Module 7 PowerPoint Integrating Knowledge of Social Policies
This assignment aims to have students integrate the knowledge of social policies and apply understanding of social, economic, and environmental justice to propose new policy that advocates for human rights at the systems level. Students will apply their knowledge of Jansson (2018) and CDC (2016) policy analysis and evaluation frameworks against their selected social issue, target population and applicable social policies. The student will explain how they would leverage social media to promote awareness about the social issue and the new social policy for a vulnerable population. The students will use recent research evidence, facts, and relevant statistics to support the information presented in the PowerPoint presentation.
Course Outcome
CO 8: Integrate knowledge of social policies and apply understanding of social, economic, and environmental justice to propose policy that advocates for human rights at the systems level.
Requirements
1. The assignment is worth 200 points and will be graded on use of citations, use of Standard English grammar, sentence structure, and overall organization based on the required components as summarized in the directions and grading criteria/rubric.
2. Create your exercise using Microsoft PowerPoint.
3. Follow the directions and grading criteria closely. Any questions about your assignment may be posted under the Q & A Forum.
4. The assignment presentation should include 17-18 slides, Excluding title slide and reference slide.
5. APA format is required with both a title page and reference page.
Criteria for the Content (Guidelines)
Develop a 17-18 slide PowerPoint presentation (excluding title and reference slides) that evaluates applicable federal policies for a specific social issue. The student should use the information accumulated from assignments in Module 2, Module 3, and Module 5 to develop the sections I - VI of the assignment. The six sections of the PowerPoint presentation are as follows:
Section I. Overview and Background - Social Issue and Target Population
This section should identify the social issue and the target population. Use of recent research evidence, facts, and relevant statistics to demonstrate the severity of the social issue and its impact on the target population.
Section II. Policy Analysis - Applicability, Feasibility, Gaps and Deficiencies of Two Policies
This section of the assignment should identify two federal policies that attempt to address the social issue for the target population. This section should provide a comprehensive overview of the two policies. This overview should include critical background information such as the year the policy was enacted, how the policy is funded, identification of the politicians, legislatures, and stakeholders that developed the policy. Also, provide information related to individuals and groups that actively oppose the policy, including the reasons for the opposition.
This section should use Jansson (2018) and CDC (2016) policy frameworks to analyze, interpret, and summarize the benefits and limitations associated with each of the 2 social policies. Discuss the need to address policy gaps and deficiencies. Use recent research evidence, facts, and statistics to support your analysis and interpretation of the two policies.
Section III. Policy Evaluation - CDC Policy Evaluation Framework
This section should demonstrate the use the CDC (2016) evaluation framework to assess each policy and compare and contrast the two federal policies. Use the CDC Policy table to create a visual depiction that compares and contrasts the two policies.
Discuss which policy presents the best legislative solution to help the target population. Likewise, discuss the policy that is least effective for the target population in the long run.
Section IV. New Policy Proposal - Designing Policy to Address Policy Gaps and Deficiencies (Non-addictive pain management)
Here, we've listed 4 techniques to control and reduce your pain that don't require an invasive procedure — or even taking a pill.
1. Cold and heat. These two tried-and-true methods are still the cornerstone of relieving pain for certain kinds of injuries. If a homemade hot or cold pack doesn't do the trick, try asking a physical therapist or chiropractor for their versions of these treatments, which can penetrate deeper into the muscle and tissue.
2. Exercise. Physical activity plays a crucial role in interrupting the "vicious cycle" of pain and reduced mobility found in some chronic conditions such as arthritis and
fibromyalgia
. Try gentle aerobic activities such as walking, swimming, or cycling.
3. Mind-body techniques. These techniques, which include meditation, mindfulness, and breathing exercises (among many others), help you restore a sense of control over your body
4. Yoga and Meditation. These two exercise practices incorporate breath control, meditation, and gentle movements to stretch and strengthen muscles.
This section requires the students to present a comprehensive overview of a new proposal that they have designed. The student will integrate contextual knowledge of the gaps and deficiencies associated with existing policy for a specific social issue and target population to design new and improved policy.
The student will clearly state the applicability, feasibility and integrity of your proposed policy. Thoroughly discuss the benefits, limitations as well as any potential gaps and deficiencies opposers to your policy could point out.
Section V. Social Media Campaign - Promoting Policies that Advocates for Human Rights
This section should discuss the role of social media in providing information, advocacy, or opposition for the selected social issue and each of the social policies. Describe how the student would leverage social media to execute a successful campaign to disseminate factual information about your new policy proposal.
Section VI. Conclusion
This section should provide a brief, concise conclusion statement recapping the key elements of the Power Point presentation assignment.
