Papers Organization: (relevant, legitimate, and follows syllabus topics) |
The paper does not match the assignment description or includes false and or misleading information. |
The paper tangentially follows the course syllabus but misses some of the major aspects of the assignment directly. It presents mostly relevant facts but lacks the ability to connect the research to a broader understanding of the study area. |
The paper appears to fit within the course syllabus description’s general idea but is disconnected from the finer points of the assignment implementation. The paper is based on credible sources and develops an argument for the information being presented. |
The content of the paper is of high quality and written scientifically, using accurate sources and information. It adheres to the assignment description. |
Paper Content: (description and history of the treatment modality) |
There is no discussion of the development or historical context of the treatment modality. |
The paper does not provide meaningful details about the intervention’s development and history. |
The paper offers a description of the development of the treatment modality. The intervention creators are mentioned. It lacks discussion of the treatment in the context of other interventions. |
The paper provides a meaningful description of the history and development of the treatment modality. It helps place it in the context of other treatment options. The intervention’s creators are discussed and how the intervention was developed is fully explained. |
| Paper Content: (treatment implementation and common techniques) |
There is no discussion of the implementation and common techniques. |
There is limited discussion of the implementation process or the standard techniques. It lacks details about how a clinician uses the modality. |
The implementation details are described in enough detail to show the general focus of the intervention. Many of the strategies or techniques are described. The submitted paper would be enhanced with more detailed discussion or real-world implementation details. |
The stages or steps a clinician goes through to implement the intervention are outlined in detail. Many of the strategies or techniques are explained. Some methods are have examples or scenarios so it clear how to implement the techniques. |
Paper Content: (research findings regarding efficacy) |
There is no discussion or inclusion of research findings. |
There is little explanation of the efficacy of the intervention. The effectiveness discussed is based on only one study. |
At least two studies and the effectiveness of the treatments. Most of the vital information for each study is provided. The presentation lacks some of the key descriptive information from the study is discussed. |
The presenters provide an insightful understanding of the effectiveness of the intervention. Three or more studies are used to provide the basis for efficacy. Key elements of the studies (context, format, participants, outcomes, etc.) are detailed in the discussion. |
Paper Content: (strengths and limitations of the selected treatment) |
There is no discussion of the strengths or limitations of the treatment. |
There is little information provided regarding strengths and limitations. |
The strengths are briefly described in general terms, without using case examples. The limitations are generic. |
There is a detailed discussion of the strengths of the given intervention. Potential population and uses are described. The limitations of the interventions are also described. Limitations should include a discussion of what researchers have defined as needing more research regarding this intervention. |
| Scholarship, Clarity, and APA Formatting |
The paper lacks clear scholarship; tone is informal or inappropriate for an academic audience; citations and references are missing. |
Some engagement with scholarship is evident but ideas may be disjointed; tone is uneven or somewhat unprofessional; several APA citation errors are present. |
The paper is generally well-organized with a mostly professional tone; minor APA formatting errors are present but do not detract significantly from clarity. |
The paper is clearly and logically organized with a consistently professional, action-oriented tone; APA citations and references are accurate and properly formatted throughout. |
| Following Assignment Requirements |
Does not follow the assignment description. |
Somewhat follows the assignment description, but significant problems exist. |
Follows the assignment description and requirements but has minor problems. |
Closely follows the assignment description and requirements. |