| Course Code | Class Code | Assignment Title | Total Points |
| CNL-501 | CNL-501-O502 | Benchmark - Treatment Interventions (Obj. 3.3) | 100.0 |
| Criteria | Percentage | Unsatisfactory (0.00%) | Less Than Satisfactory (74.00%) | Satisfactory (79.00%) | Good (87.00%) | Excellent (100.00%) | Comments | Points Earned |
| Content | 70.0% |
| A brief description of two common empirically researched substance use disorder treatments from the provided options C4.1: Assess valid and reliable research to answer questions for an identified problem, concern, or professional counseling intervention. | 20.0% | Essay omits or incompletely describes two common empirically researched substance use disorder treatments from the provided options.Essay does not demonstrate understanding of the topic. | Essay inadequately describes two common empirically researched substance use disorder treatments from the provided options, but description is weak and missing evidence to support claims. Essay demonstrates poor understanding of the topic. | Essay adequately describes two common empirically researched substance use disorder treatments from the provided options, but description is limited and lacks some evidence to support claims. Essay demonstrates a basic understanding of the topic. | Essay clearly describes two common empirically researched substance use disorder treatments from the provided options, and description is strong with sound analysis and some evidence to support claims. Essay demonstrates understanding that extends beyond the surface the topic. | Essay expertly describes two common empirically researched substance use disorder treatments from the provided options, and description is comprehensive and insightful with relevant evidence to support claims. Essay demonstrates an exceptional understanding of the topic. |
| A discussion about the differences of each treatment listed | 20.0% | Essay omits or incompletely discusses the differences of each treatment listed.Essay does not demonstrate understanding of the topic. | Essay inadequately discusses the differences of each treatment listed, but description is weak and missing evidence to support claims. Essay demonstrates poor understanding of the topic. | Essay adequately discusses the differences of each treatment listed, but description is limited and lacks some evidence to support claims. Essay demonstrates a basic understanding of the topic. | Essay clearly discusses the differences of each treatment listed, and description is strong with sound analysis and some evidence to support claims. Essay demonstrates understanding that extends beyond the surface the topic. | Essay expertly discusses the differences of each treatment listed, and description is comprehensive and insightful with relevant evidence to support claims. Essay demonstrates an exceptional understanding of the topic. |
| A discussion about which method the student would prefer to use and why | 20.0% | Essay omits or incompletely discusses which method the student would prefer to use and why.Essay does not demonstrate understanding of the topic. | Essay inadequately discusses which method the student would prefer to use and why, but description is weak and missing evidence to support claims. Essay demonstrates poor understanding of the topic. | Essay adequately discusses which method the student would prefer to use and why, but description is limited and lacks some evidence to support claims. Essay demonstrates a basic understanding of the topic. | Essay clearly discusses which method the student would prefer to use and why, and description is strong with sound analysis and some evidence to support claims. Essay demonstrates understanding that extends beyond the surface the topic. | Essay expertly discusses which method the student would prefer to use and why, and description is comprehensive and insightful with relevant evidence to support claims. Essay demonstrates an exceptional understanding of the topic. |
| A list of professionals who may be involved in treatment and how treatment would be coordinated with them | 10.0% | Essay omits or incompletely includes a list of professionals who may be involved in treatment as well as a discussion of how treatment would be coordinated with them. Essay does not demonstrate understanding of the topic. | Essay inadequately includes a list of professionals who may be involved in treatment as well as a discussion of how treatment would be coordinated with them, but the discussion is weak and missing evidence to support claims. Essay demonstrates poor understanding of the topic. | Essay adequately includes a list of professionals who may be involved in treatment as well as a discussion of how treatment would be coordinated with them, but the discussion is limited and lacks some evidence to support claims. Essay demonstrates a basic understanding of the topic. | Essay clearly includes a list of professionals who may be involved in treatment as well as a discussion of how treatment would be coordinated with them, and the discussion is strong with sound analysis and some evidence to support claims. Essay demonstrates understanding that extends beyond the surface the topic. | Essay expertly includes a list of professionals who may be involved in treatment as well as a discussion of how treatment would be coordinated with them, and the discussion is comprehensive and insightful with relevant evidence to support claims. Essay demonstrates an exceptional understanding of the topic. |
| Organization and Effectiveness | 20.0% |
| Thesis Development and Purpose | 7.0% | Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim. | Thesis and/or main claim are insufficiently developed and/or vague; purpose is not clear. | Thesis and/or main claim are apparent and appropriate to purpose. | Thesis and/or main claim are clear and forecast the development of the paper. It is descriptive, reflective of the arguments, and appropriate to the purpose. | Thesis and/or main claim are comprehensive. The essence of the paper is contained within the thesis. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear. |
| Argument Logic and Construction | 8.0% | Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources. | Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility. | Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis. | Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative. | Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative. |
| Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) | 5.0% | Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are used. | Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, and/or word choice are present. | Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used. | Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used. | Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English. |
| Format | 10.0% |
| Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) | 5.0% | Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly. | Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent. | Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present. | Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style. | All format elements are correct. |
| Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) | 5.0% | Sources are not documented. | Documentation of sources is inconsistent 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. |
| Total Weightage | 100% |
Rachaelm1
BrechmarktreatmentpaperRubric.xlsx
