- Case Study: Joshua
- Case Study: Desert Viejo Elementary School
Create one 10-12-slide PowerPoint presentation (in addition to a title slide and references slide) outlining an intervention for each case study. One of the interventions must include Critical Incident Stress Debriefing (CISD). It is up to you to decide which type of intervention is best suited for each scenario. Include the following in your interventions:
- Step-by-step description of each intervention plan
- Rationale for choosing each intervention
- Community resources that are available in your local community that you would include as part of an intervention for each scenario
Include a minimum of three scholarly references in addition to the textbook.
APA style is not required, but solid academic writing is expected.
This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
Less than Satisfactory
100.00%100.0 %Criteria 20.0 %Step-by-step description of each intervention planDoes not demonstrate an understanding of the assignment directions; does not describe steps of each intervention plan.Includes limited understanding of the assignment directions. Describes steps of each intervention plan, but the description is irrelevant or incorrect.Provides a relevant, but cursory description of each intervention plan. The information lacks the depth necessary to fully illustrate the steps of the intervention plan.Provides a relevant, thorough description that fully illustrates the steps of each intervention plan.Provides a relevant, thorough description that fully illustrates the steps of each intervention plan and supports the information provided with examples and scholarly references.15.0 %Rationale for choosing each interventionDoes not demonstrate an understanding of the assignment directions; does not provide a rationale for choosing each intervention.Includes limited understanding of the assignment directions. Provides a rational for choosing each intervention, but the rational provided does not support the selection of the intervention.Provides a relevant, but cursory discussion of the rational for choosing each intervention. Discussion lacks the depth necessary to fully support the reasoning behind the intervention selection.Provides a relevant, thorough discussion that fully supports the reasoning behind the intervention selection.Provides a relevant, thorough discussion that fully supports the reasoning behind the intervention selection, and the rationale is supported with examples and scholarly references.5.0 %Community resources that are available in your local community that you would include as part of an intervention for each scenarioDoes not demonstrate an understanding of the assignment directions; does not provide community resources to be included in the interventions.Includes limited understanding of the assignment directions. Provides community resources, but they are not relevant to the interventions.Provides community resources that are relevant to the situation, but fails to clearly link the rationale behind including the community resources in the interventions.Provides community resources that are relevant to the situation and clearly links the rationale behind including the community resources in the interventions.Provides community resources that are relevant to the situation; clearly links the rationale behind including the community resources in the interventions, and supports the selection of community resources with examples and scholarly references.30.0 %Presentation of ContentThe 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 %LayoutThe 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 %Evaluating and Documenting Sources (in-text citations for paraphrasing and direct quotes, references page listing and formatting, as appropriate to assignment and style)Contains no title slide, no references section, and no correctly cited references within the body of the presentation.Title slide is incomplete or inaccurate. References section includes sources, but many citation errors. Citations are included within the body of the presentation but with many errors.Title slide has minor errors. References section includes sources, but they are not consistently cited correctly. Citations are included within the body of the presentation but with some errors.Title slide is complete. References section includes correctly cited sources with minimal errors. Correct citations are included within the body of the presentation.Title slide is complete. References section includes correctly cited sources. Correct citations are included within the body of the presentation.100 %Total Weightage