Collin College Module 9 American Citizen and Democratic Process Discussion

Collin College Module 9 American Citizen and Democratic Process Discussion Collin College Module 9 American Citizen and Democratic Process Discussion ORDER NOW FOR CUSTOMIZED AND ORIGINAL NURSING PAPERS This is a graded discussion: 10 points possible due Nov 23 Week 6 – Interactive AssignmentNo unread replies. No replies. Your initial discussion thread is due on Day 3 (Thursday) and you have until Day 7 (Monday) to respond to your classmates. Your grade will reflect both the quality of your initial post and the depth of your responses. Personality Theory at Work in Social NetworksPrior to beginning work on this discussion, read the required article by Appel and Kim-Appel (2010) and watch the Episode: 118 – Inside Out: An Introduction to Psychology – The Enduring Self video excerpt, which is accessible through the ProQuest database in the Ashford University Library. For this discussion, you will build on your experience in the “Personality Theory at Work in Popular Media” discussion from last week by re-examining the major theoretical approaches studied in the class (psychodynamic, behavioral, learning, trait and type, and humanistic) within the realm of social networks. In addition to these five domains, you will also consider the theoretical approaches related to complex models. Your initial post will be presented in a video format. Please see the instructions for this below.To begin, choose a social networking site (this may be Facebook (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site., LinkedIn (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site. or Twitter (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.). Choose someone you know in your personal or professional life who has a profile on one of these three social networking services. It is important in your posts and responses not to disclose identifying information about your subject. You may choose a pseudonym by which to identify your selected subject in this discussion.Choose one of the five domains (psychodynamic, behavioral, learning, trait and type, and humanistic) and create a personality profile based on your current knowledge of your chosen subject using the framework of your selected domain. Collin College Module 9 American Citizen and Democratic Process Discussion. Collin College Module 9 American Citizen and Democratic Process DiscussionThen, review the online profile or feed of your subject in your chosen social networking site and create a personality profile based on the information your subject has published on the site using the framework of your selected domain.Compare and contrast the two different personality profiles. Provide an analysis of any differences between the two profiles. Select one of the models with the complex models domain. Explain the reasoning for the differences between the real world and online personality of your subject using your selected model within the complex models domains. Research a minimum of two articles on your chosen model and use these to support your statements. Evaluate and describe the usefulness of complex models as they pertain to this exercise in personality theory.You may create your initial post as a screencast video presentation or a video blog using the software of your choice. Quick-Start Guides are available for Prezi (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site., Screencast-O-Matic (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site., and YouTube (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site. for your convenience. Be sure to include all the required material from the instructions above in your presentation or video blog. Once you have created your video, please include the link in your initial post. In your initial post, please include citations for your references and a brief reflection on the differences between creating a written post and having to present the material via screencast/video.Guided Response: Review several of your colleagues’ posts and respond to at least two of your peers by 11:59 p.m. on Day 7 of the week. You are encouraged to post your required replies earlier in the week to promote more meaningful interactive discourse in this discussion. After reviewing your classmate’s video:What similarities in the comparison do you see with your own findings?Given the two personality profiles presented, which do you think is more representative of the subject being described?Use your complex models research to support your statements.Consider the ethical implications of social media interactions as the basis of personality profiling.Review the APA’s Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site. and describe the ethical issues present in your classmate’s social media personality profile.Continue to monitor the forum until 5:00 p.m. MST on Day 7 of the week and respond to anyone who replies to your initial post.Discussion Forum Grading Rubric PSY615.W6D1.10.2014Description: Total Possible Score: 10.00General Content/Subject Knowledge Total: 3.00Distinguished – Addresses all aspects of the prompt in accordance with the parameters of the discussion and demonstrates in-depth knowledge of the discussion topic.Proficient – Addresses all aspects of the prompt in accordance with the parameters of the discussion and demonstrates knowledge of the discussion topic.Basic – Addresses all aspects of the prompt in accordance with the parameters of the discussion and demonstrates basic knowledge of the discussion topic.Below Expectations – Addresses all or most aspects of the prompt in accordance with the parameters of the discussion and demonstrates limited knowledge of the discussion topic.Non-Performance – There is no initial discussion post, or the post does not address the discussion prompt at all.Critical ThinkingTotal: 3.00Distinguished – Comprehensively explores the ideas, thoughts, and elements of the topic and provides relevant evidence and information that demonstrates all of the following as applicable to the discussion prompt: clarity, relevance, depth, breadth, use of information resources, and logic.Proficient – Explores the ideas, thoughts, and elements of the topic and provides relevant evidence and information that demonstrates most of the following as applicable to the discussion prompt: clarity, relevance, depth, breadth, use of information resources, and logic.Basic -Explores the