- Premium Academic Help From Professionals
- +1 323 471 4575
- support@crucialessay.com
Section 2 of the Designing a Group Experience Assignment
Section 2 of the Designing a Group Experience Assignment
Order ID# 45178248544XXTG457 Plagiarism Level: 0-0.5% Writer Classification: PhD competent Style: APA/MLA/Harvard/Chicago Delivery: Minimum 3 Hours Revision: Permitted Sources: 4-6 Course Level: Masters/University College Guarantee Status: 96-99% Instructions
Section 2 of the Designing a Group Experience Assignment
Name: Section 2 – Formulating Goals
Description: Section 2 of the Designing a Group Experience Assignment.
Unsatisfactory Needs Improvement Satisfactory Good Excellent Formulation of goals 0 (0.00%) Did not construct goals.
79 (79.00) Constructed a set of goals, but more than two elements are missing (reasonable, appropriate, measurable, clearly written). One or more core elements of critical thinking (interpretation, analysis, inference, and evaluation) are not clearly demonstrated
80 (80.00) Constructed a set of clinical goals, but more than one element is missing (reasonable, appropriate, measurable, clearly written [;). All core elements of critical thinking (interpretation, analysis, inference, and evaluation) are demonstrated.
90 (90.00) Constructed a set of clinical goals that are appropriate to the clinical situation, but one element is missing (reasonable, appropriate, measurable, clearly written). All core elements of critical thinking (interpretation, analysis, inference, and evaluation) are demonstrated.
100 (100.0) Constructed a reasonable set of clinical goals that are appropriate to the clinical situation, achievable in the available time frame, and clarify for the participants how the procedure of the group will help them attain those goals. All core elements of critical thinking (interpretation, analysis, inference, and evaluation) are demonstrated.
Name: Section 3 – Outline of weekly sessions for your group experience
Description: Section 3 of the Designing a Group Experience Assignment
Unsatisfactory Needs Improvement Satisfactory Good Excellent Weekly sessions
. 0 (0.00%) Did not provide a weekly session outline for the group experience.
79 (79.00%) One or more required elements were missing (topic, activity, or objective) for each week of the group experience, and there was a lack of consistency and congruency with the group’s purpose and goals.One or more core elements of critical thinking (interpretation, analysis, inference, and evaluation) are not clearly demonstrated.
80 (80.00%) One of the required elements of the weekly sessions was missing (topic, activity, or objective) and there was a lack of consistency
and congruency with the group’s purpose and goals. All core elements of critical thinking (interpretation, analysis, inference, and evaluation) are demonstrated.
90 (90.00%) Provided all required elements (topic, activity, and objective)for each week of the group experience, but some were not consistent and congruent with the group’s purpose and goals. All core elements of critical thinking (interpretation, analysis, inference, and evaluation) are demonstrated
100(100.00% Provided all required elements (topic, activity, and objective) for each week of the group experience that were consistent and congruent with the group’s purpose and goals. All core elements of critical thinking (interpretation, analysis, inference, and evaluation) are demonstrated.
Name: Section 4 – Therapeutic techniques to achieve goals
Description: Section 4 of the Designing a Group Experience Assignment.
Unsatisfactory Needs Improvement Satisfactory Good Excellent Therapeutic factors
(0.00%) Did not identify or discuss therapeutic factorsor techniques.
79 (79.00%) Selected only one therapeutic factor and did not provide a rationale for the choice. Did not discuss a therapeutic technique to facilitate the integration of the therapeutic factor. One or more core elements of critical thinking (interpretation, analysis, inference, and evaluation are not clearly demonstrated.
80 (80.00%) Selected only one therapeutic factor and therapeutic technique. Provided a rationale, but it did not adequately explain choices. All core elements of critical thinking (interpretation, analysis, inference, and evaluation) are demonstrated.
90 (90.00%) Selected at least two therapeutic factors and provided a rationale. Discussed specific techniques, but did not adequately explain how they will facilitate the integration of the therapeutic factors. All core elements of critical thinking (interpretation, analysis, inference, and evaluation) are demonstrated.
100 (100.00%) Selected at least two therapeutic factors and provided a rationale that clearly explained choices. Discussed specific techniques that can be used to facilitate the integration of the therapeutic factors to help ensure that the group’s goals are achieved. All core elements of critical thinking (interpretation, analysis, inference, and evaluation)are demonstrated.
.
RUBRIC
Excellent Quality 95-100%
Introduction 45-41 points
The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.
Literature Support 91-84 points
The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.
Methodology 58-53 points
Content is well-organized with headings for each slide and bulleted lists to group related material as needed. Use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. to enhance readability and presentation content is excellent. Length requirements of 10 slides/pages or less is met.
Average Score 50-85%
40-38 points More depth/detail for the background and significance is needed, or the research detail is not clear. No search history information is provided.
83-76 points Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is little integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are included. Summary of information presented is included. Conclusion may not contain a biblical integration.
52-49 points Content is somewhat organized, but no structure is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. is occasionally detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met.
Poor Quality 0-45%
37-1 points The background and/or significance are missing. No search history information is provided.
75-1 points Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is no integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are not included in the summary of information presented. Conclusion does not contain a biblical integration.
48-1 points There is no clear or logical organizational structure. No logical sequence is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects etc. is often detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met
You Can Also Place the Order at www.perfectacademic.com/orders/ordernow or www.crucialessay.com/orders/ordernow Section 2 of the Designing a Group Experience Assignment
Section 2 of the Designing a Group Experience Assignment
