Benchmark – Problem-Solving Treatment Paper.
Benchmark – Problem-Solving Treatment Paper.
ORDER NOW FOR CUSTOMIZED, PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPERS
Write a 750-1,000-word essay that develops a 4-week Problem-Solving Treatment (PST) approach to help a student struggling with ADHD or weight loss management. Use the seven-step strategy below:
- Define the problem
- Choose a realistic goal
- Identify three strategies to reach the goal
- Evaluate the feasibility of each strategy
- Choose a strategy
- Create an action plan
- Implement and evaluate the plan
Include how these strategies may either be maintained or altered over a lifetime as part of ongoing maintenance of mental, emotional, and physical health and wellness.
Include at least three scholarly references in your assignment.
Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.
This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
You are required to submit this assignment into LopesWrite. Refer to the LopesWrite Technical Support articles for assistance.
Benchmark Information
This benchmark assignment assesses the following programmatic competency:
Mental Health & Wellness
#4.3: Analyze the relationship between mental, emotional, and physical health throughout human development.
Rubric_Print_Format5.xlsx
Rubic_Print_Format
| Course Code | Class Code | Assignment Title | Total Points | |||||
| MHW-640 | MHW-640-O500 | Benchmark – Problem-Solving Treatment Paper | 100.0 | |||||
| Criteria | Percentage | Unsatisfactory (0.00%) | Less than Satisfactory (74.00%) | Satisfactory (79.00%) | Good (87.00%) | Excellent (100.00%) | Comments | Points Earned |
| Content | 70.0% | |||||||
| Develop a 4 week Problem-Solving Treatment Plan Steps First Four Steps | 25.0% | The plan does not define the problem, identify three strategies for a realistic goal, and evaluate the feasibility of each strategy. | The plan lacks detail or some accuracy as it defines the problem, identifies three strategies for a realistic goal, and evaluates the feasibility of each strategy. | The plan defines the problem, identifies three strategies for a realistic goal, and evaluates the feasibility of each strategy. | The plan defines the problem, identifies three strategies for a realistic goal, and evaluates the feasibility of each strategy by connecting to best practices and typical resources found in integrated health care settings. | The plan defines the problem, identifies three strategies for a realistic goal, and evaluates the feasibility of each strategy by explaining how to use best practices and typical resources found in integrated health care settings. | ||
| Develop a 4 week Problem-Solving Treatment Plan Steps Final Steps | 25.0% | The action plan is not for one strategy and does not have details for both implementing and evaluating the plan. | The action plan may be generalized rather than focused on one strategy and lack details for implementing or evaluating the plan. | The action plan is for one strategy with details for both implementing and evaluating the plan. | The action plan is for one strategy with pertinent details for both implementing and evaluating the plan. | The action plan is for one strategy with comprehensive details for both implementing and evaluating the plan. | ||
| Describe lifetime maintenance after the Problem-Solving Treatment Plan (4.3) | 20.0% | The description does not give ideas for maintenance of mental, emotional, and physical health and wellness over a lifetime after this treatment plan. | The description gives vague ideas for maintenance of mental, emotional, and physical health and wellness over a lifetime after this treatment plan. | The description gives a few general ideas for maintenance of mental, emotional, and physical health and wellness over a lifetime after this treatment plan. | The description gives a few specific ideas for maintenance of mental, emotional, and physical health and wellness over a lifetime after this treatment plan. | The description gives multiple specific ideas for maintenance of mental, emotional, and physical health and wellness over a lifetime after this treatment plan. | ||
| Organization and Effectiveness | 20.0% | |||||||
| Thesis Development and Purpose | 7.0% | Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim. | Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear. | Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose. | Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose. | Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear. | ||
| Argument Logic and Construction | 8.0% | Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources. Three scholarly resources are not included. | Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility. There are not at least three scholarly sources. | 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. There are at least three scholarly resources included. | Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative. There are at least three scholarly resources included. | Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative. There are at least three scholarly resources included. | ||
| Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) | 5.0% | Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used. | Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied. | Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they 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. | ||
| Format | 10.0% | |||||||
| Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) | 5.0% | 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. | ||
| Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) | 5.0% | Sources are not documented. | Documentation of sources is inconsistent 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. | ||
| Total Weightage | 100% |
0 comments