final project
shanta75
rubic.docx|
Introduction: Problem Statement |
2.74 points Meets “Proficient” criteria and response demonstrates an advanced ability to distill key details from a vignette to develop a problem statement |
2.466 points Develops a problem statement that identifies the reason for referral and the type of assessments used |
1.918 points Develops a problem statement that identifies the reason for referral and the type of assessments used, but statement is missing key elements |
0 points Does not develop a problem statement that identifies the reason for referral and the type of assessments used |
Score of Introduction: Problem Statement, / 2.74 |
|
Test and Assessment Development Analysis- Test One: Administered |
4.8 points Meets “Proficient” criteria and description is insightful and contains exceptional detail |
4.32 points Describes how the test is administered |
3.36 points Describes how the test is administered, but description is cursory or lacks detail |
0 points Does not describe how the test is administered |
Score of Test and Assessment Development Analysis- Test One: Administered, / 4.8 |
|
Test and Assessment Development Analysis- Test One: Population |
2.74 points Meets “Proficient” criteria and demonstrates a keen insight into the applications of the test |
2.466 points Describes the populations for which the test is normed |
1.918 points Describes the populations for which the test is normed, but response contains inaccuracies or lacks justification |
0 points Does not describe the populations for which the test is normed |
Score of Test and Assessment Development Analysis- Test One: Population, / 2.74 |
|
Test and Assessment Development Analysis- Test One: Yields |
4.8 points Meets “Proficient” criteria and response is insightful and contains exceptional detail |
4.32 points Explains the information the test yields |
3.36 points Explains the information the test yields, but response lacks sufficient detail |
0 points Does not explain the information the test yields |
Score of Test and Assessment Development Analysis- Test One: Yields, / 4.8 |
|
Test and Assessment Development Analysis- Test One: Reliability and Validity |
2.74 points Meets “Proficient” criteria and demonstrates a nuanced understanding of test administration on varying populations |
2.466 points Determines the reliability and validity of the test when administered to varying populations |
1.918 points Determines the reliability and validity of the test when administered to varying populations, but response contains inaccuracies |
0 points Does not determine the reliability and validity of the test when administered to varying populations |
Score of Test and Assessment Development Analysis- Test One: Reliability and Validity, / 2.74 |
|
Test and Assessment Development Analysis- Test One: Cut Scores |
3.84 points Meets “Proficient” criteria and description includes exceptional detail |
3.456 points Describe the cut scores of the test |
2.688 points Describes the cut scores for but response contains inaccuracies or is missing key information |
0 points Does not describe the cut scores |
Score of Test and Assessment Development Analysis- Test One: Cut Scores, / 3.84 |
|
Test and Assessment Development Analysis- Test One: Cultural Concerns |
4.8 points Meets “Proficient” criteria and demonstrates keen insight into the impact of cultural concerns on test administration |
4.32 points Assesses any cultural concerns for their impact on the effectiveness of the administration of the test |
3.36 points Assesses any cultural concerns for their impact on the effectiveness of the administration of the test, but response is cursory or illogical or lacks detail |
0 points Does not assess any cultural concerns for their impact on the effectiveness of the administration of the test |
Score of Test and Assessment Development Analysis- Test One: Cultural Concerns, / 4.8 |
|
Test and Assessment Development Analysis- Test One: Ethical Issues |
4.8 points Meets “Proficient” criteria and demonstrates a sophisticated insight into the ethical issues |
4.32 points Determines if there are any ethical issues related to administering the test |
3.36 points Determines if there are any ethical issues related to administering the test, but response is cursory or illogical or lacks detail |
0 points Does not determine if there are any ethical issues related to administering the test |
Score of Test and Assessment Development Analysis- Test One: Ethical Issues, / 4.8 |
|
Test and Assessment Development Analysis- Test One: Methods |
2.74 points Meets “Proficient” criteria and is insightful and contains exceptional detail |
2.466 points Assesses the methods of interpreting and communicating the results for their appropriateness |
1.918 points Assesses the methods of interpreting and communicating the results, but response is cursory or illogical or lacks detail |
0 points Does not assess the methods of interpreting and communicating the results |
Score of Test and Assessment Development Analysis- Test One: Methods, / 2.74 |
|
Test and Assessment Development Analysis- Test Two: Administered |
4.8 points Meets “Proficient” criteria and description is insightful and contains exceptional detail |
4.32 points Describes how the test is administered |
3.36 points Describes how the test is administered, but description is cursory or lacks detail |
0 points Does not describe how the test is administered |
Score of Test and Assessment Development Analysis- Test Two: Administered, / 4.8 |
|
Test and Assessment Development Analysis- Test Two: Population |
2.74 points Meets “Proficient” criteria and demonstrates a keen insight into the applications of the test |
2.466 points Describes the populations for which the test is normed |
1.918 points Describes the populations for which the test is normed, but response contains inaccuracies or lacks justification |
0 points Does not describe the populations for which the test is normed |
Score of Test and Assessment Development Analysis- Test Two: Population, / 2.74 |
|
Test and Assessment Development Analysis- Test Two: Yields |
4.8 points Meets “Proficient” criteria and response is insightful and contains exceptional detail |
4.32 points Explains the information the test yields |
3.36 points Explains the information the test yields, but response lacks sufficient detail |
0 points Does not explain the information the test yields |
Score of Test and Assessment Development Analysis- Test Two: Yields, / 4.8 |
|
Test and Assessment Development Analysis- Test Two: Reliability and Validity |
2.74 points Meets “Proficient” criteria and demonstrates a nuanced understanding of test administration on varying populations |
2.466 points Determines the reliability and validity of the test when administered to varying populations |
1.918 points Determines the reliability and validity of the test when administered to varying populations, but response contains inaccuracies |
