I am in need of help
madeline8
3 years ago
10
files (2)CitationsthatneedtobeusedinAPAformatting_.pdf
PSTraumaResilienceFinalPaperFall2023.docx
CitationsthatneedtobeusedinAPAformatting_.pdf
Citations that need to be used in APA formatting:
Wiechelt, S. A., & Straussner, S. L. A. (2015). Introduction to the special issue: Examining the relationship between trauma and addiction. Journal of Social Work Practice in the Addictions, 15(1), 1-5.
Morgan, O. J. (2019). Addiction, Attachment, Trauma and Recovery: The Power of Connection (Norton Series on Interpersonal Neurobiology). WW Norton & Company.
Garami, J., Valikhani, A., Parkes, D., Haber, P., Mahlberg, J., Misiak, B., ... & Moustafa, A. A. (2019). Examining perceived stress, childhood trauma and interpersonal trauma in individuals with drug addiction. Psychological reports, 122(2), 433-450.
Burke, P. A., & Carruth, B. R. U. C. E. (2012). Addiction and psychological trauma: Implications for counseling strategies. Trauma counseling: Theories and interventions, 214-230.
Dayton, T. (2000). Trauma and addiction: Ending the cycle of pain through emotional literacy. Simon and Schuster.
Vitale, J. (2016). How betrayal trauma triggers addiction and how it can be healed. Journal of Heart Centered Therapies, 19(2), 19-39.
PSTraumaResilienceFinalPaperFall2023.docx
PS Trauma & resilience - LEVEL 6
Theoretical Paper- Summative Assessment II Final paper Resit
Semester: Spring Semester 2023
THEORETICAL PAPER: SUMMATIVE ASSESSMENT II - (50%)-FINAL RESIT
Critical Review Paper
• CONTENT
On the following topic write a 1,800-word critical review paper.
“ Post-traumatic Growth and Complex trauma ”
TOPIC: HOW ADDICTION IS CONNECTED TO COMPLEX TRAUMA
• FORMAT
• You will perform a search in the library or remotely through remote library access (e.g., PsycINFO, Google Scholar, PubMed) to identify at least 10 quantitative/qualitative research articles (i.e., case studies, correlational studies, experimental studies) that bear on your topic. Strictly theoretical articles are welcome as a complementary material.
• Your paper should rely on primary sources (journal articles, chapters in edited volumes) and not secondary sources. Chapters in edited books are usually primary sources (reprints of journal articles).
• You should write the paper in your own words, taking the ideas in the articles and expressing them as you understand them. You will provide a citation for the article from which those ideas came.
• Use direct quotes only if the way the author expressed the idea is so important that you cannot possibly change it and maintain the integrity of the idea. When you do include direct quotes, make sure that each quote has a single citation identifying the source, and a page number.
• Consult the APA Publication manual for details.
• Your paper should have a cover page, an abstract, your review of your topic, including at least 10-15 references of research articles, and a reference list, all in APA format. Edit and proof read it carefully.
• WORD LIMIT AND PENALIZATION
The word limit for the critical review paper is 1,800 words (title page, abstract, and references excluded). Papers with a deviation of 10% will not get penalized.
Material written after/beyond the 10% deviation above the expected total length of coursework will NOT be read, and thus assessed, by the first and second grader. As a result, this will directly affect the points earned for assessed area(s) corresponding to this material.
When work is under word limit, consequently the content is limited and this will be reflected in points earned. If all the assessed areas are underdeveloped, this will accordingly affect the points earned for all assessed areas. Alternatively weak/poor content might impact specific assessed areas. Thus, overall grade will indicate the extent to which the content is incomplete/ inadequate.
Assessment Criteria: Theoretical Paper (1800Words)
The assessment criteria for the paper embrace four areas of the work which are differently weighted as follows:
Area One: Knowledge and Understanding
(35% of Total Mark)
Area Two: Evaluation, Analysis & Synthesis
Development of Argumentation (45% of Total Mark)
Area Three: Structure and Communication of Ideas (10% of Total Mark)
Clarity of expression, use of technical vocabulary, grammar + spelling
Area Four: APA Style (10% of Total Mark)
Area One: Knowledge and Understanding (35% of Total Mark)
• The work covers all relevant information, drawn from a broad and diverse range of primary sources, which is clearly up to date.
