PSY640.W1A1.05.2016

Description:


Total Possible Score: 10.00

Provides an Overview and Brief Evaluation of the Ethical and Social Implications of Psychological Assessment

Total: 0.50

Distinguished - Provides a thorough overview and brief evaluation of the ethical and social implications of psychological assessment. Fully addresses each of the elements identified in the assignment instructions.

Proficient - Provides an overview and brief evaluation of the ethical and social implications of psychological assessment. Addresses the elements identified in the assignment instructions but minor details are missing.

Basic - Provides a limited overview and brief evaluation of the ethical and social implications of psychological assessment. Minimally addresses some of the elements identified in the assignment instructions and relevant details are missing.

Below Expectations - Attempts to provide an overview and brief evaluation of the ethical and social implications of psychological assessment; however, does not address many of the elements identified in the assignment instructions and/or significant details are missing.

Non-Performance - The overview and/or brief evaluation is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.


Describes the Responsibilities of Test Publishers and Test Users

Total: 1.00

Distinguished - Thoroughly describes the responsibilities of test publishers and test users. Fully addresses each of the elements identified in the assignment instructions.

Proficient - Describes the responsibilities of test publishers and test users. Addresses the elements identified in the assignment instructions but minor details are missing.

Basic - Partially describes the responsibilities of test publishers and test users. Minimally addresses some of the elements identified in the assignment instructions and relevant details are missing.

Below Expectations - Attempts to describe the responsibilities of test publishers and test users; however, does not address many of the elements identified in the assignment instructions and/or significant details are missing.

Non-Performance - The description of the responsibilities of test publishers and test users is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.


Analyzes and Describes Issues Related to the Testing of Cultural and Linguistic Minorities

Total: 1.00

Distinguished - Thoroughly analyzes and describes issues related to the testing of cultural and linguistic minorities. Fully addresses each of the elements identified in the assignment instructions.

Proficient - Analyzes and describes issues related to the testing of cultural and linguistic minorities.  Addresses the elements identified in the assignment instructions but minor details are missing.

Basic - Partially analyzes and describes issues related to the testing of cultural and linguistic minorities. Minimally addresses some of the elements identified in the assignment instructions and relevant details are missing.

Below Expectations - Attempts to analyze and describe issues related to the testing of cultural and linguistic minorities; however, does not address many of the elements identified in the assignment instructions and/or significant details are missing.

Non-Performance - The analysis and/or description of issues related to the testing of cultural and linguistic minorities is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.


Explains the Common Sources of Measurement Error and How Measurement Error Can Impact Reliability

Total: 1.00

Distinguished - Thoroughly explains the common sources of measurement error and how measurement error can impact reliability. Fully addresses each of the elements identified in the assignment instructions.

Proficient - Explains the common sources of measurement error and how measurement error can impact reliability. Addresses the elements identified in the assignment instructions but minor details are missing.

Basic - Partially explains the common sources of measurement error and how measurement error can impact reliability.  Minimally addresses some of the elements identified in the assignment instructions and relevant details are missing.

Below Expectations - Attempts to explain the common sources of measurement error and how measurement error can impact reliability; however, does not address many of the elements identified in the assignment instructions and/or significant details are missing.

Non-Performance - The explanation of the common sources of measurement error and how measurement error can impact reliability is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.


Validity: Includes a Diagram or Figure to Compare the Types of Validity Discussed in the Textbook, Describes the Extravalidity Concerns Related to Testing, Analyzes the Information on Factor Analysis In the Fergus (2013), Kosson, Et Al. (2013) and Mathieu, Et Al. (2013) Articles, and Describes How Factor Analysis Is Used to Validate the Constructs of the Instruments

Total: 1.00

Distinguished - Includes a thorough section on Validity, Extravalidity Concerns, and Factor Analysis. Fully addresses each of the elements identified in the assignment instructions.

Proficient - Includes a section on Validity, Extravalidity Concerns, and Factor Analysis. Addresses the elements identified in the assignment instructions but minor details are missing.

Basic - Includes a partially developed section on Validity, Extravalidity Concerns, and Factor Analysis. Minimally addresses some of the elements identified in the assignment instructions and relevant details are missing.