ideas, thoughts, and elements of the topic and provides relevant evidence and information that demonstrates some of the following as applicable to the discussion prompt: clarity, relevance, depth, breadth, and use of information, and logic. Collin College Module 9 American Citizen and Democratic Process Discussion. Below Expectations – Attempts to explore the ideas, thoughts, and elements of the topic and provide relevant evidence and information, but demonstrates few of the following as applicable to the discussion prompt: clarity, relevance, depth, breadth, use of information resources, and logic.Non-Performance – There is no attempt to explore the ideas, thoughts, and elements of the topic and provide relevant evidence and information in either the original post or subsequent response posts within the discussion, or no post is present.Written CommunicationTotal: 2.00Distinguished – Displays clear control of syntax and mechanics. The organization of the work shows appropriate transitions and flow between sentences and paragraphs. Written work contains no errors and is very easy to understand.Proficient – Displays control of syntax and mechanics. The organization of the work shows transitions and/or flow between sentences and paragraphs. Written work contains only a few errors and is mostly easy to understand.Basic – Displays basic control of syntax and mechanics. The work is not organized with appropriate transitions and flow between sentences and paragraphs. Written work contains several errors, making it difficult to fully understand.Below Expectations – Displays limited control of syntax or mechanics. The work does not include any transitions and does not flow easily between sentences and paragraphs. Written work contains major errors.Non-Performance – Fails to display control of syntax or mechanics, within the original post and/or responses. Organization is also not present.Engagement/ ParticipationTotal: 2.00Distinguished – Contributes to classroom conversations with at least the minimum number of replies, all of which were thoughtful, relevant, and contributed meaningfully to the conversation. Fully engages in the conversation with appropriate topic-based responses.Proficient – Contributes to classroom conversations with the minimum number of replies that are somewhat thoughtful, relevant, and contributed meaningfully to the conversation. Attempts to fully engage in the conversation with appropriate topic-based responses.Basic – Contributes to the classroom conversations with the minimum number of replies. Attempts to fully engage in the conversation, but the responses are not relevant or fully aligned with the discussion topic.Below Expectations – Attempts to contribute to the classroom conversations with fewer than the minimum number of replies; however, the replies are not thoughtful and relevant, or they do not contribute meaningfully to the conversation.Non-Performance – There is no contribution to the discussion.Powered by Week 6 – Final Paper Psychological Assessment ReportA psychological assessment report is created by psychology professionals to inform groups or individuals of the assessments appropriate for their current needs. This type of report also includes a summary of the services provided to these groups or individuals. This evaluation is used by the various entities to assess basic needs, competencies, preferences, skills, traits, dispositions, and abilities for different individuals in a variety of settings.Psychological reports vary widely depending on the psychology professional creating it and the needs being assessed. Some of the psychology professionals who create this type of report include counselors, school psychologists, consultants, psychometricians, or psychological examiners. This type of report may be as short as three pages or as long as 20 or more pages depending on the needs of the stakeholders. Many reports include tables of scores that are attached either in an appendix or integrated into the report. Despite the many variations in assessment reports, most include the same essential information and headings.Students will choose one of the personality assessment scenarios from the discussions in Weeks Two, Three, or Four to use as the basis of this psychological assessment report. Once the scenario has been chosen, students will research a minimum of four peer-reviewed articles that relate to and support the content of the scenario and the report as outlined below. The following headings and content must be included in the report: The Reason for Referral and Background Information In this section, students will describe the reasons for the referral and relevant background information for all stakeholders from the chosen personality assessment scenario.Assessment Procedures In this section, students will include a bulleted list of the test(s) and other assessment measures recommended for the evaluation of the given scenario. In addition to the assessment(s) initially provided in the personality assessment scenario from the weekly discussion, students must include at least three other measures appropriate for the scenario.Immediately following the bulleted list, students will include a narrative description of the assessments. In the narrative, students will examine and comment on the major theoretical approaches, research methods, and assessment instruments appropriate for the situation and stakeholder needs. In order to defend the choice of recommended assessments, students will evaluate current research in the field of personality theories and provide examples of how these assessments are valid for use in the chosen scenario. For additional support of these recommended assessment measures, students will evaluate the standardization, reliability and validity, and cultural considerations present in these personality assessments that make them the most appropriate tools for the given scenario. Students will conclude the narrative by assessing types of personality measurements and research designs often used in scenarios like the one chosen and providing a rationale for why some of those assessments were not included.General Observations and Impressions In this section, students will describe general observations of the client during the assessment period provided in the chosen personality assessment scenario and explain whether the client’s behavior might have had a negative impact on the test results. Students will analyze