Career review
LEESEUNG
FeedbackforCareerReviewPaper-PSYC495.pdf
Career Review Paper Activity: Career Review Paper
Course: PSYC 495
Name:
Content Exceptional Exceeds Expectation s
Meets Expectation s
Meets Some Expectation s
Meets Minimal Expectation s
Not Done Criterion Score
Formatti
ng:
Paper
contains
a title
page
with title
of your
paper,
your
name,
and your
institutio
nal
affiliatio
n; in-text
citation
is
properly
achieve;
and, a
referenc
e section
with at
least five
scholarly
referenc
es in
proper
APA
style.
0 / 14
Criterion Feedback
I cannot read your reference list because it appears to be pasted in. Did you not rewrite it? I
do see a source - McLeod that is NOT allowed. Information from that site will not be scored.
ONLY scholarly sources can be used.
14 points
Flawless
use of APA
style (title
page,
structure,
headings,
references,
etc.)
11.9
points
Minor
errors in
APA style
(title page,
structure,
headings,
references,
etc.)
9.8 points
Utilizes
basic APA
style but
includes
consistent
errors (title
page,
structure,
headings,
references,
etc.)
6.3 points
Pervasive
errors in
APA style
(title page,
structure,
headings,
references,
etc.)
5.6 points
Missing
key
componen
ts of an
APA style
paper (title
page,
structure,
headings,
references,
etc.)
0 points
Fails to
utilize
APA style
Feedback for Career Review Paper - PSYC 495
1 of 6 2/13/24, 17:56
Content Exceptional Exceeds Expectation s
Meets Expectation s
Meets Some Expectation s
Meets Minimal Expectation s
Not Done Criterion Score
Paper
contains
a
discussio
n of the
history
of this
area
including
its
relations
hip to
other
areas of
psycholo
gy
and/or
other
academi
c
disciplin
es
19.6 / 28
Criterion Feedback
Is your intended career clinical psychologist? You need to say that specifically in the intro
paragraph. A good start but I want more than Witmer and Freud. What is the history after
these two? You need specifics. HOW does it collaborate with the other disciplines?
Paper
contains
a
discussio
n of two
of this
area’s
psycholo
gical
theories
that are
relevant
to the
work.
9.8 / 14
Criterion Feedback
Are these two theories still relevant in practice today? Do they really influence modern day
clinicians? You are using a non-allowed source. Any scholarly source will have a date.
28 points
Insightful,
detailed
discussion
of the area
of
specializati
on, its
history
and
interdiscipl
inary
linkages.
23.8
points
Clear
discussion
of the area
of
specializati
on, its
history and
interdiscipl
inary
linkages.
Small
omissions i
n detail do
not
significantl
y impact
overall
message.
19.6
points
Summativ
e
discussion
of area of
specializat
ion, its
history
and
interdiscip
linary
linkages.
One
and/or
both
discussion
s have
room for
additional
detail.
15.4
points
Tangential
discussion
of area of
specializati
on, its
history
and/or
interdiscipl
inary
linkages.
One
and/or
both
discussion
s are
vague in
details.
11.2
points
Missing
key
componen
ts.
Mentions
history or
interdiscipl
inary
linkages
with little
to no
supporting
details
supplied.
0 points
No
mention of
history or
interdiscipl
inary
linkages.
14 points
Insightful,
detailed
explanatio
ns of two
psychologi
cal
theories
relevant to
the area of
work.
11.9
points
Clear
explanatio
ns of two
psychologi
cal
theories
relevant to
the area of
work.
Omissions
in detail do
not
significantl
y impact
overall
message.
9.8 points
Summativ
e
explanatio
ns of two
psychologi
cal
theories
relevant to
the area
of work.
One, or
both,
discussion
s have
room for
additional
detail.
6.3 points
Tangential
explanatio
ns of two
psychologi
cal
theories
relevant to
the area of
work;
and/or,
one or
both
theories
presented
are
tangentiall
y relevant
to the area
of work.
