Psychology Topic 5 Assignment

Rosi_226

PSY-352Rubric-Benchmark-CancerChronicIllnessand_orDiseaseReflectiveCritique.pdf

Home >Psychology homework help >Psychology Topic 5 Assignment

Benchmark - Cancer, Chronic Illness, and/or Disease Reflective Critique -

Rubric

Introduction 1.7 points

Criteria Description

Provide a brief introduction to the experienced problem, cancer, chronic illness, and/or

disease and its prevalence.

5. Target 1.7 points

Paper expertly introduces the experienced problem, cancer, chronic illness, and/or

disease and its prevalence, and the introduction is comprehensive and insightful

with relevant evidence to support claims. Paper demonstrates an exceptional

understanding of the topic.

4. Acceptable 1.44 points

Paper provides a clear introduction to the experienced problem, cancer, chronic

illness, and/or disease and its prevalence, and the introduction is strong with sound

analysis and some evidence to support claims. Paper demonstrates an

understanding that extends beyond the surface of the topic.

3. Approaching 1.28 points

Paper adequately introduces the experienced problem, cancer, chronic illness,

and/or disease and its prevalence, but the introduction is limited and lacks some

evidence to support claims. Paper demonstrates a basic understanding of the topic.

2. Insufficient 1.11 points

Paper inadequately introduces the experienced problem, cancer, chronic illness,

and/or disease and its prevalence, but introduction is weak and missing evidence to

support claims. Paper demonstrates a poor understanding of the topic.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Paper omits or incompletely introduces the experienced problem, cancer, chronic

illness, and/or disease and its prevalence. Paper 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.© 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/

Background 2.55 points

Criteria Description

Describe the background of the chosen community/culture/subculture. Explain the

historical factors that are important to the plan and the perceived positive and/or

negative effects on health care (i.e., norms, traditions).

5. Target 2.55 points

Paper expertly describes the background and explains historical factors of the

community / culture / subculture as it relates to history and the perceived positive

and/or negative effects on health care, and description and explanation is

comprehensive and insightful with relevant evidence to support claims. Paper

demonstrates an exceptional understanding of the topic.

4. Acceptable 2.17 points

Paper clearly describes the background and explains historical factors of the

community / culture / subculture as it relates to history and the perceived positive

and/or negative effects on health care, and description and explanation are strong

with sound analysis and some evidence to support claims. Paper demonstrates an

understanding that extends beyond the surface of the topic.

3. Approaching 1.91 points

Paper adequately describes the background and explains historical factors of the

community / culture / subculture as it relates to history and the perceived positive

and/or negative effects on health care, but description and explanation is limited

and lacks some evidence to support claims. Paper demonstrates a basic

understanding of the topic.

2. Insufficient 1.66 points

Paper inadequately describes the background and explains historical factors of the

community / culture / subculture as it relates to history or and the perceived

positive and/or negative effects on health care, but description and explanation is

weak and missing evidence to support claims. Paper demonstrates a poor

understanding of the topic.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Paper omits or incompletely describes the background and explains historical

factors of the community / culture / subculture as it relates to history and the

perceived positive and/or negative effects on health care. Paper does not

demonstrate understanding of the topic.

https://www.gce.com/

Description of Plan 4.25 points

Criteria Description

Describe how the plan is implemented and where it is based.

5. Target 4.25 points

Paper expertly describes how the plan is implemented and where it is based, and

description is comprehensive and insightful with relevant evidence to support

claims. Paper demonstrates an exceptional understanding of the topic.

4. Acceptable 3.61 points

Paper clearly describes how the plan is implemented and where it is based, and

description is strong with sound analysis and some evidence to support claims.

Paper demonstrates an understanding that extends beyond the surface of the

topic.

3. Approaching 3.19 points

Paper adequately describes how the plan is implemented and where it is based, but

description is limited and lacks some evidence to support claims. Paper

demonstrates a basic understanding of the topic.

2. Insufficient 2.76 points

Paper inadequately describes how the plan is implemented and where it is based,

but description is weak and missing evidence to support claims. Paper

demonstrates a poor understanding of the topic.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Paper omits or incompletely describes how the plan is implemented and where it is

based. Paper does not demonstrate understanding of the topic.

https://www.gce.com/

Components of the Prevention Plan 4.25 points

Criteria Description

Describe several components of the prevention plan, including factors correlated with

the chosen community/culture/subculture (e.g., education, socioeconomic status,

lifestyle behaviors, health behaviors, self-care, exercise, nutrition, conflicts with

mainstream medicine, religious/spiritual factors).

5. Target 4.25 points

Paper expertly describes several components of the prevention plan, including

factors correlated with the chosen community/culture/subculture (e.g., education,

socioeconomic status, lifestyle behaviors, health behaviors, self-care, exercise,

nutrition, conflicts with mainstream medicine, religious/spiritual factors), and

description is comprehensive and insightful with relevant evidence to support

claims. Paper demonstrates an exceptional understanding of the topic.

