refle 4
martha04attached
2 days ago
8
files (2)reflex4.docx
rubric4.docx
reflex4.docx
Of the multitude of strategies discussed this week for increasing work enjoyment for staff, what is your favorite/most preferred strategy discussed in this module? How will you integrate this strategy into your supervision practice in the future? What will it look like when you implement it with a supervisee/trainee? Are there any practices discussed that you will avoid in your supervision in the future, and why?
Remember to review the Reflection Paper rubric and instructions for reviewing a peer's submission in the Important Course Information module.
Additionally, please include LINKS or DOIs to any articles or books referenced outside of the assigned readings as part of your APA citation ( as is required when using web-based referencesLinks to an external site. ). Failing to do so will result in point deductions.
rubric4.docx
Reflection Paper Rubric 4.9.26 Edits
|
Reflection Paper Rubric 4.9.26 Edits |
||
|
Criteria |
Ratings |
Pts |
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeLength Number of words - excludes reference section and direct quotes from references that are longer than 5 words |
5 to >3.0 ptsMeets ExpectationsReflection paper is between 150 and 500 words 3 to >0.0 ptsPartially Meets ExpectationsReflection paper is less than 150 words or more than 500 words 0 ptsDoes not Meet ExpectationThe reflection paper is less than 100 words. |
5 pts |
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeGrammar, Usage, and Spelling |
5 to >3.0 ptsMeets ExpectationsReflection paper contained less than 2 grammar, usage, or spelling errors. 3 to >0.0 ptsPartially Meets ExpectationsReflection paper contained 3-4 grammar, usage, or spelling errors. 0 ptsDoes not Meet ExpectationReflection paper contained more than 5 grammar, usage, or spelling errors and proofreading was not apparent. |
5 pts |
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeReferences and Utilization of Outside Resources Inclusion of one peer reviewed behavioral source and one course assigned reading |
5 to >3.0 ptsMeets ExpectationsThe author used references from peer- reviewed behavioral sources in APA format and cited one or more original behavioral references, outside of the assigned readings. Hyperlinks to the cited external references are provided. 3 to >0.0 ptsPartially Meets ExpectationsThe author used references in APA format of assigned readings but did not include an additional peer-reviewed behavioral reference or did not include a hyperlink to the externally-cited reference. 0 ptsDoes not Meet ExpectationsThe author neither utilized APA format for referenced material used nor cited an outside peer-reviewed behavioral reference. |
5 pts |
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAddressing the Prompt Author answers the questions presented in the prompt. |
5 to >3.0 ptsMeets ExpectationsDirectly and thoroughly responds to the assignment prompt, demonstrating clear understanding of the required topic. Develops ideas logically and coherently, using organized, empirical, and evidenceinformed writing. 3 to >0.0 ptsPartially Meets ExpectationsResponds to the assignment prompt, but the development of ideas may be only partially clear, briefly addressed, or lacking depth. Organization may be uneven, with some logical flow but limited support for claims. 0 ptsDoes not Meet ExpectationsThe author’s reflection paper does not correspond with the assignment prompt, mainly discusses personal opinions, irrelevant information, or information is presented with limited logic and lack of development and organization of ideas. |
5 pts |
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeApplication Author applies the week's readings/topics. |
5 to >3.0 ptsMeets ExpectationsShows strong application of the week’s assigned readings or topic, making explicit, accurate connections between course content and the student’s insights. 3 to >0.0 ptsPartially Meets ExpectationsReferences the week’s topic or readings only tangentially, without demonstrating real application or meaningful integration. Contains general or surfacelevel statements rather than wellsupported insights. 0 ptsDoes not Meet ExpectationsThe author’s post does not demonstrate application of the week’s assigned topic/reading. |
5 pts |
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeOriginality Author writes original and unique content. |
5 to >3.0 ptsMeets ExpectationsThe author clearly articulates information that is not a direct summary of the materials presented in class or typical output from artificial intelligence. 3 to >0.0 ptsPartially Meets ExpectationsThe author is able to articulate novel responses, but rudimentary summarization or typical output from artificial intelligence is detected. 0 ptsDoes not Meet ExpectationsThe author’s response is heavily verbatim or typical output of artificial intelligence. |
5 pts |
Total Points: 30
