psychology life review

Exceeds Expectations (5) Meets Expectations (4) Below Expectations (<3)

Abstract (5%)

• No more than 250 words • Structured (uses

subheadings) • Different wording

compared to what is included in the main paper

Exceeds Expectations (8-10) Meets Expectations (6-7) Below Expectations (<5)

Introduction (10%)

• Definition of a life review is fully & clearly stated and explained, including at least one relevant citation

• Includes explanation of difference between reminiscence and life review

• Benefits of life review are clearly stated and explained, including at least one relevant citation

• The interviewee is clearly introduced (incl. relationship to student)

• The interview process is briefly summarized

• Definition of a life review is stated, but not fully explained or improperly cited

• Explanation of difference between reminiscence and life review is vague or missing

• Benefits of life review are stated, but not clearly explained or improperly cited

• The interviewee is not introduced or the relationship to the interviewee is not explained

• The interview process is not summarized

• The description of life review is vague or missing

• Explanation of difference between reminiscence and life review is vague or missing

• Benefits of life review are vague or missing

• The interviewee is not introduced, the relationship to the interviewee is not explained, the interview process is not summarized

Exceeds Expectations (20-25) Meets Expectations (15-20) Below Expectations (<15)

Interview Summary (25%)

• Be selective! Adheres to the 5-7 page limit, and, more importantly, an appropriate selection of material is included.

• The writer focuses on the most important parts of the interview (it is important to capture very detailed events/ experiences in your interview, as this process can spark important memories and foster a safe space for the interviewee; however, please just include the important details in the write-up)

• The interview summary is effectively organized according to useful subheadings

• There are effective transitions between subsections, such that the summary flows within and between subsections (TIP: organize subsections based on temporal events, periods of life, etc. to improve flow)

• Direct quotes are used appropriately (not too often; fully explained: the writer makes it very clear why each direct quote is included, and what that direct quote exemplifies)

• An inappropriate amount of material is included (too much, not enough)

• The writer does not fully focus on the most important parts of the interview (e.g., includes several details that are likely not explicitly relevant to a person’s life review—remember that this paper can serve as a legacy. What would the interviewee want to be included?)

• The interview summary is organized according to subheadings, but there is overlapping material between sub-sections or it is unclear why the information in the subsections is presented together

• There is a lack of flow within and between sub- sections

• Direct quotes are used inappropriately (e.g., not fully explained: not completely clear why each direct quote is included, and/or what the quote exemplifies)

• An inappropriate amount of material is included (far too much, not enough)

• The writer includes many seemingly important details (however – if the interviewee notes or indicates that a specific detail is important, please do include it – but clarify that this detail was meaningful to them)

• The interview summary is not organized according to subheadings

• There is a lack of flow within and between sub-sections

• Direct quotes are used inappropriately (too often; each direct quote should be explained)

Exceeds Expectations (32-40) Meets Expectations (25-31) Below Expectations (<24)

Interpretatio n & analysis (40%)

• Includes thoughtful, critical analysis of the Life Review Process

• Interprets and analyzes the included material

• Identifies themes that emerged

• This section should include useful sub-headings (perhaps categorized based on themes)

• Clearly connects concepts discussed in class and in the course readings (include citations) to content from the interview. Be creative! Also be certain to clarify the relation between the course concepts and interview content

• Clearly and effectively applies theories discussed in class to the life review (this includes explaining the theory, with citations, and supporting the theory with evidence from the interview)

• Effectively and appropriately uses language and theories from gerontology

• Evidence refuting concepts/ theories are fully explored and discussed

• Demonstrates a strong, comprehensive understanding of course concepts/theories, and links supporting evidence from the review

• Includes critical analysis of the Life Review Process

• Interprets the included material, but does not consistently provide analysis

• This section should include useful sub- headings

• Does not identify themes • Connects a few concepts

discussed in class and in the course readings to content from the interview, but not in depth. And/or does not fully clarify the relation between the course concepts and interview content

• Mentions 1 or 2 theories discussed in class to the life review, but does not include adequate explanation of the theory, or does not include citations, and/or does not support the theory with evidence from the interview

• Does not consistently use language and theories from gerontology

• Evidence refuting concepts and theories are not appropriately discussed or fully explored

• Demonstrates an adequate understanding of course concepts/theories, and does not consistently link supporting evidence from the review

• Does not include critical analysis of the Life Review Process

• Does not consistently interpret or provide analysis of the material

• Does not include useful sub-headings

• Does not identify themes

• Does not connect concepts discussed in class and in the course readings to content from the interview. And/or does not fully clarify the relation between the course concepts and interview content