4. Acceptable 3.61 points

Paper clearly describes several components of the prevention plan, including

factors correlated with the chosen community/culture/subculture (e.g., education,

socioeconomic status, lifestyle behaviors, health behaviors, self-care, exercise,

nutrition, conflicts with mainstream medicine, religious/spiritual factors), and

description is strong with sound analysis and some evidence to support claims.

Paper demonstrates an understanding that extends beyond the surface of the

topic.

3. Approaching 3.19 points

Paper adequately describes several components of the prevention plan, including

factors correlated with the chosen community/culture/subculture (e.g., education,

socioeconomic status, lifestyle behaviors, health behaviors, self-care, exercise,

nutrition, conflicts with mainstream medicine, religious/spiritual factors), but

description is limited and lacks some evidence to support claims. Paper

demonstrates a basic understanding of the topic.

2. Insufficient 2.76 points

Paper inadequately describes several components of the prevention plan, including

factors correlated with the chosen community/culture/subculture (e.g., education,

socioeconomic status, lifestyle behaviors, health behaviors, self-care, exercise,

nutrition, conflicts with mainstream medicine, religious/spiritual factors), but

description is weak and missing evidence to support claims. Paper demonstrates a

poor understanding of the topic.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points © 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.© 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/

Paper omits or incompletely describes several components of the prevention plan,

including factors correlated with the chosen community/culture/subculture (e.g.,

education, socioeconomic status, lifestyle behaviors, health behaviors, self-care,

exercise, nutrition, conflicts with mainstream medicine, religious/spiritual factors)..

Paper does not demonstrate understanding of the topic.

https://www.gce.com/

Viability of Prevention Plan 4.25 points

Criteria Description

Reflect on the viability of the prevention plan and how it is promoted.

5. Target 4.25 points

Paper expertly reflects on the viability of the prevention plan and how it is

promoted, and reflection is comprehensive and insightful with relevant evidence to

support claims. Paper demonstrates an exceptional understanding of the topic.

4. Acceptable 3.61 points

Paper clearly reflects on the viability of the prevention plan and how it is promoted,

and reflection is strong with sound analysis and some evidence to support claims.

Paper demonstrates an understanding that extends beyond the surface of the

topic.

3. Approaching 3.19 points

Paper adequately reflects on the viability of the prevention plan and how it is

promoted, but reflection is limited and lacks some evidence to support claims.

Paper demonstrates a basic understanding of the topic.

2. Insufficient 2.76 points

Paper inadequately reflects on the viability of the prevention plan and how it is

promoted, but reflection is weak and missing evidence to support claims. Paper

demonstrates a poor understanding of the topic.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Paper omits or incompletely reflects on the viability of the prevention plan and how

it is promoted. Paper does not demonstrate understanding of the topic.

https://www.gce.com/

Positive E�ects of the Plan 8.5 points

Criteria Description

Paper describes how the plan positively effects the community / culture / subculture in

relation to the cancer/illness or disease.

5. Target 8.5 points

Paper expertly describes how the plan positively effects the community / culture /

subculture in relation to the cancer/illness or disease, and description is

comprehensive and insightful with relevant evidence to support claims. Paper

demonstrates an exceptional understanding of the topic.

4. Acceptable 7.23 points

Paper clearly describes how the plan positively effects the community / culture /

subculture in relation to the cancer/illness or disease, and description is strong with

sound analysis and some evidence to support claims. Paper demonstrates an

understanding that extends beyond the surface of the topic.

3. Approaching 6.38 points

Paper adequately describes how the plan positively effects the community / culture

/ subculture in relation to the cancer/illness or disease, but description is limited

and lacks some evidence to support claims. Paper demonstrates a basic

understanding of the topic.

2. Insufficient 5.53 points

Paper inadequately describes how the plan positively effects the community /

culture / subculture in relation to the cancer/illness or disease, but description is

weak and missing evidence to support claims. Paper demonstrates a poor

understanding of the topic.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Paper omits or incompletely describes how the plan positively effects the

community / culture / subculture in relation to the cancer/illness or disease. Paper

does not demonstrate understanding of the topic.

https://www.gce.com/

Obstacles 8.5 points

Criteria Description

Paper identifies obstacles that might hinder the plan's success and proposes strategies

to overcome these obstacles.

5. Target 8.5 points

Paper expertly identifies obstacles that might hinder the plan's success and

proposed strategies to overcome these obstacles, and description is comprehensive

and insightful with relevant evidence to support claims. Paper demonstrates an

exceptional understanding of the topic.

4. Acceptable 7.23 points

Paper clearly identifies obstacles that might hinder the plan's success and proposed

strategies to overcome these obstacles, and description is strong with sound

analysis and some evidence to support claims. Paper demonstrates an

understanding that extends beyond the surface of the topic.

3. Approaching 6.38 points

Paper adequately identifies obstacles that might hinder the plan's success and

proposed strategies to overcome these obstacles, but description is limited and

lacks some evidence to support claims. Paper demonstrates a basic understanding

of the topic.

