PSY 693 Full Course Assignments GCU

PSY 693 Full Course Assignments GCU

Topic 3 Benchmark – Research Proposal PowerPoint Presentation
Details:

Present an original research proposal in a 7-10-slide PowerPoint. Be prepared to defend your research as well as critique at least two learner’s presentations in the discussion forum.
Include the following in the presentation:

Introduction (1 slide)
Research Questions/Hypotheses (1 slide)
Literature Review/Theory (1-2 slides)
Methods & Data Collection (1-2 slides)
Hypothetical Data Presentation/Findings (2-3 slides)
Future research (1 slide)
Conclusion (1 slide)

While APA format is not required for the body of this assignment, solid academic writing is expected, and documentation of sources should be presented using APA formatting guidelines, which can be found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.

You are required to submit this assignment to Turnitin. Please refer to the directions in the Student Success Center.
This benchmark assignment assesses the following programmatic competencies: 4.2 Convey scientific knowledge to a general audience through a presentation.

Benchmark – Research Proposal PowerPoint Presentation

1

Unsatisfactory

0.00%

2

Less than Satisfactory

74.00%

3

Satisfactory

79.00%

4

Good

87.00%

5

Excellent

100.00%

100.0 %Criteria

40.0 %Present and defend original research (Comp. 4.2)

Defense of Research is missing.

Defense of Research is vague.

Defense of Research is adequate.

Defense of Research is thought out with some current scholarly research.

Defense of Research is concise and thorough with current scholarly research.

30.0 %Presentation of Content

The content lacks a clear point of view and logical sequence of information. Includes little persuasive information. Sequencing of ideas is unclear.

The content is vague in conveying a point of view and does not create a strong sense of purpose. Includes some persuasive information.

The presentation slides are generally competent, but ideas may show some inconsistency in organization and/or in their relationships to each other.

The content is written with a logical progression of ideas and supporting information exhibiting a unity, coherence, and cohesiveness. Includes persuasive information from reliable sources.

The content is written clearly and concisely. Ideas universally progress and relate to each other. The project includes motivating questions and advanced organizers. The project gives the audience a clear sense of the main idea.

10.0 %Layout

The layout is cluttered, confusing, and does not use spacing, headings, and subheadings to enhance the readability. The text is extremely difficult to read with long blocks of text, small point size for fonts, and inappropriate contrasting colors. Poor use of headings, subheadings, indentations, or bold formatting is evident.

The layout shows some structure, but appears cluttered and busy or distracting with large gaps of white space or a distracting background. Overall readability is difficult due to lengthy paragraphs, too many different fonts, dark or busy background, overuse of bold, or lack of appropriate indentations of text.

The layout uses horizontal and vertical white space appropriately. Sometimes the fonts are easy to read, but in a few places the use of fonts, italics, bold, long paragraphs, color, or busy background detracts and does not enhance readability.

The layout background and text complement each other and enable the content to be easily read. The fonts are easy to read and point size varies appropriately for headings and text.

The layout is visually pleasing and contributes to the overall message with appropriate use of headings, subheadings, and white space. Text is appropriate in length for the target audience and to the point. The background and colors enhance the readability of the text.

10.0 %Language Use and Audience Awareness (includes sentence construction, word choice, etc.)

Inappropriate word choice and lack of variety in language use are evident. Writer appears to be unaware of audience. Use of primer prose indicates writer either does not apply figures of speech or uses them inappropriately.

Some distracting inconsistencies in language choice (register) and/or word choice are present. The writer exhibits some lack of control in using figures of speech appropriately.

Language is appropriate to the targeted audience for the most part.

The writer is clearly aware of audience, uses a variety of appropriate vocabulary for the targeted audience, and uses figures of speech to communicate clearly.

The writer uses a variety of sentence constructions, figures of speech, and word choice in distinctive and creative ways that are appropriate to purpose, discipline, and scope.

5.0 %Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

Slide errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning.

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader.

Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader.

Slides are largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present.

Writer is clearly in control of standard, written academic English.

5.0 %Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)

Sources are not documented.

Documentation of sources is inconsistent and/or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.

Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.