• Does not appropriately identify or explain theories discussed in class to the life review, and/or does not support the theory with evidence from the interview

• Does not use language and theories from gerontology

• Does not demonstrates an understanding of course concepts/ theories

Exceeds Expectations (8-10) Meets Expectations (6-7) Below Expectations (<5)

What did you learn and conclusion (10%)

• Includes a final, overall, summary of the project ! this summary should be clear and concise

• Clearly explains what you learned from completing this project, including what you learned about the person you interviewed, what you learned about your family (if relevant), and what you learned about yourself

• Fully and thoughtfully considers the following questions: Did this process have any impact on how you think about older adulthood? Or how you will approach your own development?

• This section should include a heading, as well as transitions before the section (and after, if relevant)

• Overall summary of the project is too long and/or unclear

• States what you learned from completing this project, but without clear or meaningful consideration of what you learned about the person you interviewed or what you learned about yourself

• This section should include a heading, as well as transitions before the section (and after, if relevant)

• The conclusion is vague or missing

• Learning outcomes are vague or missing

• No appropriate heading

Exceeds Expectations (8-10) Meets Expectations (6-7) Below Expectations (<5)

General Formatting & Clarity (5%)

• The paper is well-written, clear and well organized.

• Ideas effectively flow into one another with smooth transitions.

• Discussion is cohesive • Effective use of sub-

headings • Academic writing tone is

used throughout the paper • No grammar errors,

sentences read smoothly • Adheres to the writing tips

provided (e.g., avoids “it”, correctly uses that/which, uses simple sentences)

• Claims throughout the paper are substantiated with appropriate citations.

• The paper is verbose and unnecessarily too long or too short.

• Discussion is cohesive, but could use more organization between distinct ideas

• Ideas are generally clear, but some transitions or connections between ideas are clunky and/or missing.

• Academic writing is used through the majority of the paper.

• Does not consistently adhere to writing tips provided

• Some claims that are not appropriately substantiated with citations

• The paper is lacking critical information.

• Discussion is not well organized or thought out

• There is a lack of organization throughout the paper.

• Ideas are vague, and transitions seem non- existent.

• Academic tone and quality of writing is lacking.

• Does not adhere to writing tips provided

• Several claims are not appropriately substantiated

Exceeds Expectations (5) Meets Expectations (4) Below Expectations (<3)

ADDITIONAL SUGGESTIONS FOR THE LIFE REVIEW ANALYSIS

ANALYSIS: In an introduction, you might want to demonstrate some general knowledge about the aging process: people become more different, not afraid of death, etc. As much as possible, use your gerontological imagination in writing the paper. Be creative! You should show your ability to put your person's individual life in context (what do we know about older adults in general). This means you can say how your person is similar to or different from the general pattern. For example, your grandmother may not have stayed at home as a full time caregiver to children, unlike most women in her cohort. Remember that the analysis portion of your paper is to demonstrate your understanding and knowledge of age-related changes, ranging from the physical to the cultural. What age-related changes did you observe or did your person talk about? Some other sample questions:

1. What age category do they belong to? 2. What cohort are they a member of? 3. Are there any significant period effects (Great Depression, Women's Movement, physical

fitness era?) 4. How does the person’s gender influence their life choices (in the labor force, family?) 5. What about caregiving roles? What do we know about women's roles as caregivers in

family systems? What about men’s roles in caregiving? 6. Does your person identify as LGBTQ or BIPOC? Either way—how has this impacted

their development and healthcare? 7. Economic issues? How does your person reflect trends in, economic security,

employment and retirement? 8. How does your person's status as widow or still married (or never married) fit with the

patterns as described in your readings or in lectures? 9. How does your person’s outlook on life fit into the New Narrative discussed by Diehl,

Mehrotra & Smyer, 2020?

Appropriate sub-section headings and APA format (5%)

• 5+ relevant citations • Proper use of APA

formatting • Correct title page, running

head, and page numbering • Correctly formatted in-text

citations and reference list • Correct sentence/title case • 1-2 errors

• Less than 5 relevant citations

• Proper use of APA formatting with no errors including:

• Correct title page, running head, and page numbering

• Some incorrect in-text citations or errors in ref list

• 4 or less errors/typos

• < 2 relevant citations • Lack of proper APA

formatting (missing or incorrect title page, running head or page numbering)

• And/or 4 or more errors/typos

Total (100%) /100