Below Expectations - Attempts to include a thorough section on Validity, Extravalidity Concerns, and Factor Analysis; however, does not address many of the elements identified in the assignment instructions and/or significant details are missing.

Non-Performance - The section on Validity, Extravalidity Concerns, and Factor Analysis is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.


Clinical Versus Statistical Prediction: Compares Clinical and Statistical Prediction of Mental Health Decisions Based on the Findings of Ægisdóttir (2006) and Grove & Lloyd (2006)

Total: 1.00

Distinguished - Includes a thorough section on Clinical Versus Statistical Prediction. Fully addresses each of the elements identified in the assignment instructions.

Proficient - Includes a section on Clinical Versus Statistical Prediction. Addresses the elements identified in the assignment instructions but minor details are missing.

Basic - Includes a partially developed section on Clinical Versus Statistical Prediction. Minimally addresses some of the elements identified in the assignment instructions and relevant details are missing.

Below Expectations - Attempts to include a section on Clinical Versus Statistical Prediction; however, does not address many of the elements identified in the assignment instructions and/or significant details are missing.

Non-Performance - The section on Clinical Versus Statistical Prediction is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.


Application One: An Ethical and Professional Quandary: Describes the Ethical Issues Specific to a Selected Scenario From the Textbook and Includes an Analysis of the Relevant Principles From Standard 9: Assessment of the APA Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct, and Describes How Challenges Might Be Responded To, Providing a Brief Rationale For the Decision

Total: 1.00

Distinguished - Thoroughly describes the scenario’s ethical issues, including an analysis of relevant ethical principles, and a thorough description of appropriate responses to potential ethical challenges. Fully addresses each of the elements identified in the assignment instructions.

Proficient - Describes the scenario’s ethical issues, including an analysis of relevant ethical principles and a description of appropriate responses to potential ethical challenges. Addresses the elements identified in the assignment instructions but minor details are missing.

Basic - Partially describes the scenario’s ethical issues, including an analysis of relevant ethical principles and a description of appropriate responses to potential ethical challenges. Minimally addresses some of the elements identified in the assignment instructions and relevant details are missing.

Below Expectations - Attempts to describe the scenario’s ethical issues, including an analysis of relevant ethical principles and a description of appropriate responses to potential ethical challenges; however, does not address many of the elements identified in the assignment instructions and/or significant details are missing.

Non-Performance - The description of the scenario’s ethical issues, analysis of relevant ethical principles, and/or the description of appropriate responses to potential ethical challenges is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.


Application Two: Evidence-Based Medicine: Summarizes Youngstrom’s (2013) Recommendations for Linking Assessment Directly to Clinical Decision Making in Evidence-Based Medicine and Elaborates on Each of Youngstrom’s Recommendations by Providing Practical Examples Illustrating the Relevance of the Recommendations in a Clinical Setting

Total: 1.00

Distinguished - Thoroughly summarizes and elaborates on the recommendations for directly linking assessment to clinical decision making, and provides accurate and relevant practical examples. Fully addresses each of the elements identified in the assignment instructions.

Proficient - Summarizes and elaborates on the recommendations for directly linking assessment to clinical decision making, and provides relevant practical examples. Addresses the elements identified in the assignment instructions but minor details are missing.

Basic - Partially summarizes and elaborates on the recommendations for directly linking assessment to clinical decision making, and provides generally relevant practical examples. Minimally addresses some of the elements identified in the assignment instructions and relevant details are missing.

Below Expectations - Attempts to summarize and the recommendations for directly linking assessment to clinical decision making, and provide relevant example; however, does not address many of the elements identified in the assignment instructions and/or significant details are missing.

Non-Performance - The summary, recommendations and/or practical examples pertinent to linking assessment to clinical decision making is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.


Application Three: Selecting Valid Instruments: Includes a Research Hypothesis or Brief Clinical Case Scenario in Which an Instrument is Selected to Measure Intolerance for Uncertainty and Uses the Information in the Fergus (2013) Article to Support the Measure(s) Chosen

Total: 1.00

Distinguished - Includes a well-developed research hypothesis or brief clinical case scenario incorporating the use of a measure of intolerance for uncertainty. The content in the section thoroughly supports the measure(s) chosen. Fully addresses each of the elements identified in the assignment instructions.