and comment on how the APA’s Ethical Principles and Code of Conduct affected the implementation of the personality assessment during the initial process. Collin College Module 9 American Citizen and Democratic Process Discussion. Based on the observations and analysis, students will assess the validity of the evaluation and make a recommendation for or against the necessity for additional testing.Test Results and Interpretations In this section, students will analyze the results of the assessment provided in the chosen personality assessment scenario. Based on the score, students will interpret the personality factors (conscientiousness, openness, emotional stability, introversion, extroversion, work drive, self-directedness, etc.) that are present.Note: Typically, this section reports test results and is the longest section of a psychological assessment report because the results of all the tests administered are analyzed and reported. Some psychologists report all test results individually, while others may integrate only a portion of the test results. However, in this report, only the assessment presented in the chosen personality assessment scenario will be included.Summary and Recommendations In this section, students will summarize the test results. They will provide a complete explanation for the evaluation, the procedures and measures used, and the results and include any recommendations translating the evaluation into strategies and suggestions to support the client. Finally, students will provide any conclusions and diagnostic impressions drawn from the previous sections of the report.Pathbrite Portfolio The Masters of Arts in Psychology program is utilizing the Pathbrite portfolio tool as a repository for student scholarly work in the form of signature assignments completed within the program. After receiving feedback for this Psychological Assessment Report, please implement any changes recommended by the instructor, go to Pathbrite (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site. and upload the revised Psychological Assessment Report to the portfolio. Use the Pathbrite Quick-Start Guide (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site. to create an account if you do not already have one. The upload of signature assignments will take place after completing each course. Be certain to upload revised signature assignments throughout the program as the portfolio and its contents will be used in other courses and may be used by individual students as a professional resource tool. See the Pathbrite (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site. website for information and further instructions on using this portfolio tool.Writing the Psychological Assessment ReportThe report:Must be six to ten double-spaced pages in length and formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center.Must include a title page with the following:oTitle of paperoStudent’s nameoCourse name and numberoInstructor’s nameoDate submittedMust include the required headings and content as listed above. Must address the topic of the paper with critical thought.Must utilize assessment manuals as necessary to support the inclusion and results of the assessments.Must use a minimum of four peer-reviewed sources, at least two of which must be from the Ashford University Library.Must document all sources in APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center.Must include a separate reference page that is formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing CenterGrading Rubric PSY615.W6A1.10.2014Description: Total Possible Score: 25.00Describes the Reasons for the Referral and Relevant Background Information for All StakeholdersTotal: 1.00Distinguished – Comprehensively describes the background details for the referral, including pertinent information about the assessments recommended for the scenario.Proficient – Describes the background details for the referral, including pertinent information about the assessments recommended for the scenario. Minor details are missing or inappropriate/inaccurate for the scenario.Basic – Minimally describes the background details for the referral, including pertinent information about the assessments recommended for the scenario. Relevant details are missing and/or inappropriate/inaccurate for the scenario.Below Expectations – Attempts to describe the background details for the referral, including pertinent information about the assessments recommended for the scenario; however, significant details are missing and inappropriate/inaccurate for the scenario.Non-Performance – The description of the reasons for the referral and background information are either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.Includes a Bulleted List of the Test(s) and Other Assessment Measure(s) Recommended for the Evaluation of the Given ScenarioTotal: 1.00Distinguished – Includes a complete bulleted list of the test(s) and other assessment measure(s) recommended for the evaluation of the given scenario.Proficient – Includes a bulleted list of the test(s) and other assessment measure(s) recommended for the evaluation of the given scenario. Some minor details are missing.Basic – Includes a limited bulleted list of the test(s) and other assessment measure(s) recommended for the evaluation of the given scenario. Relevant details are missing and/or inaccurate.Below Expectations – Attempts to includes a bulleted list of the test(s) and other assessment measure(s) recommended for the evaluation of the given scenario; however, significant details are missing and inaccurate.Non-Performance – A bulleted list of the test(s) and other assessment measure(s) recommended for the evaluation of the given scenario is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.Includes a Narrative Description of the AssessmentsTotal: 1.00Distinguished -Includes a thorough narrative description of the assessments.Proficient – Includes a narrative description of the assessments. Some minor details are missing.Basic -Includes a limited narrative description of the assessments. Collin College Module 9 American Citizen and Democratic Process Discussion. Relevant details are missing and/or inaccurate.Below Expectations – Attempts to includes a narrative description of the assessments; however, significant elements are missing and inaccurate.Non-Performance – A narrative description of the assessments is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.Examines