Psychotherapy for Prospects With Addictive Issues

NRNP_6645_Week8_Assignment_Rubric

Standards

Ratings

Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDevelop a 5- to 10-race PowerPoint presentation on your chosen research article discussing a therapeutic intention for treating potentialities, households, or teams with addictive disorders.•Provide an make clear of the article you chose, including:What inhabitants (particular person, personnel, or family) is below consideration?What changed into the explicit intervention that changed into frail? Is that this a contemporary intervention or one which changed into already frail?What were the author's claims?

20 to >17.0 ptsExcellent 90%–100%The presentation thoroughly and accurately defines the regarded as inhabitants…. The explicit intervention frail is totally and accurately described. The description clearly signifies whether the intervention is contemporary or whether it changed into already studied…. The response includes an intensive and sexy description of the author's claims.

17 to >15.0 ptsGood 80%–89%The presentation defines the regarded as inhabitants…. The explicit intervention frail is described. The description signifies whether the intervention is contemporary or whether it changed into already studied…. The response includes an make clear of the author's claims.

15 to >13.0 ptsFair 70%–seventy nine%There is an incomplete definition of the regarded as inhabitants…. The explicit intervention frail is partly or inaccurately described…. The response includes a partial or wrong description of the author's claims.

13 to >0 ptsPoor 0%–69%There is an incomplete definition of the regarded as inhabitants, or it is lacking…. The explicit intervention frail is partly or inaccurately described, or is lacking…. The response includes a partial or wrong description of the author's claims, or is lacking.

20 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcomeo Stamp the findings/outcomes of the look within the article. Embody whether this can even translate into educate with your potentialities. If that’s the case, how? If no longer, why?

25 to >22.0 ptsExcellent 90%–100%The presentation includes an intensive and sexy review of the findings of the chosen article…. The response absolutely addresses whether or no longer the outcomes will translate into educate with potentialities.

22 to >19.0 ptsGood 80%–89%The presentation includes a review of the findings of the chosen article…. The response addresses whether or no longer the outcomes will translate into educate with potentialities.

19 to >17.0 ptsFair 70%–seventy nine%The presentation includes a considerably wrong or incomplete review of the findings of the chosen article…. The response partly or inaccurately addresses whether or no longer the outcomes will translate into educate with potentialities.

17 to >0 ptsPoor 0%–69%The presentation includes an wrong and incomplete review of the findings of the chosen article, or is lacking…. The response partly or inaccurately addresses whether or no longer the outcomes will translate into educate with potentialities, or is lacking.

25 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome• Stamp whether the boundaries of the look might well impact your skill to make converse of the findings/outcomes presented within the article.

25 to >22.0 ptsExcellent 90%–100%The presentation includes an intensive and sexy clarification of the whether the boundaries of the look might well impact your skill to make converse of the findings presented within the article.

22 to >19.0 ptsGood 80%–89%The presentation includes an clarification of the whether the boundaries of the look might well impact your skill to make converse of the findings presented within the article.

19 to >17.0 ptsFair 70%–seventy nine%The presentation includes a considerably wrong or incomplete clarification of the whether the boundaries of the look might well impact your skill to make converse of the findings presented within the article.

17 to >0 ptsPoor 0%–69%The presentation includes an wrong or incomplete clarification of the whether the boundaries of the look might well impact your skill to make converse of the findings presented within the article, or is lacking.

25 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome•Jabber the Notes characteristic of PowerPoint to craft presenter notes to magnify upon the boom material of your slides.

10 to >8.0 ptsExcellent 90%–100%The Notes characteristic of the presentation is because it might well possibly per chance be frail to comprehensively magnify upon the presentation slides.

8 to >7.0 ptsGood 80%–89%The Notes characteristic of the presentation is satisfactorily frail to magnify upon the presentation slides.

7 to >6.0 ptsFair 70%–seventy nine%The Notes characteristic of the presentation is utilized nevertheless notes are imprecise or comprise runt inaccuracies.

6 to >0 ptsPoor 0%–69%The Notes characteristic of the presentation partly or inaccurately expands upon the presentation slides, or is no longer included.

10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome• Abet your response with at the least three gaze-reviewed, evidence-essentially essentially essentially based sources. Stamp why every of your supporting sources is scholarly. References are included on your ultimate race.

10 to >8.0 ptsExcellent 90%–100%The presentation is strongly supported with at the least three gaze-reviewed, evidence-essentially essentially essentially based, scholarly sources. References are included on the ultimate race.

8 to >7.0 ptsGood 80%–89%The presentation is supported with at the least three gaze-reviewed, evidence-essentially essentially essentially based, scholarly sources. References are included on the ultimate race.

7 to >6.0 ptsFair 70%–seventy nine%The presentation is supported with two or three gaze-reviewed, evidence-essentially essentially essentially based, scholarly sources. Appropriate references is doubtlessly no longer included on the ultimate race.

6 to >0 ptsPoor 0%–69%The presentation is no longer supported with resources gaze-reviewed, evidence-essentially essentially essentially based, scholarly sources, and/or the reference listing is lacking.

10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting – Sort and Group: Slides are certain and no longer overly crowded. Sentences in presenter notes are fastidiously focused—neither long and rambling nor brief and lacking substance.

5 to >4.0 ptsExcellent 90%–100%Slides are certain, concise, and visually titillating. Sentences in presenter notes educate writing requirements for waft, continuity, and readability.

4 to >3.5 ptsGood 80%–89%Slides are certain and concise. Sentences educate writing requirements for waft, continuity, and readability 80% of the time.

3.5 to >3.0 ptsFair 70%–seventy nine%Slides will seemingly be considerably unorganized or crowded. Sentences educate writing requirements for waft, continuity, and readability 60%–seventy nine% of the time.

3 to >0 ptsPoor 0%–69%Slides are unorganized and/or crowded. Sentences educate writing requirements for waft, continuity, and readability < 60% of the time.

5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting – English writing requirements: Heavenly grammar, mechanics, and sexy punctuation

5 to >4.0 ptsExcellent 90%–100%Makes converse of sexy grammar, spelling, and punctuation without a errors.

4 to >3.5 ptsGood 80%–89%Accommodates 1 or 2 grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.

3.5 to >3.0 ptsFair 70%–seventy nine%Accommodates 3 or 4 grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.

3 to >0 ptsPoor 0%–69%Accommodates many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding.

5 pts