| Course Code |
Class Code |
Assignment Title |
Total Points |
| CNL-540 |
CNL-540-O500 |
Program Evaluation Essay (Obj. 6.1 and 6.4) |
90.0 |
| 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% |
| Needs Assessment |
| 1
|
|
| 5.0% |
Essay omits or incompletely describes how you would do a needs assessment to determine the need for the program, including whether you would use quantitative or qualitative tools and why.Essay does not demonstrate understanding of the topic. |
Essay inadequately describes how you would do a needs assessment to determine the need for the program, including whether you would use quantitative or qualitative tools and why, but description is weak and missing evidence to support claims. Essay demonstrates a poor understanding of the topic. |
Essay adequately describes how you would do a needs assessment to determine the need for the program, including whether you would use quantitative or qualitative tools and why, but description is limited and lacks some evidence to support claims. Essay demonstrates a basic understanding of the topic. |
Essay clearly describes how you would do a needs assessment to determine the need for the program, including whether you would use quantitative or qualitative tools and why, and description is strong with sound analysis and some evidence to support claims. Essay demonstrates an understanding that extends beyond the surface of the topic. |
Essay expertly describes how you would do a needs assessment to determine the need for the program, including whether you would use quantitative or qualitative tools and why, and description is comprehensive and insightful with relevant evidence to support claims. Essay demonstrates an exceptional understanding of the topic. |
| Outcome Measurement Tool |
15.0%
Essay omits or incompletely describes what tool you would use to measure the outcome of the program, including whether you would use a quantitative tool or qualitative tool and why.Essay does not demonstrate understanding of the topic. |
Essay inadequately describes what tool you would use to measure the outcome of the program, including whether you would use a quantitative tool or qualitative tool and why, but description is weak and missing evidence to support claims. Essay demonstrates a poor understanding of the topic. |
Essay adequately describes what tool you would use to measure the outcome of the program, including whether you would use a quantitative tool or qualitative tool and why, but description is limited and lacks some evidence to support claims. Essay demonstrates a basic understanding of the topic. |
Essay clearly describes what tool you would use to measure the outcome of the program, including whether you would use a quantitative tool or qualitative tool and why, and description is strong with sound analysis and some evidence to support claims. Essay demonstrates an understanding that extends beyond the surface of the topic. |
Essay expertly describes what tool you would use to measure the outcome of the program, including whether you would use a quantitative tool or qualitative tool and why, and description is comprehensive and insightful with relevant evidence to support claims. Essay demonstrates an exceptional understanding of the topic. |
| Trauma-Informed Care Intervention |
40.0% |
Essay omits or incompletely describes one trauma-informed care intervention you would recommend to the clinical director, including the validity and reliability as an intervention and whether the research conducted is based on quantitative or qualitative measures.Essay does not demonstrate understanding of the topic. |
Essay inadequately describes one trauma-informed care intervention you would recommend to the clinical director, including the validity and reliability as an intervention and whether the research conducted is based on quantitative or qualitative measures, but description is weak and missing evidence to support claims. Essay demonstrates a poor understanding of the topic. |
Essay adequately describes one trauma-informed care intervention you would recommend to the clinical director, including the validity and reliability as an intervention and whether the research conducted is based on quantitative or qualitative measures, but description is limited and lacks some evidence to support claims. Essay demonstrates a basic understanding of the topic. |
Essay clearly describes one trauma-informed care intervention you would recommend to the clinical director, including the validity and reliability as an intervention and whether the research conducted is based on quantitative or qualitative measures, and description is strong with sound analysis and some evidence to support claims. Essay demonstrates an understanding that extends beyond the surface of the topic. |
Essay expertly describes one trauma-informed care intervention you would recommend to the clinical director, including the validity and reliability as an intervention and whether the research conducted is based on quantitative or qualitative measures, and description is comprehensive and insightful with relevant evidence to support claims. Essay demonstrates an exceptional understanding of the topic. |
| 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. |
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. |
| 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% |
