| Course | DNRS 6800 Advanced Pediatric Development and Behavior |
|---|---|
| Week | Week 9 |
| Paper type | Discussion post with two peer replies |
| Length | About 540 words, 3 pages |
| Format | Discussion post, APA 7 citations |
| School | Walden University |
| Program | Doctor of Nursing Practice (DNP) |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for DNRS 6800 Week 9
Week 9 Discussion: Initial Post
A Spoon-Feeding Item, a Grandmother Who Feeds Her Grandson, and What the Score Can Support
A composite 30-month-old boy's screening questionnaire came back with a low personal-social score, driven largely by the item asking whether he feeds himself with a spoon. His grandmother, who cares for him during the day, feeds him at every meal. In their household, feeding a child of this age is ordinary and intended; it is how she shows care and how meals stay tidy and unhurried. He has never been expected to use a spoon himself.
Two questions are usually run together here, and they need to be separated. The first is whether the item measures development: does he have the fine motor and self-help skills to feed himself? The second is whether the item measures a family practice: has he had the chance and the expectation to do so? A parent-completed item cannot tell these apart, because the parent reports what the child does, not what the child could do.
The instrument's norms tell us whose practice the item assumes. The Ages and Stages Questionnaires were developed and normed in the United States (Squires & Bricker, 2009), and a national U.S. survey of caregivers found that most toddlers were reported to show self-feeding skills by 15 to 18 months (Carruth et al., 2004), which reflects both skill and the common U.S. expectation that toddlers feed themselves. A review of the instrument's use across many countries found it widely translated and adapted, and called for further validation across cultural and linguistic settings (Small et al., 2019). That caution applies within a single U.S. clinic too, when a family's practices differ from those of the norming sample.
So the score can support two things, in this order. First, it can support asking about opportunity: who feeds him, whether he is ever offered a spoon, and what he does when he is. Second, it can support a brief direct look at the underlying skill, such as handing him a spoon and a cup of yogurt in the clinic and watching his grasp and aim. It cannot support calling him delayed on that item, because he has not had the chance the item assumes. And it cannot support dismissing the whole screen as culturally biased either: his other domains still count, and if the spoon test in clinic showed poor grasp, the low score would mean something after all.
Reply to Bianca
Bianca, your point extends well to the dressing items. In your case, a 3-year-old whose mother dresses her each morning to get to work on time scored low on putting on a shirt. The same two questions apply. Did anyone watch her try to put on a shirt in clinic, and what would you conclude if she managed it easily?
Reply to Kevin
Kevin, you read the norming data as meaning the tool is invalid for any family outside the norming sample. I would put it more narrowly: the norms tell us what most children in that sample did, which is useful as long as we ask whether a given item depends on a practice. Would you set aside the gross motor items for this boy too, even though running and climbing do not depend on family feeding customs?
References
Carruth, B. R., Ziegler, P. J., Gordon, A., & Hendricks, K. (2004). Developmental milestones and self-feeding behaviors in infants and toddlers. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 104(1 Suppl. 1), s51-s56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jada.2003.10.019
Small, J. W., Hix-Small, H., Vargas-Baron, E., & Marks, K. P. (2019). Comparative use of the Ages and Stages Questionnaires in low- and middle-income countries. Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology, 61(4), 431-443. https://doi.org/10.1111/dmcn.13938
Squires, J., & Bricker, D. (2009). Ages & Stages Questionnaires, third edition (ASQ-3): A parent-completed child monitoring system. Paul H. Brookes Publishing.
Reading the DNRS 6800 Week 9 instructions
The ninth week thread in DNRS 6800 often asks how culture, family practice or language affects developmental screening and interpretation. You are expected to discuss a specific instrument or item, what its norms rest on, and how a clinician should respond when a result reflects family practice. Cite the instrument manual or validation research and at least one study on cultural adaptation in APA 7. A case helps make the point concrete. The initial post is due midweek, followed by two replies. Replies should carry sources too in most sections. Avoid general statements about cultural sensitivity without connecting them to the instrument. Describe the family practice without judgment and in enough detail that a classmate can see why the item failed. Name what you would ask the grandmother at the next visit.