100 %Total Weightage

Topic 3 Review of Research Proposal – Peer Review Worksheet
Details:

Attached is the “Peer Review Worksheet” you will use to review the proposal of a colleague in the discussion forum. You will turn one copy of the completed worksheet in here for your instructor to grade; the other you will attach in the discussion forum for your peer to view.
Attach the file with your completed Peer Review Worksheet to the Peer Review Forum Activity as a “reply” to the initial post of your peer’s first draft. Do not post the worksheet as an attachment.
PSY-693-RS-PeerReviewWksht.docx

Topic 3 Peer Review Forum Activity

Review the proposal of the person who posted his/her proposal directly below yours in the Peer Review Forum Activity. If your proposal is the last posted, review the first proposal posted. Complete the “Peer Review Worksheet” (attached under the assignment tab). You will then need to post your completed Peer Review Worksheet to TWO places: to the Topic 3 Peer Review Forum Activity for your peer to view, as well as to the Topic 3 Peer Review of Research Proposal assignment box, so the instructor can grade your work.
Attach the file with your completed Peer Review Worksheet to the Peer Review Forum Activity as a “reply” to the initial post of your peer’s first draft. Do not post the worksheet as an attachment.

PSY 693 Module 5 Benchmark Assignment – Career Exploration/Short Research Paper
Details:
Research two or three career paths of interest in your prospective field. In 750-1,000 words, include the following:

Labor market and availability (e.g., location)
Income range
Education/training needed
Job availability
Future stability
Time Demands
Benefits
Challenges (e.g., burnout propensity)
Opportunities for advancement
Does it match your skill level?
Does it align with your personality? Value system?
Summarize which path best suits you and your career choices. Explain why.
Discuss any surprising factors surrounding the career paths of your prospective field.

At least two to three scholarly sources are required for this assignment.
Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide and Typing Template, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.

You are required to submit this assignment to Turnitin. Please refer to the directions in the Student Success Center.
This benchmark assignment assesses the following programmatic competencies: 4.4. Research based professional career goals
Benchmark Assignment – Career Exploration/Short Research Paper

1

Unsatisfactory

0.00%
2

Less than Satisfactory

74.00%
3

Satisfactory

79.00%
4

Good

87.00%
5

Excellent

100.00%

70.0 %Content
15.0 %Discuss the marketability of the career, including; labor market and availability, income range, education/training needed, job availability, future stability, and time demands from the career.
Discussion of the marketability of the career, including; labor market and availability, income range, education/training needed, job availability, future stability, and time demands from the career is missing.
Discussion of the marketability of the career, including; labor market and availability, income range, education/training needed, job availability, future stability, and time demands from the career is vague or inconsistent.
Discussion of the marketability of the career, including; labor market and availability, income range, education/training needed, job availability, future stability, and time demands from the career is present but lacks some clarity or quality.
Discussion of the marketability of the career, including; labor market and availability, income range, education/training needed, job availability, future stability, and time demands from the career is present and is clearly understood. Shows quality analysis of the topics.
Discussion of the marketability of the career, including; labor market and availability, income range, education/training needed, job availability, future stability, and time demands from the career is exceptional. Clearly conveys a thorough grasp of the topics.

15.0 %Discuss career benefits and challenges, including; burnout propensity and opportunities for advancement.
Discussion of career benefits and challenges, including; burnout propensity and opportunities for advancement is missing.
Discussion of career benefits and challenges, including; burnout propensity and opportunities for advancement is vague or inconsistent.
Discussion of career benefits and challenges, including; burnout propensity and opportunities for advancement is present but lacks some clarity or quality.
Discussion of career benefits and challenges, including; burnout propensity and opportunities for advancement is clearly understood and makes some connection to current research.
Discussion of career benefits and challenges, including; burnout propensity and opportunities for advancement is exceptional and uses examples from current research, not simply personal opinions.

15.0 %Discuss how career matches your skill set, your personality, and your values system.
Discussion of how career matches skill set, personality, and values system is missing.
Discussion of how career matches skill set, personality, and values system is vague and inadequate.
Discussion of how career matches skill set, personality, and values system is present but lacks some clarity.
Discussion of how career matches skill set, personality, and values system is present and well thought out.
Discussion of how career matches skill set, personality, and values system is comprehensive, concise and thoughtful.

