Rubric to follow for the discussion question Outstanding Performance Excellent 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 ...

1. Rubric to follow for the discussion question
Outstanding Performance
Excellent 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

2. 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

3. 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

4. 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

5. 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%)

6. 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

7. 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

8. 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
Name: NURS_6501_Week9_Discussion_Rubric
Learning Resources to follow
Required Readings
Huether, S. E., & McCance, K. L. (2017). Understanding
pathophysiology (6th ed.). St. Louis, MO: Mosby.
· Chapter 18, “Mechanisms of Hormonal Regulation”
This chapter explores mechanisms of hormonal regulation and
the structure and function of the endocrine glands. It provides a
foundation for examining alterations of the endocrine system, as
well as the effects of aging on the endocrine glands.
· Chapter 19, “Alterations of Hormonal Regulation”
This chapter begins with an explanation of the mechanisms of
hormonal alterations. It then discusses alterations of the
hypothalamic-pituitary system, thyroid function, parathyroid

9. function, endocrine pancreas, and adrenal function. It also
covers the pathophysiology, clinical manifestations, and
evaluation and treatment of type 1 and type 2 diabetes.
Hammer, G. D., & McPhee, S. J. (2019). Pathophysiology of
disease: An introduction to clinical medicine (8th ed.). New
York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education.
· Chapter 17, “Disorders of the Parathyroids & Calcium &
Phosphorus Metabolism”
This chapter explores the anatomy, histology, and associated
mechanisms of the parathyroid glands, bone, vitamin D, and C
cells. It then examines various disorders involving altered
regulation of parathyroids, calcium, and phosphorous
metabolism.
· Chapter 18, “Disorders of the Endocrine Pancreas”
This chapter explores the anatomy, histology, and physiology of
the endocrine pancreas. It then covers the clinical presentation,
etiology, pathophysiology, and clinical manifestations of
endocrine pancreas disorders such as diabetes mellitus.
· Chapter 19, “Disorders of the Hypothalamus & Pituitary
Gland”
This chapter covers the structure and function of the
hypothalamus and pituitary glands. It then explores disorders
relating to alterations of the hypothalamus and pituitary glands.
· Chapter 20, “Thyroid Disease”
This chapter explains thyroid hormones, including how they are
formed and secreted. It then examines thyroid diseases such as
hyperthyroidism, hypothyroidism, and goiters.

10. http://evolve.elsevier.com/huether
http://www.diabetes.org/
http://www.endo-society.org/
http://www.hormone.org/
Discussion question
Discussion: Diabetes
According to the American Diabetes Association (2011), 25.8
million children and adults have been diagnosed with diabetes
in the United States. Approximately 2 million more are
diagnosed every year, with another 79 million people
considered to be in a pre-diabetes state. These millions of
people are at risk of several alterations, including heart disease,
stroke, kidney failure, neuropathy, and blindness. Since diabetes
has a major impact on the health of millions of people around
the world, it is essential for nurses to understand the
pathophysiology and associated alterations of this disorder. In
this Discussion, you compare two types of diabetes—diabetes
mellitus and diabetes insipidus.
To Prepare
· Review Chapter 19 in the Huether and McCance text and
Chapter 18 in the Hammer and McPhee text. Identify the
pathophysiology of diabetes mellitus and diabetes insipidus.
Consider the similarities and differences between resulting
alterations of hormonal regulation.
· Select two of the following patient factors: genetics, gender,
ethnicity, age, or behavior. Think about how the factors you
selected might impact the diagnosis and prescription of
treatment for these two types of diabetes.
By Day 3

11. Post an explanation of the pathophysiology of diabetes mellitus
and diabetes insipidus. Describe the differences and similarities
between resulting alterations of hormonal regulation. Then
explain how the factors you selected might impact the diagnosis
and prescription of treatment for these two types of diabetes.
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 "Post to
Discussion Question" link and then select "Create Thread" to
complete your initial post. Remember, once you click on
Submit, you cannot delete or edit your own posts, and you
cannot post anonymously. Please check your post carefully
before clicking on Submit!
Reference
American Diabetes Association. (2011). Diabetes statistics.
Retrieved from http://www.diabetes.org/diabetes-
basics/diabetes-statistics/