Proficient - Includes a research hypothesis or brief clinical case scenario incorporating the use of a measure of intolerance for uncertainty. The content in the section supports the measure(s) chosen. Addresses the elements identified in the assignment instructions but minor details are missing.

Basic - Includes a research hypothesis or brief clinical case scenario incorporating the use of a measure of intolerance for uncertainty. The content in the section partially supports the measure(s) chosen. Minimally addresses some of the elements identified in the assignment instructions and relevant details are missing.

Below Expectations - Attempts to include a research hypothesis or brief clinical case scenario incorporating the use of a measure of intolerance for uncertainty. The content in the section does not address many of the elements identified in the assignment instructions and/or significant details are missing.

Non-Performance - The research hypothesis and/or brief clinical case scenario is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.


Written Communication: Content Development

Total: 0.25

Distinguished - Uses appropriate, pertinent, and persuasive content to discover and develop sophisticated ideas within the context of the discipline, shaping the work as a whole.

Proficient - Uses appropriate and pertinent content to discover ideas within the context of the discipline, shaping the work as a whole.

Basic - Uses appropriate and pertinent content but does not apply it toward discovering or developing ideas. Overall, content assists in shaping the written work.

Below Expectations - Uses content, though it may be unrelated or inappropriate to the topic. Content does not contribute toward the development of the written work and may distract the reader from its purpose.

Non-Performance - The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.


Applied Ethics: Application of Ethical Perspectives/Concepts

Total: 0.25

Distinguished - Independently applies ethical viewpoints to an ethical question correctly and considers the full ramifications of the application.

Proficient - Independently applies ethical viewpoints to an ethical question correctly, but does not consider the specific ramifications of the application.

Basic - Applies ethical viewpoints to an ethical question with support, but is unable to apply ethical perspectives/concepts independently.

Below Expectations - Inaccurately constructs ethical viewpoints to an ethical question.

Non-Performance - The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.


Written Communication: Control of Syntax and Mechanics

Total: 0.25

Distinguished - Displays meticulous comprehension and organization of syntax and mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains no errors and is very easy to understand.

Proficient - Displays comprehension and organization of syntax and mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains only a few minor errors and is mostly easy to understand.

Basic - Displays basic comprehension of syntax and mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains a few errors which may slightly distract the reader.

Below Expectations - Fails to display basic comprehension of syntax or mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains major errors which distract the reader.

Non-Performance - The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.


Written Communication: APA Formatting

Total: 0.25

Distinguished - Accurately uses APA formatting consistently throughout the paper, title page, and reference page.

Proficient - Exhibits APA formatting throughout the paper. However, layout contains a few minor errors. 

Basic - Exhibits limited knowledge of APA formatting throughout the paper. However, layout does not meet all APA requirements. 

Below Expectations - Fails to exhibit basic knowledge of APA formatting. There are frequent errors, making the layout difficult to distinguish as APA.

Non-Performance - The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.


Written Communication: Page Requirement

Total: 0.25

Distinguished - The length of the paper is equivalent to the required number of correctly formatted pages. 

Proficient - The length of the paper is nearly equivalent to the required number of correctly formatted pages. 

Basic - The length of the paper is equivalent to at least three quarters of the required number of correctly formatted pages.

Below Expectations - The length of the paper is equivalent to at least one half of the required number of correctly formatted pages.   

Non-Performance - The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.


Written Communication: Resource Requirement

Total: 0.25

Distinguished - Uses more than the required number of scholarly sources, providing compelling evidence to support ideas. All sources on the reference page are used and cited correctly within the body of the assignment.

Proficient - Uses the required number of scholarly sources to support ideas. All sources on the reference page are used and cited correctly within the body of the assignment.

Basic - Uses less than the required number of sources to support ideas. Some sources may not be scholarly. Most sources on the reference page are used within the body of the assignment. Citations may not be formatted correctly.

Below Expectations - Uses an inadequate number of sources that provide little or no support for ideas. Sources used may not be scholarly. Most sources on the reference page are not used within the body of the assignment. Citations are not formatted correctly.

Non-Performance - The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.