5.6 points
Identifies
theories
unrelated
to the area
of work.
Summary
missing
significant
informatio
n. Little
mention of
the
reasons for
choice and
relevance
to the
work.
0 points
No
mention of
psychologi
cal theory
and
linkages to
area of
work.
Feedback for Career Review Paper - PSYC 495 6384 Psychology Capst...
2 of 6 2/13/24, 17:56
Content Exceptional Exceeds Expectation s
Meets Expectation s
Meets Some Expectation s
Meets Minimal Expectation s
Not Done Criterion Score
Paper
contains
a
discussio
n of two
of the
research
methods
that
research
ers in
this area
commonl
y use to
gather
data and
test
hypothe
ses
6.3 / 14
Criterion Feedback
This is asking you to describe two specific research designs used in clinical psychology. This is
far too general and does not show you understand the methods used. One sentence saying
case studies are important does not describe them nor analyze why they are important.
14 points
Discusses
two
relevant
research
methods
applicable
to the
assigned
topic of
study.
Provides
a insightful
, detailed
explanatio
ns on data
gathering
and
hypothesis
testing.
11.9
points
Discusses
two
relevant
research
methods
applicable
to the
assigned
topic of
study.
Clear
explanatio
ns of data
gathering
and
hypothesis
testing. O
missions in
detail do
not
significantl
y impact
overall
message.
9.8 points
Discusses
two
relevant
research
methods
applicable
to the
assigned
topic of
study.
Presents
an
explanatio
n of data
gathering
and
hypothesis
testing. Ro
om or
additional
details
that
support
points
outlined.
6.3 points
Discusses
two
research
methods
which may
or may
not be
applicable
to the
assigned
topic of
study.
Presents
a vague ex
planation
of data
gathering
and/or
hypothesi
s testing.
5.6 points
Discusses
research
methods
which may
or may not
be
applicable
to the
assigned
topic of
study.
Presents
a vague ex
planation
of data
gathering
and/or
hypothesis
testing.
0 points
No
mention of
research
methods
or data
collection.
Feedback for Career Review Paper - PSYC 495 6384 Psychology Capst...
3 of 6 2/13/24, 17:56
Content Exceptional Exceeds Expectation s
Meets Expectation s
Meets Some Expectation s
Meets Minimal Expectation s
Not Done Criterion Score
Paper
contains
a
descripti
on of
two
empirical
studies
from the
professio
nal
literature
of this
area and
an
explanati
on how
the
results
of each
of these
studies
can or
have
been
used to
promote
human
welfare.
15.4 / 28
Criterion Feedback
This section should simply describe two studies. When discussing studies, it is Author (date)
examined.... (variables). I want to see IV, DV hypothesis, basic methods and results
described. Past tense only since the study is complete,
How is long term memory related to clinical? What can we learn from a 2x2x2 factorial
design? Do you understand what that is? Again, what does this have to do with clinical? I
cannot look at the studies because your reference list is unreadable.
28 points
Identifies
two
relevant
articles
presenting
empirical
work
dedicated
to the
assigned
topic of
study.
Provides
an
insightful,
detailed
explanatio
n of the
study’s
purpose
and its
application
to promote
human
welfare.
23.8
points
Identifies
two
relevant
articles
presenting
empirical
work
dedicated
to the
assigned
topic of
study.
Provides a
clear
summary
of the
study’s
purpose
and its
application
to promote
human
welfare.
More
details
would
strengthen
points
being
made.
19.6
points
Identifies
two
relevant
articles
presenting
empirical
work
dedicated
to the
assigned
topic of
study.
Provides a
summary
of the
study’s
purpose
and its
application
to promote
human
welfare.
Room for
additional
detail.
Omissions
creates
gaps in
explanatio
n or
connectio
ns
presented.
15.4
points
Identifies
two
tangentiall
y relevant
articles
presenting
empirical
work
dedicated
to the
assigned
topic of
study.
