social ecological model ( individual level ) about HIV/Aids in Cameroon
Ibrahim99
PositionPaperInstructions1.docxH312 Group Position Paper Instructions – 100 points
Group Project: 5 people per group
· Focus: A program addressing an aspect of the HIV/AIDS epidemic within a country.
· The framework for this paper is the socio-ecologic model.
· Assign one person per level of the socio-ecologic model
· Each person will:
· Discuss these issues people face at the level they were assigned
· Discuss how they serve as either opportunities or barriers in the fight against the HIV/AIDS epidemic in the country of choice.
· The group will
· Identify and briefly describe a program implemented in the country of choice that attempts to address the HIV/AIDS epidemic.
· The group will
· Use information gathered by each member to critically analyze how the different levels of the socio ecologic model impact the programs effectiveness/ineffectiveness
· Develop a possible compromise or solution.
· Provide a concluding paragraph.
Paper Structure:
· APA format (see https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/560/01/)
· 12 point font
· Double spaced
· 5 pages in length (does not include title page or reference page)
· Minimum of 15 refereed or approved references (3 per person)
Countries (These will be picked at random)
India
Kenya
Russia
China
Ethopia
Cameroon
Democratic Republic of the Congo
Haiti
Swaziland
Rwanda
Lesothos
Sudan
Vietnam
Namibia
GRADING:
· Each group member will rate their own and their group members contribution.
· The 5 ratings will be summed and divided by the total available to represent a %.
· This % will be multiplied against the points earned on the paper the results will reflect your personal points earned.
· Example: Member 1 gets 20/25 = 80%. Member 2 gets 25/25 =100%
· Total Score on paper is 90/100.
· Member one gets a 72. Member 2 gets 90.
|
|
Excellent |
Good |
Fair |
Unacceptable |
|
Criteria and Requirements (40 points possible) |
All Requirements were met. The required sections are present, clearly labeled and organized, and the position chosen for the topic is appropriate. All directions were clearly followed. |
The majority of the requirements were met. There were some sections missing or not well represented. Most of the directions were followed. |
About half of the requirements were met. There were sections missing or under represented. Most of the directions were followed. |
A haphazard attempt to meet requirements. There were sections missing, not represented with significant errors. Directions were simply not followed. |
|
Comprehension and Examples (45 points possible) |
All ideas are arranged logically. There are sufficient and strong examples. The reader can follow the line of reasoning. |
Most ideas are arranged logically. There may be some minor issues with providing sufficient examples. The reader can follow the line of reasoning. There are some unclear points |
More than half of the paper consisted of ideas that were arranged logically. There may be some issues with providing sufficient examples. The reader can mostly follow the line of reasoning. There are some unclear points |
The paper consisted of ideas that were not arranged logically. There are serious issues with providing sufficient examples. The reader can not follow the line of reasoning. There are many unclear points |
|
Writing (15 points possible) |
APA was clearly followed for in-text citations and references. The paper has proper grammar, tone, and sentence construction. The paper has no spelling errors. |
APA was mostly followed for in-text citations and references. The paper has minor issues with one or more of the following: with proper grammar, tone, and sentence construction. The paper has spelling errors. |
There were issues with APA in-text citations and references. The paper has issues with one or more of the following: proper grammar, tone, and sentence construction. The paper has spelling errors. |
APA in-text citations and references was poor. The paper has many issues with proper grammar, tone, and sentence construction. The paper has spelling errors. |
