Introductory Anatomy & Physiology Research Paper
Top nursing paper writers on hand to assist you with assignment : Introductory Anatomy & Physiology Research Paper
Introductory Anatomy & Physiology Research Paper
Introductory Anatomy & Physiology Research Paper
Introductory Anatomy & Physiology Research Paper Instructions:
The topic of the research paper will be any disease or condition of the body. The paper must include a thorough description of the disease/condition; current statistics of those affected; explanations on how the various body systems are affected; and any medications/treatments that are available, if any.
Looking for nursing papers writing help? Top Nursing Papers Writing Service Online is here. A team of professional nursing essay writers ready to help. Relieve academic stress! With you all through your education course. There is no nursing subject we cannot handle.
Introductory Anatomy & Physiology Research Paper
As always, I highly suggest that you utilize The Owl at Purdue site for assistance with formatting your paper in the APA style: owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/560/01/
Get top nursing papers.
There are over 7 billion people in the world today. Each one of us has the same basic template: a set of arms and legs, one heart, two eyes, two ears, etc., but with infinite variations, no two people are identical. From the findings of anatomy and physiology, the human body consists of six levels of structural complexity. It begins with the microscopic level of atoms and molecules to the largest level, the organism level. Anatomy is the study of the structure and shape of the body and physiology is the study of the functions of the human body. They are two different studies, but anatomy and physiology are closely related and correspond with each other. With such close relations, both sciences are often studied together for an effective learning.
Ancient Greek anatomist, Herophilus (325–255 B. C.), was said to be “the father of anatomy.” One of the most contentious occurrences in history is that Herophilus, along with his colleague, Erasistratus, performed vivisections on living human beings. This controversial event marked the beginning development of human anatomy and became a milestone for future discoveries. He, along with Erasistratus, were the first to analyze the human body which shortly led to the understanding of human organs. Herophilus’ observations consisted of the brain, eye, liver, reproductive organs and the nervous system. He studied the cavities of the brain, which he noted as the center of the nervous system. He would name certain structures based on their shape and many medical terms are constructed with Latin and Greek roots to provide a better exchange of context.
While Herophilus was notably the father of anatomy, Erasistratus (304–250 B.C.), was believed to be the “father of physiology.” Erasistratus studie…
Name: Discussion Rubric
| Excellent 90–100 |
Good 80–89 |
Fair 70–79 |
Poor 0–69 |
|||
| 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. |
40 (40%) – 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. No less than 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth. Supported by at least three current credible sources. |
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 the post has exceptional depth and breadth. Supported by at least three 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. Cited with fewer than two 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 one or no credible references. |
||
| Main Posting: Writing |
6 (6%) – 6 (6%) Written clearly and concisely. Contains no grammatical or spelling errors. Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. |
5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Written concisely. May contain one to two grammatical or spelling errors. Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. |
4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Written somewhat concisely. May contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors. Contains some APA formatting errors. |
0 (0%) – 3 (3%) 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 |
9 (9%) – 10 (10%) Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. Posts main Discussion by due date. |
8 (8%) – 8 (8%) Meets requirements for full participation. Posts main Discussion by due date. |
7 (7%) – 7 (7%) Posts main Discussion by due date. |
0 (0%) – 6 (6%) Does not meet requirements for full participation. Does not post main Discussion by due date. |
||
| 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 (8%) – 8 (8%) Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting. |
7 (7%) – 7 (7%) Response is on topic and may have some depth. |
0 (0%) – 6 (6%) Response may not be on topic and lacks depth. |
||
| First Response: Writing |
6 (6%) – 6 (6%) 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%) 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 (4%) – 4 (4%) 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. |
0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective communication. 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, full, and active participation. Posts by due date. |
4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Meets requirements for full participation. Posts by due date. |
3 (3%) – 3 (3%) Posts by due date. |
0 (0%) – 2 (2%) Does not meet requirements for full participation. Does not post by due date. |
||
| 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 (8%) – 8 (8%) Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting. |
7 (7%) – 7 (7%) Response is on topic and may have some depth. |
0 (0%) – 6 (6%) Response may not be on topic and lacks depth. |
||
| Second Response: Writing |
6 (6%) – 6 (6%) 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%) 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 (4%) – 4 (4%) 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. |
0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective communication. 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, full, and active participation. Posts by due date. |
4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Meets requirements for full participation. Posts by due date. |
3 (3%) – 3 (3%) Posts by due date. |
0 (0%) – 2 (2%) Does not meet requirements for full participation. Does not post by due date. |
||
| Total Points: 100 | ||||||
Name: Discussion Rubric
24/7 Nursing Homework Help
Stuck with your nursing assignment? From Essays to Complicated Dissertations? Our accredited nursing paper writers can answer it all!