Inside the DNRS 6800 Week 9 example
The post opens with a concrete instance rather than a principle: a child whose independent feeding item scores below expectation in a household where feeding a three year old is ordinary and intended. From there it separates two questions that most posts run together, whether the item measures development and whether the item measures a family practice. A cited source establishes the norming sample of the instrument in question. A second source supplies the caution about applying it across groups. The writer then states what the score can and cannot support, in that order, and refuses the easy conclusion in both directions. Two replies follow, one extending the argument to a different item and one disputing the writer's reading of the norming data.
DNRS 6800 Week 9 rubric: what earns full marks
This thread rewards precision about instruments, and it punishes vagueness dressed as sensitivity. The row for evidence expects a real citation about a real norming sample, and posts that assert bias without naming where it enters the instrument collect little from it. The example wires its claim to a specific item and a specific source. A second row asks for a defensible position, and refusing to say what the score means is not a position even when it sounds respectful. Points also go missing when a post treats a family practice as an obstacle to accurate screening rather than as information about the child. Where replies are graded separately, disputing a classmate's evidence scores where restating their conclusion does not.
DNRS 6800 Week 9 help from the desk
The thread punishes vagueness dressed as sensitivity, such as saying screening tools may be biased without naming how. Point to the item and the norm. Another error is dismissing the score entirely; the other domains still carry information. Writers also forget to say what the clinician does next, such as asking whether the child is given chances to feed himself. Keep the family's practice described respectfully and specifically. Avoid criticizing a screening tool in general when the issue is one item. In replies, add a source and a concrete step. Check the manual edition you cite. Posts also go wrong by handling culture as a fixed trait of a group rather than as what this family does at meals. Describe the practice, not a stereotype. Writers also forget that a low score still deserves a follow-up plan even when the explanation seems clear. Say what you would rescreen and when.
Get a DNRS 6800 Week 9 example written to your instructions
Send the Week 9 prompt with the instrument your section is working from and the rubric. The desk writes a thread post around that instrument, its norming sample and the tension your prompt sets up. First custom sample is free and arrives within 24-48 hours, replies included and sourced.
More DNRS 6800 papers and DNP samples
- DNRS 6800 Week 1: Discussion Post
- DNRS 6800 Week 2: Observation Write-Up
- DNRS 6800 Week 3: Milestone Analysis
- DNRS 6800 Week 4: Behavior Log Analysis
- DNRS 6800 Week 5: Discussion Post
- DNRS 6800 Week 6: Case Formulation
- DNRS 6800 Week 7: Family Interview Write-Up
- DNRS 6800 Week 8: Referral Letter
- DNRS 6800 Week 10: Parent guidance plan
- DNRS 6800 Week 11: Reflection
- NURS 8002 Week 9: DNP change agent post
- DNRS 6630 Week 9: Special Populations Paper
- NURS 8003 Week 9: Development plan
- DNRS 6211 Week 9: Business Case
DNRS 6800 Week 9 questions, answered
Does the example criticize a specific screening tool?
It examines one, which is different. The post names an instrument, cites what population it was built on, and reasons about a single item where a household practice affects the score. That is analysis rather than criticism, and it is what the row for evidence pays for. Whichever tool your prompt puts on the table can be substituted without changing the structure.
Is this a cultural competence discussion?
It touches that, but the post is written as a measurement argument, which is what keeps it gradable. Threads that stay at the level of respect and awareness read alike across a whole section. Anchoring the same concern to a scored item, a norming sample and a decision about what the number supports gives a grader something specific to reward.
Do the two replies need sources?
In the example both carry one, and it is the cheapest way to lift a reply out of the agreement band. Requirements differ by classroom, and some rubrics ask for citation only in the initial post. Even where replies are ungraded on evidence, a reply that brings a source tends to draw a response from the classmate, which is what the thread row is measuring.
Where can I find a free DNRS 6800 Week 9 sample paper?
The spoon-feeding post is reproduced here with replies to Bianca and Kevin and margin notes on reading a single item against the family's practice.
Can a screening score reflect culture rather than delay in DNRS 6800 Week 9?
Yes. The example shows a low personal-social score driven by a self-feeding item when the child's grandmother feeds him, so the item measured opportunity, not ability.