0 points Does not determine the reliability and validity of the test when administered to varying populations |
Score of Test and Assessment Development Analysis- Test Two: Reliability and Validity, / 2.74 |
|
Test and Assessment Development Analysis- Test Two: Cut Scores |
3.84 points Meets “Proficient” criteria and description includes exceptional detail |
3.456 points Describes the cut scores of the test |
2.688 points Describes the cut scores for the test, but response contains inaccuracies or is missing key information |
0 points Does not describe the cut scores |
Score of Test and Assessment Development Analysis- Test Two: Cut Scores, / 3.84 |
|
Test and Assessment Development Analysis- Test Two: Cultural Concerns |
4.8 points Meets “Proficient” criteria and demonstrates keen insight into the impact of cultural concerns on test administration |
4.32 points Assesses any cultural concerns for their impact on the effectiveness of the administration of the test |
3.36 points Assesses any cultural concerns for their impact on the effectiveness of the administration of the test, but response is cursory or illogical or lacks detail |
0 points Does not assess any cultural concerns for their impact on the effectiveness of the administration of the test |
Score of Test and Assessment Development Analysis- Test Two: Cultural Concerns, / 4.8 |
|
Test and Assessment Development Analysis- Test Two: Ethical Issues |
4.8 points Meets “Proficient” criteria and demonstrates a sophisticated insight into the ethical issues |
4.32 points Determines if there are any ethical issues related to administering the test |
3.36 points Determines if there are any ethical issues related to administering the test, but response is cursory or illogical or lacks detail |
0 points Does not determine if there are any ethical issues related to administering the test |
Score of Test and Assessment Development Analysis- Test Two: Ethical Issues, / 4.8 |
|
Test and Assessment Development Analysis- Test Two: Methods |
2.74 points Meets “Proficient” criteria and assessment is insightful and contains exceptional detail |
2.466 points Assesses the methods of interpreting and communicating the results for their appropriateness |
1.918 points Assesses the methods of interpreting and communicating the results, but response is cursory or illogical or lacks detail |
0 points Does not assess the methods of interpreting and communicating the results |
Score of Test and Assessment Development Analysis- Test Two: Methods, / 2.74 |
|
Clinical Formulation: Results |
3.84 points Meets “Proficient” criteria and analysis is insightful and contains exceptional detail |
3.456 points Analyzes the results of the tests using industry-standard tools |
2.688 points Analyzes the results of the tests using industry-standard tools, but analysis contains inaccuracies or lacks detail |
0 points Does not analyze the results of the tests using industry-standard tools |
Score of Clinical Formulation: Results, / 3.84 |
|
Clinical Formulation: Diagnosis |
3.84 points Meets “Proficient” criteria and determination is insightful and contains exceptional detail |
3.456 points Determines a diagnosis based on the data provided |
2.688 points Determines a diagnosis based on the data provided, but diagnosis lacks justification or detail |
0 points Does not determine the diagnosis based on the data provided |
Score of Clinical Formulation: Diagnosis, / 3.84 |
|
Clinical Formulation: Psychometric Data |
3.84 points Meets “Proficient” criteria and demonstrates a complex grasp of the psychometric data |
3.456 points Interprets the psychometric data from the test results to address the reason for the referral |
2.688 points Interprets the psychometric data from the test results to address the reason for the referral, but submission contains inaccuracies or is missing key details |
0 points Does not interpret the psychometric data from the test results to address the reason for the referral |
Score of Clinical Formulation: Psychometric Data, / 3.84 |
|
Recommendations: Treat |
4.8 points Meets “Proficient” criteria and recommendations are insightful and detailed |
4.32 points Recommends actionable ways to best treat the client based on the clinical formulation |
3.36 points Recommends actionable ways to best treat the client based on the clinical formulation, but recommendations are cursory or illogical or lacks detail |
0 points Does not recommend actionable ways to best treat the client based on the clinical formulation |
Score of Recommendations: Treat, / 4.8 |
|
Recommendations: Impact |
4.8 points Meets “Proficient” criteria and demonstrates a sophisticated insight into ethical issues related to presenting results to a client |
4.32 points Assesses potential ethical issues for their impact on presenting results to the client |
3.36 points Assesses potential ethical issues for their impact on presenting results to the client, but assessment is cursory or illogical or lacks detail |
0 points Does not assess potential ethical issues for their impact on presenting results to the client |
Score of Recommendations: Impact, / 4.8 |
|
Recommendations: Results |
4.8 points Meets “Proficient” criteria and demonstrates keen insight into strategies that are ethical and strength-based |
4.32 points Determines strategies to present results to the client that are ethical and strength-based |
3.36 points Determines strategies to present results to the client that are ethical and strength-based, but strategies are not appropriate or lack detail |
0 points Does not determine strategies to present results to the client that are ethical and strength-based |
Score of Recommendations: Results, / 4.8 |
|
Recommendations: Limitations |
4.8 points Meets “Proficient” criteria and discussion is insightful and exceptionally detailed |
4.32 points Discusses limitations of the analysis |
3.36 points Discusses limitations of the analysis, but response is cursory or illogical or lacks detail |
0 points Does not determine limitations of the analysis |
Score of Recommendations: Limitations, / 4.8 |
|
Articulation of Response |
4.02 points Submission is free of errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, and organization and is presented in a professional and easy-to-read format |
3.618 points Submission has no major errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization |
2.814 points Submission has major errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization that negatively impact readability and articulation of main ideas |
0 points Submission has critical errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization that prevent understanding of ideas |
Score of Articulation of Response, / 4.02 |
Total
Score of PSY 550 Final Project Rubric (SA),
/ 100
Overall Score
Points earned out of 100
91 points minimum
The overall submission earned 91 points or more. Final calculation of grades can be found in the gradebook.
