|
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 % Counselor Values
|
Analysis of the criteria is not outlined or outlined poorly. Fails to formulate and clearly express own point of view.
|
Ignores or superficially evaluates the ethical issues. Formulates a vague and indecisive point of view.
|
Surface level of evaluation of the ethical issues is offered. Minimal rationale presented. Expresses a preference in a personal point of view, but lacks details. Discusses a counseling plan for the client, but lacks supporting rationale.
|
Describes the process/plan in which counseling would or would not be provided, considering all ethical implications. Subject knowledge appears to be good. Formulates a clear and precise personal point of view. Includes essential knowledge about personal values and attitudes with supporting details and resources.
|
Comprehensively describes the process/plan in which counseling would or would not be provided, considering all ethical implications. Subject knowledge is excellent. Formulates a clear and precise personal point of view. Clearly describes personal values and attitudes in depth with extensive details and resources.
|
|
20.0 % Client Rights
|
Includes little knowledge about the topic. Subject knowledge is not evident.
|
Includes little knowledge about the topic with few supporting details. Little subject knowledge is evident. Ignores or superficially evaluates the criteria.
|
Lists the five ethical principles and discusses how they relate to client rights. Explains how these rights will be incorporated into professional practice with minimal details and/or rationale. Some subject knowledge is evident. Surface level of evaluation of the content is offered.
|
Presents a detailed outline of the relationship between the five ethical principles and how they relate to client rights. Explains how these principles will be incorporated into professional practice with supporting details, and/or rationale. Informed consent is explicitly and thoroughly addressed in this description. Subject knowledge appears to be good. Analysis is direct, competent, and appropriate for the criteria.
|
Presents a full detailed in-depth description of the relationship between the five ethical principles and client rights. Explain show these principles will be incorporated into professional practice with extensive details and/or rationale. Informed consent is explicitly and thoroughly addressed in this description. Subject knowledge is excellent. Thoughtfully analyzes and evaluates major points of the criteria.
|
|
20.0 % Responsibility to Warn and Protect
|
Includes little knowledge about the topic. Subject knowledge is not evident. Factors involved in decision making are vague or not present.
|
Includes little knowledge about the topic with few supporting details. Little subject knowledge is evident. A minimal understanding of some factors involved in decision making is present.
|
Includes knowledge about the topic with supporting details. Some subject knowledge is evident. Identifies with minimal detail the factors involved in decision making. Outlines the decision making process used to address the ethical issues. Some ambiguity may be found.
|
Includes essential knowledge about the topic with supporting details. Subject knowledge appears to be good. Presents a detailed discussion of factors involved in the decision making process used to address the ethical issues.
|
Covers topic in-depth with extensive details. Subject knowledge is excellent. Presents full, detailed, in-depth details as well as a discussion of the factors involved in the decision making process used to address the clearly identified ethical issues.
|
|
15.0 % Client Record-Keeping
|
Includes little knowledge about the topic. Subject knowledge is not evident. Analysis of the most important components of the clinical record for protecting client’s and counselor’s rights is not outlined or outlined poorly. Does not provide supporting rationale.
|
Includes little knowledge about the topic with few supporting details. Little subject knowledge is evident. Ignores or superficially evaluates the most important components of the clinical record for protecting client’s and counselor’s rights. Minimal supporting rationale present.
|
Includes knowledge about the topic with supporting details. Some subject knowledge is evident. Surface level of evaluation of the most important components of the clinical record for protecting client’s and counselor’s rights is offered. Basic descriptions and rationale provided.
|
Includes essential knowledge about the topic with supporting details. Subject knowledge appears to be good. Analysis is direct, competent, and appropriate for the most important components of the clinical record for protecting client’s and counselor’s rights.
|
Covers topic in-depth with extensive supporting details. Subject knowledge is excellent. Thoughtfully analyzes and evaluates the most important components of the clinical record for protecting client’s and counselor’s rights.
|
|
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.
|
|
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.
|
|
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 % Research Citations (in-text citations for paraphrasing and direct quotes, and reference page listing and formatting, as appropriate to assignment and style)
|
No reference page is included. No citations are used.
|
Reference page is present. Citations are inconsistently used.
|
Reference page is included and lists sources used in the paper. Sources are appropriately documented, although some errors may be present.
|
Reference page is present and fully inclusive of all cited sources. Documentation is appropriate and citation style is usually correct.
|
In-text citations and a reference page are complete and correct. The documentation of cited sources is free of error.
|
|
100 % Total Weightage
|
|
|