• Solid evidence of deep and broad knowledge of the theoretical and empirical literature relevant to the topic
• Exceptionally well researched
Excellent (UK)
(mark between 24.5-35)
A
• The work covers nearly all relevant information, drawn from a wide range of sources. A good range of mainly relevant and up to date primary sources has been reviewed.
• Clear evidence of a sound knowledge of the literature relevant to the topic
• Very well researched
Very Good (UK)
(mark between 21.0-24.4)
A-, B+
• The work covers a good amount of relevant information, drawn from a rather limited range of sources. Τhe literature reviewed is based on a combination of primary and secondary sources.
• Evidence of a fairly good knowledge of the relevant literature, but with some gaps and omissions
• Well researched
Good (UK)
(mark between 17.5-20.9)
B
• The work covers a satisfactory amount of relevant information, drawn from a limited or outdated number of sources.
• Evidence of a satisfactory knowledge of the relevant literature, but with obvious gaps and omissions
• Satisfactorily researched
Satisfactory (UK)
(mark between 15.8-17.4)
C+
• The work covers the topic only peripherally, with some relevant information, drawn commonly from secondary sources, which are possibly not up to date
• Evidence of only a limited knowledge of the literature
• Marginally acceptable level of research
Pass (UK)
(mark between 14-15.7)
C
• The work focuses inadequately on the topic
• The work contains a significant amount of irrelevant information
• No convincing evidence of an understanding of the literature, with a very limited selection of relevant sources
• Poorly researched
Poor (UK)
(mark between 0-13.9)
F
Marker’s Additional Comments
Area Two: Evaluation, Synthesis, Analysis and Development of Argumentation (45% of Total Mark)
• Excellent critical evaluation of material. The work shows that conflicting views in the information have been evaluated leading to a novel and/or independent conclusion/s.
• Excellent synthesis and analysis of information derived from different contexts, establishing links and highlighting controversies and inconsistencies.
• Excellent presentation of arguments in a logical and coherent way; comprehensive and persuasive argumentation.
Excellent (UK)
(mark between 31.5-45)
A
• Very good critical evaluation of material. The work shows that conflicting views in the information have mostly been evaluated leading to coherent conclusion/s.
• Very good synthesis and analysis of information derived from many contexts, establishing links and highlighting controversies or inconsistencies.
• A very good presentation of arguments in a logical and coherent way; the argumentation is persuasive.
Very Good (UK)
(mark between 27.0-31.4)
A-, B+
• Good attempt to critically evaluate the most important
issues in question, with balanced arguments.
• Good evidence of ability to synthesize and analyze information developing sound arguments.
• Some arguments might be incomplete/underdeveloped, but with no serious omissions.
Good (UK)
(mark between 22.5-26.9)
B
• Limited critical evaluation of material. The most critical issues are discussed but arguments are imbalanced or underdeveloped/incomplete.
• Limited ability to synthesize and analyze information developing sound arguments.
• Obvious gaps in the development of arguments.
Satisfactory (UK)
(mark between 20.3-22.4)
C+
• Superficial evaluation of material. Arguments are basic or not totally relevant to the issue in question.
• Sparse evidence of analysis of material and poor synthesis of information in the development of arguments.
• Significant gaps in the development of arguments
Pass (UK)
(mark between 18-20.2)
C
• Clearly no evaluative stance towards the material and poor synthesis of information. The works is purely descriptive; if arguments are included are irrelvant
Poor (UK)
(mark between 0-17.9)
F
Marker’s Additional Comments
Area Three: Structure and Communication of Ideas (10% of Total Mark)
• Standard of presentation is impressive; lucid, elegant, accurate.
• Title original and informative of the topic.
• Exceptionally clear and correct use of English characterized by a very lucid style of expression, with no imprecise and/or incorrect statements;
• Spelling and Grammar: no errors.