Points earned out of 100
71 points minimum
The overall submission earned 71 points or more. Final calculation of grades can be found in the gradebook.
Points earned out of 100
1 point minimum
The overall submission earned 1 points or more. Final calculation of grades can be found in the gradebook.
Points earned out of 100
0 points minimum
The overall submission earned 0 points or more. Final calculation of grades can be found in the gradebook.
|
|
|
|
Associated Learning Objectives |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assessment Method: Score on Criteria - Test and Assessment Development Analysis- Test One: Administered |
|
|
Required Performance: Proficient |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assessment Method: Score on Criteria - Test and Assessment Development Analysis- Test One: Yields |
|
|
Required Performance: Proficient |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assessment Method: Score on Criteria - Test and Assessment Development Analysis- Test Two: Administered |
|
|
Required Performance: Proficient |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assessment Method: Score on Criteria - Test and Assessment Development Analysis- Test Two: Yields |
|
|
Required Performance: Proficient |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assessment Method: Score on Criteria - Introduction: Problem Statement |
|
|
Required Performance: Proficient |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assessment Method: Score on Criteria - Test and Assessment Development Analysis- Test One: Population |
|
|
Required Performance: Proficient |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assessment Method: Score on Criteria - Test and Assessment Development Analysis- Test One: Reliability and Validity |
|
|
Required Performance: Proficient |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assessment Method: Score on Criteria - Test and Assessment Development Analysis- Test One: Methods |
|
|
Required Performance: Proficient |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assessment Method: Score on Criteria - Test and Assessment Development Analysis- Test Two: Population |
|
|
Required Performance: Proficient |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assessment Method: Score on Criteria - Test and Assessment Development Analysis- Test Two: Methods |
|
|
Required Performance: Proficient |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assessment Method: Score on Criteria - Test and Assessment Development Analysis- Test Two: Reliability and Validity |
|
|
Required Performance: Proficient |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assessment Method: Score on Criteria - Test and Assessment Development Analysis- Test One: Cut Scores |
|
|
Required Performance: Proficient |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assessment Method: Score on Criteria - Test and Assessment Development Analysis- Test Two: Cut Scores |
|
|
Required Performance: Proficient |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assessment Method: Score on Criteria - Clinical Formulation: Results |
|
|
Required Performance: Proficient |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assessment Method: Score on Criteria - Clinical Formulation: Diagnosis |
|
|
Required Performance: Proficient |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assessment Method: Score on Criteria - Clinical Formulation: Psychometric Data |
|
|
Required Performance: Proficient |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assessment Method: Score on Criteria - Test and Assessment Development Analysis- Test One: Cultural Concerns |
|
|
Required Performance: Proficient |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assessment Method: Score on Criteria - Test and Assessment Development Analysis- Test Two: Cultural Concerns |
|
|
Required Performance: Proficient |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assessment Method: Score on Criteria - Recommendations: Treat |
|
|
Required Performance: Proficient |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assessment Method: Score on Criteria - Recommendations: Limitations |
|
|
Required Performance: Proficient |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assessment Method: Score on Criteria - Test and Assessment Development Analysis- Test One: Ethical Issues |
|
|
Required Performance: Proficient |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assessment Method: Score on Criteria - Test and Assessment Development Analysis- Test Two: Ethical Issues |
|
|
Required Performance: Proficient |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assessment Method: Score on Criteria - Recommendations: Impact |
|
|
Required Performance: Proficient |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assessment Method: Score on Criteria - Recommendations: Results |
|
|
Required Performance: Proficient |
|
|
|