Summary
vague
explanatio
n of
study’s
purpose
and/or its
applicatio
n to
promote
human
welfare.
Room for
additional
detail.
Omissions
in
explanatio
n.
11.2
points
Identifies
two
articles
which may
or may not
be related
to the
assigned
topic.
presenting
empirical
work
dedicated
to the
assigned
topic of
study.
Summary
missing
significant
informatio
n. Little
mention of
the
reasons
behind the
study;
and/or its
application
to promote
human
welfare.
0 points
No
mention of
the
reasons
behind the
study or
human
welfare
application
s.
Feedback for Career Review Paper - PSYC 495 6384 Psychology Capst...
4 of 6 2/13/24, 17:56
Content Exceptional Exceeds Expectation s
Meets Expectation s
Meets Some Expectation s
Meets Minimal Expectation s
Not Done Criterion Score
Paper
contains
an
accurate
descripti
on of A)
the
specific
occupati
on in
this area
you plan
to enter;
B) the
tasks a
person
in this
occupati
on
performs
; and C)
the
specific
types of
knowled
ge, skills.
abilities
(KSA), &
characte
ristics
for
success
11.9 / 14
Criterion Feedback
What are the educational requirements. You cannot be a solo practitioner without a
doctorate. You cannot even call yourself a clinical psychologist.
14 points
Insightful,
detailed
discussion,
purposeful
ly
addressing
Items A, B,
and C
listed in
the
criterion
description
.
11.9
points
Clear
discussion
addressing
Items A, B,
and C
listed in
the
criterion
descriptio
n.
Omissions
in detail
do not
significantl
y impact
overall
message.
9.8 points
Summativ
e
discussion
addressing
Items A, B,
and C
listed in
the
criterion
description
. Not all
topics are
covered
comprehe
nsively.
Room for
additional
detail.
6.3 points
Tangential
discussion
addressing
some, or
all, of
Items A, B,
and C
listed in
the
criterion
description
. Significan
t room for
additional
detail.
5.6 points
Missing
several
key
componen
ts (e.g.,
specific
occupation
selection,
tasks,
KSAs).
0 points
Did not
address.
Feedback for Career Review Paper - PSYC 495 6384 Psychology Capst...
5 of 6 2/13/24, 17:56
Total
Overall Score
Content Exceptional Exceeds Expectation s
Meets Expectation s
Meets Some Expectation s
Meets Minimal Expectation s
Not Done Criterion Score
Paper
contains
an
explanati
on of
how you
have
used
specific
A)
curricula
r, and B)
extracurr
icular
opportu
nities
during
your
undergra
duate
educatio
n to C)
accompli
sh the
knowled
ge, skills
&
characte
ristics
identifie
d in the
previous
section.
23.8 / 28
Criterion Feedback
You will need stronger research methods. How did you participate in research? UMGC
courses do not do actual research.
28 points
Insightful,
detailed
discussion,
purposeful
ly
addressing
Items A,
B, and C
listed in
the
criterion
description
.
23.8
points
Clear
discussion
addressing
Items A, B,
and C
listed in
the
criterion
descriptio
n.
Omissions
in detail
do not
significantl
y impact
overall
message.
19.6
points
Summativ
e
discussion
addressing
Items A, B,
and C
listed in
the
criterion
description
. Not all
topics are
covered
comprehe
nsively.
Room for
additional
detail.
15.4
points
Tangential
discussion
addressing
some, or
all, of
Items A, B,
and C
listed in
the
criterion
description
. Significan
t room for
additional
detail.
11.2
points
Missing
several
key
componen
ts (e.g., use
of
curricular,
use of
extracurric
ular,
accomplish
ment of
identified
KSAs
and/or
characteris
tics).
0 points
Did not
address.
Excepti
onal
Exceeds
Expectations
Meets
Expectations
Meets Some
Expectations
Meets Minimal
Expectations
Leve
l 1
Feedback for Career Review Paper - PSYC 495 6384 Psychology Capst...
6 of 6 2/13/24, 17:56