and Comments on the Major Theoretical Approaches, Research Methods, and Assessment Instruments Appropriate for the Situation and Stakeholder NeedsTotal: 1.50Distinguished – Provides and exceptionally detailed explanation of the assessment instruments selected for this scenario which is appropriate for the situation and stakeholder needs based on the literature in the field.Proficient – Provides a mostly detailed explanation of the assessment instruments selected for this scenario which is appropriate for the situation and stakeholder needs based on the literature in the field. The examination of the literature is slightly underdeveloped.Basic – Provides a limited explanation of the assessment instruments selected for this scenario, and which may not be appropriate for the situation and stakeholder needs based on the literature in the field. The examination is underdeveloped.Below Expectations – Attempts to provide an explanation of the assessment instruments selected for this scenario based on the literature in the field; however, the selected assessments are not appropriate for the situation and stakeholder needs, and the examination is significantly underdeveloped.Non-Performance – The examination of the theoretical approaches for this scenario is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.Evaluates Current Research in the Field of Personality Theories and Provides Examples of How these Assessments are Valid for Use in the Chosen ScenarioTotal: 1.50Distinguished – Comprehensively evaluates current research in the field of personality theories and provides relevant examples of how these assessments are valid for use in the chosen scenario.Proficient – Evaluates current research in the field of personality theories and provides mostly relevant examples of how these assessments are valid for use in the chosen scenario. Minor details are missing.Basic – Minimally valuates current research in the field of personality theories and provides somewhat relevant examples of how these assessments are valid for use in the chosen scenario. Relevant details are missing and/or inaccurate.Below Expectations -Attempts to evaluate current research in the field of personality theories and provides examples of how these assessments are valid for use in the chosen scenario; however, the examples are not relevant and significant details are missing or inaccurate.Non-Performance – An evaluation of current research in the field of personality theories and provides examples of how these assessments are valid for use in the chosen scenario is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.Provides a Critical Analysis of the Standardization, Reliability and Validity, and Cultural Considerations Present in these Personality Assessments that Make Them the Most Appropriate Tools for the Given ScenarioTotal: 1.50Distinguished – Provides and exceptionally clear and detailed critical analysis of the standardization, reliability and validity, and cultural considerations present in these personality assessments that make them the most appropriate tools for the given scenario.Proficient – Provides a critical analysis of the standardization, reliability and validity, and cultural considerations present in these personality assessments that make them the most appropriate tools for the given scenario. Collin College Module 9 American Citizen and Democratic Process Discussion. The critical analysis is slightly underdeveloped.Basic – Provides a limited critical analysis of the standardization, reliability and validity, and cultural considerations present in these personality assessments that make them the most appropriate tools for the given scenario. The critical analysis is underdeveloped.Below Expectations – Attempts to provide a critical analysis of the standardization, reliability and validity, and cultural considerations present in these personality assessments that make them the most appropriate tools for the given scenario; however, the critical analysis is significantly underdeveloped.Non-Performance – The critical analysis of the standardization, reliability and validity, and cultural considerations present in the personality assessments is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.Assesses Types of Personality Measurements and research designs often used in scenarios like the one chosen and provides a rationale for why some of those assessments were not included.Total: 1.00Distinguished – Comprehensively assesses types of personality measurements and research designs often used in scenarios like the one chosen and provides a rationale for why some of those assessments were not included.Proficient – Assesses types of personality measurements and research designs often used in scenarios like the one chosen and provides a rationale for why some of those assessments were not included. Some minor details are missing or inaccurate.Basic – Partially assesses types of personality measurements and research designs often used in scenarios like the one chosen and provides a rationale for why some of those assessments were not included. Relevant details are missing and/or inaccurate.Below Expectations – Attempts to assesses types of personality measurements and research designs often used in scenarios like the one chosen; however does not provide a rationale for why some of those assessments were not included and significant details are missing and inaccurate.Non-Performance – The assessment of types of personality measurements and research designs often used in scenarios like the one chosen, and a rationale for why some of those assessments were not included are either nonexistent or lack the components described in the assignment instructions.Describes General Observations of the Client During the Assessment Period and Explains Whether the Client’s Behavior Might Have Had a Negative Impact on the Test ResultsTotal: 0.50Distinguished – Thoroughly describes general observations of the client during the assessment period and fully explains whether the client’s behavior might have had a negative impact on the test results.Proficient – Describes general observations of the client during the assessment period and explains whether the client’s behavior might have had a negative impact on the test results. Some minor details are missing or inaccurate.Basic – Partially describes general observations of the client during the assessment period and minimally