This page holds a finished NR 302 Week 5 respiratory assessment, showing how a beginner turns something heard into words another reader can use. Searches like "nr 302 week 5 assignment example", "nr302 week 5 sample" and "nr 302 week 5 example" land here.
What a finished NR 302 Week 5 respiratory assessment looks like
What the finished document proves is that the writer had more than one word available. Before anything is listened to, the visible part is written: how many breaths in a minute, whether they come evenly, whether the shoulders and neck are helping, how the person is sitting. Then the listening entries, and each one carries four things rather than one. How loud the sound was. Whether it sat high or low. How long the in-breath ran against the out-breath at that spot. And exactly where on the chest or back the writer's stethoscope was resting. Sounds that belong in a place are named as belonging there. Anything the writer could not put a word to is described in plain English instead of being left out.
How a NR 302 Week 5 example is structured
The form sets the order and this region's forms almost always separate the front, the back and the sides into their own blocks. Inside a block the example works in pairs, one spot on the right and the matching spot on the left before anything moves lower, and the two are written as a single line, which puts the comparison into the document rather than leaving it in somebody's recollection. Positions are given in whatever terms the form prints, usually a rib space and a vertical line down the body. The looking entries come before the listening ones, since a rate counted after a person has been asked to breathe deeply is no longer the rate they arrived with. Each listening entry names the sound before describing it. A closing line says how the person managed the examination.
Four things per sound
Loudness, whether it sits high or low, how the in-breath compares with the out-breath, and the exact spot, all four entered rather than replaced by one adjective.
Looking before listening
Rate, evenness, effort and posture written down first, because asking somebody to breathe deeply changes the very thing the opening rows were meant to capture.
Pairs written as one line
The right spot and its partner on the left entered together, so the difference between them is recorded at the moment it was heard rather than reconstructed later.
Plain English where the term is missing
A sound the writer has no name for described in ordinary words, which is worth far more than a technical label chosen because it sounded plausible.
Quiet spots still entered
Every place the stethoscope rested produces a line naming what was there, since an empty row reads as a spot the writer never reached.
Where marks go in NR 302 Week 5
The reliable loss is the sound with nowhere to be. Heard clear is not a finding, and neither is a note that breathing was normal, because both describe the writer's confidence instead of the noise. Second is the write-up that finishes one whole side before starting the other, which discards the only reason for listening in pairs. After those: a rate given with nothing about rhythm or effort, an entry with a description and no position, a position given as upper back rather than as a space and a line, the sides listened to but never set against each other in writing, and adjectives that could apply to any sound in any region. Writing a sound to fill a row you never listened to is the one loss that is not recoverable.
Get a NR 302 Week 5 example written to your instructions
Send the Week 5 instructions and the respiratory form your section uses, and a custom example is written into its blocks with your own landmarks, back inside 24 to 48 hours. The first one is free. The chest you listened to belongs to somebody who agreed to be listened to, and that part is yours alone.
NR 302 Week 5 questions, answered
Everything sounded the same on my volunteer. What am I supposed to write?
Put down the place and the sound at every stop, with the four descriptors filled in each time. Equal loudness on both sides at every level is a finding and a complete one. The week is testing whether you can describe an ordinary sound, which is harder than describing an unusual one and is the reason the assignment exists at this point in the term.
Do I need to know the proper names for the normal breath sounds?
Use them where your text has already introduced them, and describe the sound plainly where it has not. The two proper names for ordinary breathing carry a lot of information in very little space, which is why they are taught early, but a beginner who attaches the wrong one to the wrong part of the chest loses more than the space was worth. Accuracy first, compression afterwards.
My describing words all sound the same. Is that a problem?
It is the problem this week was designed around, and the fix is mechanical rather than creative. Build a short list of the sound terms your text uses before you start listening, keep it beside you, and choose from it. Beginners who write from memory reach for the same two adjectives all the way down the page, and a grader can see the whole document was written by somebody working from one word.