Psychology assignment

Rosi_226

PSY-255Rubric-PsychodynamicTheoristsCaseStudy-ONLObj.2.1.pdf

Home >Psychology homework help >Psychology assignment

Psychodynamic Theorists Case Study - ONL (Obj. 2.1) - Rubric

Demographics of the Character 12 points

Criteria Description

Provides important demographics for the well-known fictional character (gender, age,

race, location, profession, etc.).

5. Target 12 points

The case study expertly provides important demographics of a well-known fictional

character. The case study demonstrates an exceptional understanding of the topic.

4. Acceptable 10.2 points

The case study clearly provides important demographics of a well-known fictional

character. The case study demonstrates an understanding that extends beyond the

surface of the topic.

3. Approaching 9 points

The case study adequately provides important demographics of a well-known

fictional character. The case study demonstrates a basic understanding of the topic.

2. Insufficient 7.8 points

The case study inadequately provides important demographics of a well-known

fictional character. The case study demonstrates a poor understanding of the topic.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

The case study omits or incompletely provides important demographics of a well-

known fictional character. The case study does not demonstrate understanding of

the topic.

Collapse All

© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

https://www.gce.com/

Personal History 12 points

Criteria Description

Identifies notable childhood experiences (positive and negative) and any notable

experiences from adolescence or adulthood.

5. Target 12 points

The case study expertly identifies notable experiences from childhood and

adolescence or adulthood for the selected fictional character. The case study

demonstrates an exceptional understanding of the topic.

4. Acceptable 10.2 points

The case study clearly identifies notable experiences from childhood and

adolescence or adulthood for the selected fictional character. The case study

demonstrates an understanding that extends beyond the surface of the topic.

3. Approaching 9 points

The case study adequately identifies notable experiences from childhood and

adolescence or adulthood for the selected fictional character. The case study

demonstrates a basic understanding of the topic.

2. Insufficient 7.8 points

The case study inadequately identifies notable experiences from childhood and

adolescence or adulthood for the selected fictional character. The case study

demonstrates a poor understanding of the topic.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

The case study omits or incompletely identifies notable experiences from childhood

and adolescence or adulthood for the selected fictional character. The case study

does not demonstrate understanding of the topic.

https://www.gce.com/

Presenting Problem 24 points

Criteria Description

Explains a number of maladaptive thoughts, feelings, and behaviors that might cause

this individual to seek out (or be sent to) therapy and why these particular thoughts,

feelings, and behaviors may be distressing for the individual and/or society.

5. Target 24 points

The case study expertly explains a number of maladaptive thoughts, feelings, and

behaviors that might cause the selected fictional character to seek out (or be sent

to) therapy. The case study exceptionally explains why these particular thoughts,

feelings, and behaviors may be distressing for the individual and/or society.

4. Acceptable 20.4 points

The case study clearly explains a number of maladaptive thoughts, feelings, and

behaviors that might cause the selected fictional character to seek out (or be sent

to) therapy. The case study explains why these particular thoughts, feelings, and

behaviors may be distressing for the individual and/or society.

3. Approaching 18 points

The case study adequately explains a number of maladaptive thoughts, feelings,

and behaviors that might cause the selected fictional character to seek out (or be

sent to) therapy. The case study minimally explains why these particular thoughts,

feelings, and behaviors may be distressing for the individual and/or society.

2. Insufficient 15.6 points

The case study inadequately explains a number of maladaptive thoughts, feelings,

and behaviors that might cause the selected fictional character to seek out (or be

sent to) therapy. The case study poorly explains why these particular thoughts,

feelings, and behaviors may be distressing for the individual and/or society.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

The case study omits or incompletely explains a number of maladaptive thoughts,

feelings, and behaviors that might cause the selected fictional character to seek out

(or be sent to) therapy. The case study does not explain why these particular

thoughts, feelings, and behaviors may be distressing for the individual and/or

society.

https://www.gce.com/

Theory Analysis I 24 points

Criteria Description

Discusses why the chosen character is experiencing their presenting problem and what

one psychodynamic theorist (Freud, Horney, Adler, or Jung) would say about this

person’s psychological issues.

5. Target 24 points

The case study expertly discusses why the chosen character is experiencing their

presenting problem and what one psychodynamic theorist (Freud, Horney, Adler, or

Jung) would say about this person’s psychological issues.

4. Acceptable 20.4 points

The case study clearly discusses why the chosen character is experiencing their

presenting problem and what one psychodynamic theorist (Freud, Horney, Adler, or

Jung) would say about this person’s psychological issues.

3. Approaching 18 points

The case study adequately discusses why the chosen character is experiencing their

presenting problem and what one psychodynamic theorist (Freud, Horney, Adler, or

Jung) would say about this person’s psychological issues.

2. Insufficient 15.6 points

The case study inadequately discusses why the chosen character is experiencing

their presenting problem and what one psychodynamic theorist (Freud, Horney,

Adler, or Jung) would say about this person’s psychological issues.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

The case study omits or incompletely discusses why the chosen character is

experiencing their presenting problem and what one psychodynamic theorist

(Freud, Horney, Adler, or Jung) would say about this person’s psychological issues.

https://www.gce.com/

Theory Analysis II 24 points

Criteria Description

Explains one alternative psychodynamic theorist's perspective (Freud, Horney, Adler,

or Jung) and compares this approach to the previously selected theorist.