15.0 %Summarize which career path is best suited to you and your career choice, including why it is best suited. (Comp 4.4)
Summary of career path best suited to you and your career choice, including why it is best suited is missing.
Summary of career path best suited to you and your career choice, including why it is best suited is vague and inconsistent.
Summary of career path best suited to you and your career choice, including why it is best suited is present but lacks some clarity.
Summary of career path best suited to you and your career choice, including why it is best suited is clear and appropriate with relevant details.
Summary of career path best suited to you and your career choice, including why it is best suited is comprehensive, thoughtful, and shows sound analysis of personal situation.

10.0 %Discuss any surprising factors discovered surrounding your career path.
Discussion of surprising factors discovered surrounding your career path is missing.
Discussion of surprising factors discovered surrounding your career path is vague and inadequate.
Discussion of surprising factors discovered surrounding your career path is present but lacks some clarity.
Discussion of surprising factors discovered surrounding your career path is clear and thoughtful.
Discussion of surprising factors discovered surrounding your career path is concise, comprehensive, and shows sound analysis.

20.0 %Organization and Effectiveness
7.0 %Thesis Development and Purpose
Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.
Thesis and/or main claim are insufficiently developed and/or vague; purpose is not clear.
Thesis and/or main claim are apparent and appropriate to purpose.
Thesis and/or main claim are clear and forecast the development of the paper. It is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.
Thesis and/or main claim are comprehensive. The essence of the paper is contained within the thesis. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.

20.0 %Organization and Effectiveness
8.0 %Argument Logic and Construction
Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.
Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.
Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.
Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.
Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.

20.0 %Organization and Effectiveness
5.0 %Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are used.
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) and/or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.
Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.
Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.
Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.

10.0 %Format
5.0 %Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)
Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.
Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent.
Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.
Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style.
All format elements are correct.

5.0 %Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)
Sources are not documented.
Documentation of sources is inconsistent and/or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.
Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.

100 %Total Weightage

Topic 7 Benchmark Assignment – Leadership Reflection Paper
Details:
NOTE: Please review the attached document Leadership Reflection, located under course materials, before beginning this assignment.
In 500-750 words reflect on what you learned from your leadership interview.

Describe what you learned from your interview.
Describe how you will use the information in your own leadership experiences.

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide and Typing Template, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.

You are required to submit this assignment to Turnitin. Please refer to the directions in the Student Success Center.
This benchmark assignment assesses the following programmatic competencies: 2.4: Evaluate intrapersonal skills.
PSY693-RS-LeadershipReflection.docx

Benchmark Assignment – Leadership Reflection Paper

1

Unsatisfactory

0.00%
2

Less than Satisfactory

74.00%
3

Satisfactory

79.00%
4

Good

87.00%
5

Excellent

100.00%

70.0 %Content
35.0 %Describe what you learned from your interview
of what was learned from the interview is missing.
of what was learned from the interview is vague or inadequate.
of what was learned from the interview is present but somewhat lacks clarity.
of what was learned from the interview is clear and thoughtful.
of what was learned from the interview is clear, thorough, and well-presented.

35.0 %Describe how you will use this information in your own leadership experiences. (Comp 2.4)
of how you will use this information in your own leadership experiences is missing.
of how you will use this information in your own leadership experiences is vague or inadequate.
of how you will use this information in your own leadership experiences is present but somewhat lacks clarity.
of how you will use this information in your own leadership experiences is clear and thoughtful.
of how you will use this information in your own leadership experiences is clear, thorough, and well-presented.

20.0 %Organization and Effectiveness
7.0 %Thesis Development and Purpose
Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.
Thesis and/or main claim are insufficiently developed and/or vague; purpose is not clear.
Thesis and/or main claim are apparent and appropriate to purpose.
Thesis and/or main claim are clear and forecast the development of the paper. It is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.
Thesis and/or main claim are comprehensive. The essence of the paper is contained within the thesis. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.

20.0 %Organization and Effectiveness
8.0 %Argument Logic and Construction
Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.
Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.
Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.
Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.
Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.

20.0 %Organization and Effectiveness
5.0 %Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are used.
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) and/or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.
Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.
Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.
Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.

10.0 %Format
5.0 %Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)
Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.
Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent.
Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.
Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style.
All format elements are correct.

5.0 %Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)
Sources are not documented.
Documentation of sources is inconsistent and/or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.
Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.

100 %Total Weightage