• Excellent use of scientific terminology; accurate, sophisticated and varied
• Excellent layout in terms of structure and cohesiveness. The division of content into subsections is original
Excellent (UK)
(mark between 7.0-10)
A
• Standard of presentation is very good; Pleasing clarity of ideas;
• Title appropriate and informative of the topic
• Clear and correct use of English characterized by a clear style of expression, with a few imprecise and/or incorrect statements; clear, fluent, accurate.
• Very good use of scientific terminology; accurate and appropriate;
• Very good layout in terms of structure and cohesiveness. The division of content into subsections is meaningful
Very Good (UK)
(mark between 6.0-6.9)
A-,B+
• Standard of presentation good. Good clarity of ideas
• Title mostly appropriate and informative of the topic
• Reasonably clear and correct use of English characterized by generally clear expression, with relatively few imprecise and/or incorrect statements
• Good use of scientific terminology
• Generally good layout in terms of structure and cohesiveness
Good (UK)
(mark between 5.0-5.9)
B
• Standard of presentation satisfactory
• Title satisfactory
• Satisfactory use of scientific language
• Generally correct use of English, but with aspects of unclear expression and a few imprecise and/or incorrect statements
• Generally satisfactory layout in terms of structure and cohesiveness
Satisfactory (UK)
(mark between 4.5-4.9)
C+
• Standard of presentation marginal.
• Title relevant
• Marginally use of scientific language
• Use of English characterized by unclear and incoherent expression and a number of imprecise and/or incorrect statements
• Marginally acceptable layout in terms of structure and cohesiveness
Pass (UK)
(mark between 4.0-4.4)
C
• Standard of presentation poor
• Inadequate title
• Poor use of scientific language or with no undersatnding
• Poor use of English characterized by significant errors in writting, obscuring meaning; very unclear, incorrect statements
• Generally unacceptable layout in terms of structure and cohesiveness
Poor (UK)
(mark between 0-3.9)
F
Marker’s Additional Comments
Area Four: APA Style (10% of Total Mark)
• Conforms to all aspects of APA style.
• The report is in the correct format.
• The abstract is inclusive of all issues addressed and succinct.
• All references and Appendices are provided, using standard format
Excellent (UK)
(mark between 7.0-10)
A
• Conforms to most aspects of APA style.
• The report is in the correct format in nearly all structural aspects of APA.
• The abstract is informative and clear
• Nearly all references and Appendices are provided, using standard format
Very Good (UK)
(mark between 6.0-6.9)
A-, B+
• Conforms to the major APA style specifications.
• The report conforms to the basic structural aspects of APA (eg. major sections, major headings) but deviates somehow on other secondary features (keywords in abstract and length, running head, Appendices).
• The abstract contains most critical aspects but somewhat lacks clarity.
• Serious attempt at providing references and Appendices, but with some flaws in presentation
Good (UK)
(mark between 5.0-5.9)
B
• Conforms to a fair amount of APA specifications.
• It has generally satisfactory layout in terms of structure, but deviates on secondary features.
• The abstract lacks clarity but contains some relavant information.
• Flawed attempt at providing references and/or Appendices
Satisfactory (UK)
(mark between 4.5-4.9)
C+
• Does not conform to a number of required APA style specifications.
• The report deviates on primary and secondary features of the APA.
• The abstract lacks clarity and contains very few relevant information.
• References and/or Appendices have various errors.
Pass (UK)
(mark between 4.0-4.4)
C
• Does not conform to the required APA style specifications.
• The report deviates substantially on primary and secondary features of the APA.
• The abstract is either missing or inadequate.
• References and/or Appendices either missing or with significant errors.
Poor (UK)
(mark between 0-3.9)
F
Marker’s Additional Comments
- Only for Baber Makayla
- You have been hired to manage a small manufacturing facility which has
- The credit manager for a local department store discovers that 88%
- Consider the following graph
- NEED DISCUSSION IN HALF AN HOUR
- putul only
- Chimstry homework now
- The visual principle of gestalt,
- In the small town of Tidewater, an Assistant District Attorney was found guilty of child molestation and sexual exploitation of...
- Sales Mix Decision