Directions and Grading Criteria
|
Category
|
Points
|
Description
|
|
Social Issue Overview
|
25
|
· Introduction section should clearly identify the social issue, target population. Uses research evidence and statistics to demonstrate the magnitude.
|
|
Policy Overview
|
25
|
· Provides a comprehensive overview of two federal policies that addresses the social issue for the target population.
|
|
Policy Analysis
|
25
|
· Uses Jansson (2018) or CDC (2016) policy framework to analyze different aspects of the two selected federal policies.
|
|
Policy Evaluation
|
25
|
· Use CDC policy framework to evaluate different aspects of the two policies.
|
|
New Policy Proposal
|
25
|
· Develop and present a new policy proposal to address the social issue and improve on existing policy.
|
|
Social Media
|
25
|
· Discuss the role of social media to promote the policy.
|
|
Conclusion
|
20
|
· Provide a brief conclusion statement that includes all the key elements discussed in the paper.
|
|
Clarity of Writing & Slide Design
|
15
|
· Use of standard English grammar and sentence
· No spelling errors or typographical errors.
· Clear and organized slide flow
· Correct slide count
· Professional Presentation
|
|
APA Style
|
15
|
· All information taken from another source, even if summarized, must be appropriately cited in problem Statement and listed in the references using APA format:
· Document Set up
· Title and reference pages
· Citations in the text and references
|
|
Total
|
200
|
A quality essay will meet or exceed all of the above requirements.
|
Rubric
Integrating Knowledge of Social Policies
|
Integrating Knowledge of Social Policies
|
|
Criteria
|
Ratings
|
Pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
Social Issue
|
|
25 pts
Highest Level of performance
Provides a thorough description of a contemporary social issue and describes the effects on a vulnerable target population; Uses research evidence, facts, and relevant statistics to establish the severity of the social issue and its impact on the target population.
|
15 pts
Very Good or High Level of Performance
Provides a good description of a contemporary social issue and describes some effects on the target population; Uses research evidence, facts, and relevant statistics to demonstrate the severity of the social issue and its impact on the target population
|
10 pts
Acceptable Level of Performance
Provides an adequate description of a contemporary social issue but does not adequately address the impact on the target population; Uses some research evidence, facts, and statistics to demonstrate the severity of the social issue and its impact on the target population.
|
0 pts
Failing Level of Performance
Fails to identify social issue and target population; Does not use relevant research evidence, facts, and relevant statistics to show the severity of the social issue and its impact on the target population.
|
|
25 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Policy Overview
|
|
25 pts
Highest Level of performance
Provides a comprehensive overview of 2 applicable federal social policy that addresses the selected social issue; Uses research evidence to corroborate statements about the relevancy or irrelevancy of the social policy.
|
15 pts
Very Good or High Level of Performance
Provides a good overview of two applicable federal social policy that addresses the selected social issue; Uses research evidence to provide support for statements about the relevancy or irrelevancy of the social policy.
|
10 pts
Acceptable Level of Performance
Provides an adequate overview of two applicable federal social policy that addresses the selected social issue; Uses some research evidence to provide minimal support for statements about the relevancy or irrelevancy of the social policy.
|
0 pts
Failing Level of Performance
Fails to identify and describe social policies related to the selected social issue; Fails to provide relevant research evidence to support statements.
|
|
25 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Policy Analysis
|
|
25 pts
Highest Level of performance
Provides a critical analysis, interpretation, and comprehensive summary of the benefits and limitations associated with each social policy; Discusses policy gaps and deficiencies; Uses recent research evidence, facts, and statistics to support analysis and interpretation of the 2 policies.
|
15 pts
Very Good or High Level of Performance
Provides a good analysis, interpretation, and summary of the benefits and limitations associated with each social policy; Discusses policy gaps and deficiencies; Uses research evidence, facts, and statistics to support analysis and interpretation of the two policies.
|
10 pts
Acceptable Level of Performance
Provides a basic analysis, interpretation, and summary of the benefits and limitations associated with each social policy; Discusses policy gaps and deficiencies; Uses research evidence, facts, and statistics to provide minimal support for analysis and interpretation of the two policies.
|
0 pts
Failing Level of Performance
Fails to identify sufficiently detail thee analysis, interpretation of two policies; Fails to provide relevant research evidence to support statements.
|
|
25 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Policy Evaluation
|
|
25 pts
Highest Level of performance
Uses the CDC evaluation framework to thoroughly evaluate and present information 2 federal policies for the selected social issue; Uses a table to comprehensively to compare and contrast the 2 policies; Provides comprehensive discussion on the determination of the best and worst legislative solutions for the target population.
|
15 pts
Very Good or High Level of Performance
Uses the CDC evaluation framework to evaluate and present information for the selected social issue; Uses a table to compare and contrast the two policies; Discusses the determination of the best and worst legislative solutions for the target population.
|
10 pts
Acceptable Level of Performance
Uses the CDC evaluation framework to evaluate and present information for the selected social issue; Presents basic information on a table to compare and contrast the two; Provides limited information to support the determination of best and worst legislative solutions for the target population.
