Benchmark – Research Proposal PowerPoint Presentation
Just Click on Below Link To
Download This Course:
https://bit.ly/2QSKw04
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.
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 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.
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.
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 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.
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 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.
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
|
Description of what was learned from the interview is missing.
|
Description of what was learned from the interview is vague or
inadequate.
|
Description of what was learned from the interview is present but
somewhat lacks clarity.
|
Description of what was learned from the interview is clear and
thoughtful.
|
Description 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)
|
Description of how you will use this information in your own
leadership experiences is missing.
|
Description of how you will use this information in your own
leadership experiences is vague or inadequate.
|
Description of how you will use this information in your own
leadership experiences is present but somewhat lacks clarity.
|
Description of how you will use this information in your own
leadership experiences is clear and thoughtful.
|
Description 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
|
||||||
Course Tutor helps in providing the best essay writing
service. If you need 100% original papers for PSY
693 Full Course Assignments GCU, then contact us through call or live chat.
Comments
Post a Comment