explains whether the client’s behavior might have had a negative impact on the test results. Relevant details are missing and/or inaccurate. Below Expectations – Attempts to describe general observations of the client during the assessment period and explain whether the client’s behavior might have had a negative impact on the test results; however, significant details are missing and inaccurate.Non-Performance – A description of general observations of the client during the assessment period and explains whether the client’s behavior might have had a negative impact on the test results is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.Analyzes and Comments on How the APA’s Ethical Principles and Code of Conduct Affected the Implementation of the Personality Assessment During the ProcessTotal: 1.50Distinguished – Thoroughly analyzes and comments on how the APA’s Ethical Principles and Code of Conduct affected the implementation of the personality assessment during the process.Proficient – Analyzes and comments on how the APA’s Ethical Principles and Code of Conduct affected the implementation of the personality assessment during the process. Minor details are missing or inaccurate.Basic – Minimally analyzes and comments on how the APA’s Ethical Principles and Code of Conduct affected the implementation of the personality assessment during the process. Relevant details are missing and/or inaccurate.Below Expectations – Attempts to analyze and comment on how the APA’s Ethical Principles and Code of Conduct affected the implementation of the personality assessment during the process; however, significant details are missing and inaccurate.Non-Performance – The analysis of how the APA’s Ethical Principles and Code of Conduct affected the implementation of the personality assessment during the process is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.Assesses the Validity of the Evaluation and Makes a Recommendation for or Against the Necessity for Additional TestingTotal: 1.50Distinguished – Thoroughly assesses the validity of the evaluation and makes a recommendation for or against the necessity for additional testing.Proficient – Assesses the validity of the evaluation and makes a recommendation for or against the necessity for additional testing. Minor details are missing.Basic – Partially assesses the validity of the evaluation and makes a recommendation for or against the necessity for additional testing. Relevant details are missing and/or inaccurate.Below Expectations – Attempts to assess the validity of the evaluation and makes a recommendation for or against the necessity for additional testing; however, significant details are missing and inaccurate.Non-Performance -The assessment of the validity of the evaluation and makes a recommendation for or against the necessity for additional testing is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.Analyzes the Results of the Assessment Provided in the Original ScenarioTotal: 1.00Distinguished – Comprehensively analyzes the results of the assessment provided in the original scenario.Proficient – Analyzes the results of the assessment provided in the original scenario. Minor details are missing.Basic – Partially analyzes the results of the assessment provided in the original scenario. Relevant details are missing and/or inaccurate.Below Expectations -Attempts to analyze the results of the assessment provided in the original scenario; however, significant elements are missing or inaccurate.Non-Performance – The analysis of the results of the assessment provided in the original scenario is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.Interprets the Personality Factors Present Based on the Assessment ScoreTotal: 1.00Distinguished – Thoroughly and accurately interprets the personality factors present based on the assessment score.Proficient – Interprets the personality factors present based on the assessment score. Minor details are missing or inaccurate.Basic – Vaguely interprets the personality factors present based on the assessment score. Collin College Module 9 American Citizen and Democratic Process Discussion. Relevant details are missing and/or inaccurate.Below Expectations – Attempts to interpret the personality factors present based on the assessment score; however, significant details are missing and inaccurate.Non-Performance -The interpretation of the personality factors present based on the assessment score is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.Summarizes the Test ResultsTotal: 1.00Distinguished – Comprehensively and accurately summarizes the test results.Proficient – Summarizes the test results. Minor details are missing.Basic – Partially summarizes the test results. Relevant details are missing and/or inaccurate.Below Expectations – Attempts to summarize the test results; however, significant details are missing and inaccurate.Non-Performance – The summary of the test results is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.Provides a Complete Explanation for the Evaluation, the Procedures and Measures Used, and the ResultsTotal: 1.00Distinguished – Provides a complete and accurate explanation for the evaluation, the procedures and measures used, and the results.Proficient – Provides an explanation for the evaluation, the procedures and measures used, and the results. Minor details are missing or inaccurate.Basic – Provides a limited explanation for the evaluation, the procedures and measures used, and the results. Relevant details are missing and/or inaccurate.Below Expectations – Attempts to provide an explanation for the evaluation, the procedures and measures used, and the results; however, significant elements are missing and inaccurate.Non-Performance – The explanation for the evaluation, the procedures and measures used, and the results is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.Includes Recommendations Translating the Evaluation into Strategies and Suggestions to Support the ClientTotal: 1.00Distinguished – Thoroughly includes relevant recommendations translating the evaluation into strategies and suggestions to support the client.Proficient – Includes relevant recommendations translating the evaluation into strategies and suggestions to support the client. Minor details are missing.Basic – Partially includes somewhat relevant recommendations translating the evaluation into strategies and suggestions to support the client. Releva