|
0 pts
Failing Level of Performance
Fails to use the CDC evaluation framework to evaluate and present information on two federal policies; Does not use a table to compare and contrast the two federal policies; Does not discuss the determination of the best and worst legislative solutions for the target population.
|
|
25 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome New Policy Proposal
|
|
25 pts
Highest Level of performance
Thoroughly integrates contextual knowledge of the gaps and deficiencies associated with existing policy for a specific social issue and target population to design new and improved policy; Clearly and concisely states the applicability, feasibility and integrity of the proposed policy; Thoroughly discusses the benefits, limitations as well as any potential gaps and deficiencies opposers may present as a counterargument to the proposed policy.
|
15 pts
Very Good or High Level of Performance
Presents good contextual knowledge of the gaps and deficiencies associated with existing policy for a specific social issue and target population to design new and improved policy; States the applicability, feasibility and integrity of the proposed policy; Discusses the benefits, limitations as well as any potential gaps and deficiencies opposers will present as a counterargument to the proposed policy.
|
10 pts
Acceptable Level of Performance
Presents adequate contextual knowledge of the gaps and deficiencies associated with existing policy for a specific social issue and target population to design new policy; Provides basic information regarding the applicability, feasibility and integrity of the proposed policy; Discusses the benefits, limitations, potential gaps and deficiencies to defend the policy against counterarguments.
|
0 pts
Failing Level of Performance
Fails to demonstrate a sufficient amount of contextual knowledge related to the gaps and deficiencies associated with existing policy to design new and improved policy; Fails to state the applicability, feasibility and integrity of the proposed policy; Does not discuss the benefits, limitations as well as any potential gaps and deficiencies to defend the policy against counterarguments.
|
|
25 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
Social Media
|
|
25 pts
Highest Level of performance
Identifies and thoroughly describes the existing social media campaigns to provide awareness on the social issue and promotes social policy; Provides a comprehensive recommendation on how to leverage social media to improve future awareness campaigns.
|
15 pts
Very Good or High Level of Performance
Identifies and provides a good description of existing social media campaigns to provide awareness on the social issue and promote social policy; Provides a recommendation on how to improve future social media campaigns.
|
10 pts
Acceptable Level of Performance
Identifies and provides a basic overview existing social media campaigns to provide awareness on the social issue and promote social policy; Provides a generic recommendation for the improvement of future social media campaigns.
|
0 pts
Failing Level of Performance
Fails to identify and describe information on existing social media awareness campaigns for the social issue or applicable social policies; Does not provide a recommendation to improve future social media campaigns.
|
|
25 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
Conclusion
|
|
20 pts
Highest Level of performance
Provides a comprehensive conclusion statement, which concisely summarizes the social issue, target population, applicable policy, policy analysis, policy evaluation and social media strategy.
|
10 pts
Very Good or High Level of Performance
Provides a good conclusion statement, which summarizes the social issue, target population, applicable policy, policy analysis, policy evaluation and social media strategy.
|
5 pts
Acceptable Level of Performance
Provides a generic conclusion statement, which provides some information about the social issue, target population, applicable policy, policy analysis, policy evaluation and social media strategy.
|
0 pts
Failing Level of Performance
Does not provide a conclusion statement to summarize information about the social issue, target population, applicable policy, policy analysis, policy evaluation and social media strategy.
|
|
20 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
Clarity of Writing & Slide Design
|
|
15 pts
Highest Level of performance
Excellent use of standard English showing original thought. No spelling or grammar errors. Well organized with proper flow of meaning. Excellent flow and organization of slides Professional Presentation Excellent use of graphics to support slide design
|
10 pts
Very Good or High Level of Performance
Some evidence of own expression and competent use of language. No more than three spelling or grammar errors. Well organized thoughts and concepts. Somewhat organized flow of slides. A few graphics used to support slide design.
|
5 pts
Acceptable Level of Performance
Language needs development. Four or more spelling and/or grammar errors. Poorly organized thoughts and concepts. Presentation is not very professional. Graphics used do not support slide design.
|
0 pts
Failing Level of Performance
Language needs significant development. Five or more spelling and/or grammar errors; fails to have organized thoughts and concepts. Did not meet slide presentation standards
|
|
15 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
APA Style
|
|
15 pts
Highest Level of performance
APA format is correct with no errors.
|
10 pts
Very Good or High Level of Performance
APA format is mostly correct, with no more than 1 to 2 minor errors.
|
5 pts
Acceptable Level of Performance
APA formatting contains multiple errors and/or several citations are missing.
|
0 pts
Failing Level of Performance
APA formatting not present and citations are not included.
|
|
|
The term accessibility in this sense is referring to the accessibility of services for adolescents to support treatment for opioid use, not how accessible opioids are for adolescents. I hope this makes sense. The goal here is to determine what type of services and resources are available to combat the use of opioids for adolescents (the target population).