7.5 (7.5%) – 8 (8%) Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting 6.5 (6.5%) – 7 (7%) Response is on topic, may have some depth 0 (0%) – 6 (6%) Response may not be on topic, 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 (%) – (%) Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues Response to faculty questions are 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 (%) – (%) Responses posted 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%) – 4 (4%) Responses posted in the discussion lack effective 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 and full participation Posts by due date 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) NA 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) NA 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) NA 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Does not meet requirement for full participation Total Points: 100
Use the order calculator below and get started! Contact our live support team for any assistance or inquiry.
[order_calculator]