Also utilize study questions to develop your understanding of the concepts and topics presented throughout this course. Soriano, R. P. (2026). Bates’ guide to physical examination and history taking(14th ed.). Wolters

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCompare the efficacy of each provider's approach to patient interviewing regarding the effect on patient behavior. Which approach is more effective in helping patients achieve health-related behavioral changes?

20 to >17.88 ptsExcellentProvides a fully developed comparison of the efficacy of each provider's approach to patient interviewing regarding the effect on patient behavior. Thoroughly explains which approach is more effective in helping patients achieve health-related behavioral changes.

17.88 to >15.88 ptsGoodProvides an adequately developed comparison of the efficacy of each provider's approach to patient interviewing regarding the effect on patient behavior. Adequately explains which approach is more effective in helping patients achieve health-related behavioral changes.

15.88 to >13.88 ptsFairProvides a minimally developed comparison of the efficacy of each provider's approach to patient interviewing regarding the effect on patient behavior. Minimal or undeveloped explanation of which approach is more effective in helping patients achieve health-related behavioral changes.

13.88 to >0 ptsPoorDoes not provide a comparison of the efficacy of each provider's approach to patient interviewing regarding effect on patient behavior; comparison is vague, unclear, or inaccurate.

20 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeExplain how motivational interviewing (MI) differs in tone, structure, and patient engagement compared to traditional interviewing.

20 to >17.88 ptsExcellentProvides a fully developed explanation of how motivational interviewing (MI) differs in tone, structure, and patient engagement compared to traditional interviewing.

17.88 to >15.88 ptsGoodProvides an adequately developed reflection on how they might use MI techniques in their own advanced practice role to promote patient-centered outcomes.

15.88 to >13.88 ptsFairProvides a minimally developed reflection on how they might use MI techniques in their own advanced practice role to promote patient-centered outcomes.

13.88 to >0 ptsPoorDoes not provide a reflection on how they might use MI techniques in their own advanced practice role to promote patient-centered outcomes; reflection is vague, unclear, or inaccurate.

20 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeReflect on how you might use MI techniques in your own advanced practice role to promote patient-centered outcomes.

20 to >17.88 ptsExcellentProvides a fully developed reflection on how they might use MI techniques in their own advanced practice role to promote patient-centered outcomes.

17.88 to >15.88 ptsGoodProvides an adequately developed reflection on how they might use MI techniques in their own advanced practice role to promote patient-centered outcomes.

15.88 to >13.88 ptsFairProvides a minimally developed reflection on how they might use MI techniques in their own advanced practice role to promote patient-centered outcomes.

13.88 to >0 ptsPoorDoes not provide a reflection on how they might use MI techniques in their own advanced practice role to promote patient-centered outcomes; reflection is vague, unclear, or inaccurate.

20 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeConsider how principles of autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice apply to patient interviewing and communication practices.

20 to >17.88 ptsExcellentProvides a fully developed analysis of how principles of autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice apply to patient interviewing and communication practices.

17.88 to >15.88 ptsGoodProvides an adequately developed analysis of how principles of autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice apply to patient interviewing and communication practices.

15.88 to >13.88 ptsFairProvides a minimally developed analysis of how principles of autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice apply to patient interviewing and communication practices.

13.88 to >0 ptsPoorDoes not provide an analysis of how principles of autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice apply to patient interviewing and communication practices; analysis is vague, unclear, or inadequate.

20 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeUse at least 3 scholarly resources that are less than 5 years old.

10 to >8.94 ptsExcellentUses 3 peer-reviewed scholarly sources published within the last 5 years.

8.94 to >7.94 ptsGoodUses 2 peer-reviewed scholarly sources published within the last 5 years.

7.94 to >6.94 ptsFairUses 1 peer-reviewed scholarly source published within the last 5 years.

6.94 to >0 ptsPoorDoes not use peer-reviewed scholarly sources or sources used are older than 5 years.

10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSource Attribution and APA Formatting

5 to >4.46 ptsExcellentAll sources are cited in APA format without any errors.

4.46 to >3.96 ptsGoodAll sources are cited in APA format with some minor errors.

3.96 to >3.46 ptsFairAll sources are cited with frequent APA formatting errors.

3.46 to >0 ptsPoorMissing source citations and/or minimal adherence to APA formatting rules.

5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeGrammar, Mechanics, and Punctuation

5 to >4.46 ptsExcellentUses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors.

4.46 to >3.96 ptsGoodUses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with few errors.

3.96 to >3.46 ptsFairUses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with frequent errors.

3.46 to >0 ptsPoorPost contains frequent errors in grammar, spelling, and punctuation that interfere with comprehension.

5 pts