NRS-434VN developmental assessment: school-aged child

Assessment Description The needs of the pediatric patient differ depending on age, as do the stages of development and the expected assessment findings for each stage. In a 500-750-word paper, examine the needs of a school-aged child between the ages of 5 and 12 years old and discuss the following: Compare the physical assessments among school-aged children. Describe how you would modify assessment techniques to match the age and developmental stage of the child. Choose a child between the ages of 5 and 12 years old. Identify the age of the child and describe the typical developmental stages of children that age. Applying developmental theory based on Erickson, Piaget, or Kohlberg, explain how you would developmentally assess the child. Include how you would offer explanations during the assessment, strategies you would use to gain cooperation, and potential findings from the assessment. You are required to cite a minimum of three peer-reviewed sources to complete this assignment. Sources must be published within the last 5 years, appropriate for the assignment criteria, and relevant to nursing practice. Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required. This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion. You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. A link to the LopesWrite technical support articles is located in Class Resources if you need assistance. Attachments NRS-434VN-R-CLC-Agreement-Student.docx Developmental Assessment and the School-Aged Child – Rubric Collapse All Developmental Assessment And The School-Aged Child – RubricCollapse All Comparison of Physical Assessment Among School-Aged Children 27.5 points Criteria Description Comparison of Physical Assessment Among School-Aged Children 5. 5: Excellent 27.5 points A detailed comparison of physical assessments among different school-aged children is presented. How assessment techniques would be modified depending on the age and developmental stage of the child is thoroughly described. Insight is demonstrated into the physical assessment of school age children. 4. 4: Good 24.48 points A comparison of physical assessments among different school-aged children is presented. How assessment techniques would be modified depending on the age and developmental stage of the child is described. Some information is needed for clarity. 3. 3: Satisfactory 21.73 points A general comparison of physical assessments among different school-aged children is summarized. How assessment techniques would be modified depending on the age and developmental stage of the child is generally described. More information or support is needed for clarity or accuracy. 2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory 20.63 points An incomplete comparison of physical assessments among different school-aged children is summarized. How assessment techniques would be modified depending on the age and developmental stage of the child is omitted or contains significant inaccuracies. 1. 1: Unsatisfactory 0 points A comparison of physical assessments among different school-aged children is omitted. Typical Assessment for a Child of a Specific Age 27.5 points Criteria Description Typical Assessment for a Child of a Specific Age 5. 5: Excellent 27.5 points The typical developmental stage of a child between the ages 5 and 12 is accurately and thoroughly described. 4. 4: Good 24.48 points The typical developmental stage of a child between the ages 5 and 12 is described. The overall description is accurate. Some information is needed for clarity. 3. 3: Satisfactory 21.73 points The typical developmental stage of a child between the ages 5 and 12 is generally described. The description contains some inaccuracies for the age of the child. 2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory 20.63 points The typical developmental stage of a child between the ages 5 and 12 is summarized. The summary contains significant inaccuracies for the age of the child. 1. 1: Unsatisfactory 0 points The typical developmental stage of a child between the ages 5 and 12 is not described. Developmental Assessment of a Child Using a Developmental Theory (Erickson, Piaget, Kohlberg) 33 points Criteria Description Developmental Assessment of a Child Using a Developmental Theory (Erickson, Piaget, Kohlberg) 5. 5: Excellent 33 points A child assessment based on a developmental theory is thoroughly described. Well-developed strategies to gain cooperation and for how explanations would be offered during the assessment are presented. The potential findings expected from the assessment are all accurate and described in detail. 4. 4: Good 29.37 points A child assessment based on a developmental theory is described. Appropriate strategies to gain cooperation and for how explanations would be offered during the assessment are presented. The potential findings expected from the assessment are described. Some information is needed for clarity. 3. 3: Satisfactory 26.07 points A child assessment based on a developmental theory is generally described. General strategies to gain cooperation and for how explanations would be offered during the assessment are presented. The potential findings expected from the assessment are summarized. There are minor inaccuracies. 2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory 24.75 points A child assessment based on a developmental theory is partially summarized. Partial strategies to gain cooperation and for how explanations would be offered during the assessment are presented. The potential findings expected from the assessment are omitted or are incorrect. There are significant inaccuracies. 1. 1: Unsatisfactory 0 points A child assessment based on a developmental theory is omitted. Applying developmental theory based on Erickson, Piaget, or Kohlberg, explain how you would developmentally assess the child Thesis Development and Purpose 5.5 points Criteria Description Thesis Development and Purpose 5. 5: Excellent 5.5 points Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear. 4. 4: Good 4.9 points Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose. 3. 3: Satisfactory 4.35 points Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose. 2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory 4.13 points Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear. 1. 1: Unsatisfactory 0 points Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim. Argument Logic and Construction 5.5 points Criteria Description Argument Logic and Construction 5. 5: Excellent 5.5 points Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative. 4. 4: Good 4.9 points Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative. 3. 3: Satisfactory 4.35 points Argument is orderly but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis. 2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory 4.13 points Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility. 1. 1: Unsatisfactory 0 points Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources. Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) 5.5 points Criteria Description Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) 5. 5: Excellent 5.5 points Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English. 4. 4: Good 4.9 points Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used. 3. 3: Satisfactory 4.35 points Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used. 2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory 4.13 points Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, or word choice are present. 1. 1: Unsatisfactory 0 points Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used. Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) 2.2 points Criteria Description Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) 5. 5: Excellent 2.2 points All format elements are correct. 4. 4: Good 1.96 points Template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style. 3. 3: Satisfactory 1.74 points Template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present. 2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory 1.65 points Template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent. 1. 1: Unsatisfactory 0 points Template is not used appropriately, or documentation format is rarely followed correctly. Documentation of Sources 3.3 points Criteria Description Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) 5. 5: Excellent 3.3 points Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error. 4. 4: Good 2.94 points Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct. 3. 3: Satisfactory 2.61 points Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present. 2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory 2.47 points Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors. 1. 1: Unsatisfactory 0 points Sources are not documented. Total 110 points