2. Insufficient 5.53 points

Paper inadequately identifies obstacles that might hinder the plan's success and

proposed strategies to overcome these obstacles, but description is weak and

missing evidence to support claims. Paper demonstrates a poor understanding of

the topic.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Paper omits or incompletely identifies obstacles that might hinder the plan's

success and proposed strategies to overcome these obstacles. Paper does not

demonstrate understanding of the topic.

https://www.gce.com/

Strengths, Weaknesses, and Improvements 12.75 points

Criteria Description

Paper reflects on the strengths and weaknesses of the chosen prevention plan and

proposes changes or improvements to the plan to make it more effective, culturally

sensitive, or inclusive.

5. Target 12.75 points

Paper expertly reflects on the strengths and weaknesses of the chosen prevention

plan and proposed changes or improvements to the plan to make it more effective,

culturally sensitive, or inclusive, and description is comprehensive and insightful

with relevant evidence to support claims. Paper demonstrates an exceptional

understanding of the topic.

4. Acceptable 10.84 points

Paper clearly reflects on the strengths and weaknesses of the chosen prevention

plan and proposed changes or improvements to the plan to make it more effective,

culturally sensitive, or inclusive, and description is strong with sound analysis and

some evidence to support claims. Paper demonstrates an understanding that

extends beyond the surface of the topic.

3. Approaching 9.56 points

Paper adequately reflects on the strengths and weaknesses of the chosen

prevention plan and proposed changes or improvements to the plan to make it

more effective, culturally sensitive, or inclusive, but description is limited and lacks

some evidence to support claims. Paper demonstrates a basic understanding of the

topic.

2. Insufficient 8.29 points

Paper inadequately reflects on the strengths and weaknesses of the chosen

prevention plan and proposed changes or improvements to the plan to make it

more effective, culturally sensitive, or inclusive, but reflection is weak and missing

evidence to support claims. Paper demonstrates a poor understanding of the topic.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Paper omits or incompletely reflects on the strengths and weaknesses of the

chosen prevention plan and proposed changes or improvements to the plan to

make it more effective, culturally sensitive, or inclusive. Paper does not

demonstrate understanding of the topic.

https://www.gce.com/

Evidence-Based Recommendations (B) 12.75 points

Criteria Description

Paper provides evidence-based recommendations for enhancing the plan's impact on

the selected community/culture/subculture, including any ethical considerations or

potential unintended consequences of any proposed changes. (C3.4)

5. Target 12.75 points

Paper expertly provides evidence-based recommendations for enhancing the plan's

impact on the selected community/culture/subculture, including any ethical

considerations or potential unintended consequences of any proposed changes,

and recommendations are comprehensive and insightful with relevant evidence to

support claims. Paper demonstrates an exceptional understanding of the topic.

4. Acceptable 10.84 points

Paper clearly provides evidence-based recommendations for enhancing the plan's

impact on the selected community/culture/subculture, including any ethical

considerations or potential unintended consequences of any proposed changes,

and recommendations are strong with sound analysis and some evidence to

support claims. Paper demonstrates an understanding that extends beyond the

surface of the topic.

3. Approaching 9.56 points

Paper adequately provides evidence-based recommendations for enhancing the

plan's impact on the selected community/culture/subculture, including any ethical

considerations or potential unintended consequences of any proposed changes,

but recommendations are limited and lacks some evidence to support claims. Paper

demonstrates a basic understanding of the topic.

2. Insufficient 8.29 points

Paper inadequately provides evidence-based recommendations for enhancing the

plan's impact on the selected community/culture/subculture, including any ethical

considerations or potential unintended consequences of any proposed changes,

but recommendations are weak and missing evidence to support claims. Paper

demonstrates a poor understanding of the topic.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Paper omits or incompletely provides evidence-based recommendations for

enhancing the plan's impact on the selected community/culture/subculture,

including any ethical considerations or potential unintended consequences of any

proposed changes. Paper does not demonstrate understanding of the topic.

https://www.gce.com/

Thesis, Position, or Purpose 5.95 points

Criteria Description

Communicates reason for writing and demonstrates awareness of audience.

5. Target 5.95 points

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

directed to a specific audience.

4. Acceptable 5.06 points

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

appropriate audience is demonstrated.

3. Approaching 4.46 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 3.87 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 5.95 points

Criteria Description

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

from development.

5. Target 5.95 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 5.06 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 4.46 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 3.87 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 5.1 points

Criteria Description

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

other perspectives.

5. Target 5.1 points

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

clearly considered.

4. Acceptable 4.34 points

Relevant evidence that includes other perspectives is used.

3. Approaching 3.82 points

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

integration of other perspectives is present.

2. Insufficient 3.32 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 5.1 points

Criteria Description

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

structure, etc.

5. Target 5.1 points

No mechanical errors are present. Appropriate language choice and sentence

structure are used throughout.

4. Acceptable 4.34 points

Few mechanical errors are present. Suitable language choice and sentence

structure are used.

3. Approaching 3.82 points

Occasional mechanical errors are present. Language choice is generally

appropriate. Varied sentence structure is attempted.

2. Insufficient 3.32 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 3.4 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 3.4 points

No errors in formatting or documentation are present.

4. Acceptable 2.89 points

Appropriate format and documentation are used with only minor errors.

3. Approaching 2.55 points

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

errors.

2. Insufficient 2.21 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 85 points

https://www.gce.com/