5. Target 24 points

The case study expertly explains one alternative psychodynamic theorist's

perspective (Freud, Horney, Adler, or Jung) and compares this approach to the

previously selected theorist. The case study demonstrates an exceptional

understanding of the topic.

4. Acceptable 20.4 points

The case study clearly explains one alternative psychodynamic theorist's

perspective (Freud, Horney, Adler, or Jung) and compares this approach to the

previously selected theorist. The case study demonstrates an understanding that

extends beyond the surface of the topic.

3. Approaching 18 points

The case study adequately explains one alternative psychodynamic theorist's

perspective (Freud, Horney, Adler, or Jung) and compares this approach to the

previously selected theorist. The case study demonstrates a basic understanding of

the topic.

2. Insufficient 15.6 points

The case study inadequately explains one alternative psychodynamic theorist's

perspective (Freud, Horney, Adler, or Jung) and compares this approach to the

previously selected theorist. The case study demonstrates a poor understanding of

the topic.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

The case study omits or incompletely explains one alternative psychodynamic

theorist's perspective (Freud, Horney, Adler, or Jung) and compares this approach

to the previously selected theorist. The case study does not demonstrate

understanding of the topic.

https://www.gce.com/

Thesis, Position, or Purpose 6 points

Criteria Description

Communicates reason for writing and demonstrates awareness of audience.

5. Target 6 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is clearly communicated throughout and clearly

directed to a specific audience.

4. Acceptable 5.1 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is adequately presented. An awareness of the

appropriate audience is demonstrated.

3. Approaching 4.5 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is discernable in most aspects but is occasionally

weak or unclear. There is limited awareness of the appropriate audience.

2. Insufficient 3.9 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is unfocused or confused. There is very little

awareness of the intended audience.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is not discernible. No awareness of the appropriate

audience is evident.

https://www.gce.com/

Development, Structure, and Conclusion 6 points

Criteria Description

Advances position or purpose throughout writing; conclusion aligns to and evolves

from development.

5. Target 6 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is logically advanced throughout. The progression

of ideas is coherent and unified. A clear and logical conclusion aligns to the

development of the purpose.

4. Acceptable 5.1 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is advanced in most aspects. Ideas clearly build on

each other. Conclusion aligns to the development of the purpose.

3. Approaching 4.5 points

Limited advancement of thesis, position, or purpose is discernable. There are

inconsistencies in organization or the relationship of ideas. Conclusion is simplistic

and not fully aligned to the development of the purpose.

2. Insufficient 3.9 points

Writing lacks logical progression of the thesis, position, or purpose. Some

organization is attempted, but ideas are disconnected. Conclusion is unclear and

not supported by the overall development of the purpose.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

No advancement of the thesis, position, or purpose is evident. Connections

between paragraphs are missing or inappropriate. No conclusion is offered.

https://www.gce.com/

Evidence 4.8 points

Criteria Description

Selects and integrates evidence to support and advance position/purpose; considers

other perspectives.

5. Target 4.8 points

Specific and appropriate evidence is included. Relevant perspectives of others are

clearly considered.

4. Acceptable 4.08 points

Relevant evidence that includes other perspectives is used.

3. Approaching 3.6 points

Evidence is used but is insufficient or of limited relevance. Simplistic explanation or

integration of other perspectives is present.

2. Insufficient 3.12 points

Evidence is limited or irrelevant. The interpretation of other perspectives is

superficial or incorrect.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Evidence to support the thesis, position, or purpose is absent. The writing relies

entirely on the perspective of the writer.

https://www.gce.com/

Mechanics of Writing 4.8 points

Criteria Description

Includes spelling, capitalization, punctuation, grammar, language use, sentence

structure, etc.

5. Target 4.8 points

No mechanical errors are present. Appropriate language choice and sentence

structure are used throughout.

4. Acceptable 4.08 points

Few mechanical errors are present. Suitable language choice and sentence

structure are used.

3. Approaching 3.6 points

Occasional mechanical errors are present. Language choice is generally

appropriate. Varied sentence structure is attempted.

2. Insufficient 3.12 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors are present. Inconsistencies in language

choice or sentence structure are recurrent.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Errors in grammar or syntax are pervasive and impede meaning. Incorrect language

choice or sentence structure errors are found throughout.

https://www.gce.com/

Format/Documentation 2.4 points

Criteria Description

Uses appropriate style, such as APA, MLA, etc., for college, subject, and level;

documents sources using citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc.,

appropriate to assignment and discipline.

5. Target 2.4 points

No errors in formatting or documentation are present.

4. Acceptable 2.04 points

Appropriate format and documentation are used with only minor errors.

3. Approaching 1.8 points

Appropriate format and documentation are used, although there are some obvious

errors.

2. Insufficient 1.56 points

Appropriate format is attempted, but some elements are missing. Frequent errors

in documentation of sources are evident.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Appropriate format is not used. No documentation of sources is provided.

Total 120 points

https://www.gce.com/