1
Unsatisfactory
0.00% |
2
Less than Satisfactory
74.00%
|
3
Satisfactory
79.00%
|
4
Good
87.00%
|
5
Excellent
100.00%
|
|
100.0 %Content
|
|
|
10.0 %MMPI-2-RF and What it Measures
|
Does not identify what the MMPI-2-RF is or what it measures.
|
The MMPI-2-RF was identified, but a less than appropriate description of what it measures is included. The description is unclear or inappropriate for the MMPI-II. Demonstrates poor understanding of the MMPI-2-RF and what it measures.
|
The MMPI-2-RF was identified, and an appropriate description of what it measures is included. Demonstrates a basic understanding of the MMPI-2-RF and what it measures.
|
The MMPI-2-RF is identified and the description of what it measures is very appropriate. Description of measurement is clearly articulated, with some evidence to support claims. Demonstrates a good understanding of the MMPI-2-RF and what it measures.
|
The MMPI-2-RF is identified and the description of what it measures is completely appropriate. Description of measurement is comprehensively articulated, with strong evidence to support claims; rationale is virtually flawless. Demonstrates an exceptional understanding of the MMPI-2-RF and what it measures.
|
|
20.0 %Legal and Ethical Requirements (administration, interpretation, and reporting)
|
Does not include legal and ethical requirements.
|
Gives details of the legal and ethical requirements in a less than satisfactory manner; unclear or inappropriate requirements related to administration, interpretation, and/or reporting are listed. Demonstrates poor understanding of the requirements of the MMPI-2-RF.
|
Minimally details the legal and ethical requirements. A limited grasp of the requirements for administration, interpretation, and/or reporting is shown. Demonstrates a basic understanding of the requirements of the MMPI-2-RF.
|
Adequately details the legal and ethical requirements. Requirements for administration, interpretation, and reporting are appropriate and the description shows why they are necessary. Demonstrates a good understanding of the requirements of the MMPI-2-RF.
|
Comprehensively details the legal and ethical requirements. Requirements for administration, interpretation, and reporting are comprehensive and completely appropriate. Description clearly details why all are necessary; rationale is virtually flawless. Demonstrates an exceptional understanding of the requirements of the MMPI-2-RF.
|
|
20.0 %Intake and Treatment Planning Process
|
Does not discuss how gathered information assists the intake and treatment planning processes.
|
Describes how gathered information assists the intake and treatment planning processes in a less than satisfactory manner. The description is unclear or inappropriate for the content. Demonstrates poor understanding of how gathered information can assist in processes.
|
Minimally describes how gathered information assists the intake and treatment planning processes. A limited grasp of the information and processes is shown. Demonstrates a basic understanding of how gathered information can assist in processes.
|
Adequately details how gathered information assists the intake and treatment planning processes. Information and processes are appropriate and show why they are necessary. Demonstrates a good understanding of how gathered information can assist in processes.
|
Comprehensively details how gathered information assists the intake and treatment planning processes. Information and processes are comprehensive and completely appropriate. Description clearly details the interrelation of each; rationale is virtually flawless. Demonstrates an exceptional understanding of how gathered information can assist in processes.
|
|
20.0 %Potential Treatment Strategies
|
Does not include potential treatment strategies.
|
Gives details of treatment strategies in a less than satisfactory manner; unclear or inappropriate strategies are listed. Demonstrates poor understanding of potential treatment strategies to incorporate.
|
Minimally details treatment strategies. A limited grasp of potential strategies is shown. Demonstrates a basic understanding of potential treatment strategies to incorporate.
|
Adequately details treatment strategies. Potential strategies are appropriate and the description shows why strategies are relevant and necessary. Demonstrates a good understanding of potential treatment strategies to incorporate.
|
Comprehensively details treatment strategies. Potential strategies are comprehensive and completely appropriate. Description clearly details why all strategies are relevant and necessary; rationale is virtually flawless. Demonstrates an exceptional understanding of potential strategies to incorporate.
|
|
5.0 %Detailed Speaker Notes
|
The presentation does not contain speaker notes.
|
The presentation contains vague speaker notes and/or inaccurate or poorly written speaker notes.
|
The presentation?s speaker notes are present and are generally competent.
|
The presentation contains advanced speaker notes that indicate what might be said if giving the presentation in person.
|
The presentation includes comprehensive speaker notes that give a complete picture of what would be said if the presentation were given in person.
|
|
5.0 %Presentation of Content
|
The content lacks a clear point of view and logical sequence of information. Includes little persuasive information. Sequencing of ideas is unclear.
|
The content is vague in conveying a point of view and does not create a strong sense of purpose. Includes some persuasive information.
|
The presentation slides are generally competent, but ideas may show some inconsistency in organization and/or in their relationships to each other.
|
The content is written with a logical progression of ideas and supporting information exhibiting a unity, coherence, and cohesiveness. Includes persuasive information from reliable sources.
|
The content is written clearly and concisely. Ideas universally progress and relate to each other. The project includes motivating questions and advanced organizers. The project gives the audience a clear sense of the main idea.
|
|
5.0 %Layout
|
The layout is cluttered, confusing, and does not use spacing, headings, and subheadings to enhance the readability. The text is extremely difficult to read with long blocks of text, small point size for fonts, and inappropriate contrasting colors. Poor use of headings, subheadings, indentations, or bold formatting is evident.
|
The layout shows some structure, but appears cluttered and busy or distracting with large gaps of white space or a distracting background. Overall readability is difficult due to lengthy paragraphs, too many different fonts, dark or busy background, overuse of bold, or lack of appropriate indentations of text.
|
The layout uses horizontal and vertical white space appropriately. Sometimes the fonts are easy to read, but in a few places the use of fonts, italics, bold, long paragraphs, color, or busy background detracts and does not enhance readability.
|
The layout background and text complement each other and enable the content to be easily read. The fonts are easy to read and point size varies appropriately for headings and text.
|
The layout is visually pleasing and contributes to the overall message with appropriate use of headings, subheadings, and white space. Text is appropriate in length for the target audience and to the point. The background and colors enhance the readability of the text.
|
|
5.0 %Language Use and Audience Awareness (includes sentence construction, word choice, etc.)
|
Inappropriate word choice and lack of variety in language use are evident. Writer appears to be unaware of audience. Use of primer prose indicates writer either does not apply figures of speech or uses them inappropriately.
|
Some distracting inconsistencies in language choice (register) and/or word choice are present. The writer exhibits some lack of control in using figures of speech appropriately.
|
Language is appropriate to the targeted audience for the most part.
|
The writer is clearly aware of audience, uses a variety of appropriate vocabulary for the targeted audience, and uses figures of speech to communicate clearly.
|
The writer uses a variety of sentence constructions, figures of speech, and word choice in distinctive and creative ways that are appropriate to purpose, discipline, and scope.
|
|
5.0 %Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)
|
Slide errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning.
|
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader.
|
Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader.
|
Slides are largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present.
|
Writer is clearly in control of standard, written academic English.
|
|
5.0 %Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)
|
Sources are not documented.
|
Documentation of sources is inconsistent and/or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.
|
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.
|
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.
|
Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.
|
|
100 %Total Weightage
|
|
