Feeling overwhelmed with your essay workload? Relax– we've got your back! From research to citations, our writers can handle it all. Click now for quality essay writing!
Submit your essay instructions
Assessment criteria
This assessment will measure your ability to:
Introduce your topic and aims and present your case study of a consumer including their stage of change and formulation of need (20%) Present a literature review on the application of motivational assessment to change (20%)
Present a literature review on one therapy model that would fit with this presentation (20%)
Consider future implications for this consumer considering their stage of change and the work that will need to be conducted to change (20%)
Conclude your assignment (10%)
Use appropriate written communication and referencing (10%)
Guidelines
Follow these points to structure your assessment.
Introduction. Introduce your topic and present your clearly defined objectives (half a page).
Brief case study. Provide a brief case study that presents the person’s stage of change and formulation of the presenting needs (half a page). Application. Conduct a literature review exploring the application of motivational interviewing for assessment of this client to change (two and a half pages).
Consider ONE therapy for this client by exploring the literature and providing evidence for interventions (two and a half pages).
Consider the implications for the future for this consumer and the work the clinician will need to engage the client with (one and a half pages).
Conclusion. Provide a conclusion to your paper (half a page).
Reference list. All references are to follow APA7 style. Students are encouraged to paraphrase sources of material in their own words wherever possible. Excessive use of direct quotes may result in a decreased grade. Non-acknowledgement of other authors is considered as plagiarism according to University policy and will result in a fail grade. Ensure your in-text reference citation equates to your end-text list of references.
Notes:
Use appropriate section headings to develop your argument. Use bold typeface to clearly identify headings. Use third-person academic writing.
Post any questions to the discussion forum for Assessment 2. There will be further thoughts about this assessment posted there. Please do not email questions.
Presentation guide for assessments
Format your assignment with double-line spacing and 12-point font.
Set left and right margins at 2.5 cm.
Use the APA 7th edition referencing style of author and date.
Always write in the third person.
Word count does not include citation, title page or any appendices.
CRITERIA
A: Excellent
(>80%)
B: Very good
(70–79%)
C: Good
(60–69%)
D: Acceptable
(50–59%)
N: Unacceptable
(<50%)
Introduction, aims and case study (20 marks)
Includes an excellent, plain-English introduction that crystallises the key message and engages readership. Includes excellent and clear aims of the paper and addresses scope so that the paper is focused.
Includes a vivid case study that is excellent with clear focus on stage of change and assists in the development of the paper.
(16–20 marks)
Includes a very good, plain-English introduction that crystallises the key message and engages readership. Includes very good and clear aims of the paper and addresses scope so that the paper is focused.
Includes a case study that is very good with clear focus on stage of change and assists in the development of the paper. (14–15 marks)
Includes a good, plain-English introduction that crystallises the key message and engages readership. Includes good and clear aims of the paper and addresses scope so that the paper is focused. Includes case study that is good with some focus on stage of change and that assists in the development of the paper. (12–13 marks)
Includes an adequate, plain-English introduction that crystallises the key message and engages readership. Includes adequate aims of the paper and addresses scope so that the paper is focused. Includes a case study that is adequate but does not address stage of change well and that assists in the development of the paper. (10–11 marks)
Inadequate or missing introduction.
Inadequate or missing aims and scope.
Inadequate or missing case study.
Does not identify stage of change.
(<10 marks)
Use of MI as assessment to change
(20 marks)
Demonstrates mastery by identifying MI as an assessment tool with explicit references to relevant and diverse content and concepts.
Very high quality/quantity literature provided to support argument.
(16–20 marks)
The analysis demonstrates attempts to investigate the problem using relevant MI concepts but lacks depth of analysis or uses a limited range of concepts.
Very good quality/quantity literature provided to support argument.
(14–15 marks)
Student makes attempts at applying some MI concepts to the issue but fails to demonstrate a depth of analysis or selects less relevant concepts.
A reasonable level of literature provided to support argument.
(12–13 marks)
Review does not move beyond a description of MI with superficial links to subject material.
Minimum level of required literature provided to support argument.
(10–11 marks)
Inadequate analysis.
(<10 marks)
Overview of one therapy model
(20 marks)
Demonstrates mastery by appropriately analysing the issue with explicit references to relevant and diverse content and concepts.
Very high quality/quantity literature provided to support argument.
(16–20 marks)
The analysis demonstrates attempts to investigate the problem using relevant subject concepts but lacks depth of analysis or uses a limited range of concepts.
Very good quality/quantity literature provided to support argument.
(14–15 marks)
Student makes attempts at applying some concepts to the issue but fails to demonstrate a depth of analysis or selects less relevant concepts.
A reasonable level of literature provided to support argument.
(12–13 marks)
Analysis does not move beyond a description of the issue with superficial links to subject material.
Minimum level of required literature provided to support argument.
(10–11 marks)
Inadequate analysis.
(<10 marks)
Future implications
(20 marks)
Makes excellent, in-depth recommendations that are consistent with the analysis and address all important identified problems or improvement opportunities.
(16–20 marks)
Makes very good recommendations that are supported by analysis with rationale and potential benefits. (14–15 marks)
Makes sufficient recommendations consistent with the analysis. May lack sufficient detail or may not address all the problems identified. Some comment on the path to solving the issues.
(12–13 marks)
Makes cursory recommendations that need further explanation or do not flow clearly from the analysis.
(10–11 marks)
Inadequate or missing recommendations.
(<10 marks)
Conclusion (10 marks)
Includes an excellent, plain-English summary that crystallises the key message, suitable for a general readership. (8–10 marks)
Includes a very good, plain-English summary of the key message, suitable for a general readership. (7–7.5 marks)
Includes a good summary of the key message.
(6–6.5 marks)
Includes an acceptable summary of the key message of the policy position. (5–5.5 marks)
Inadequate or missing summary and key message.
(<5 marks)
Communication and references
(10 marks)
Assessment is well structured and written with excellent spelling and grammar.
Makes effective use of the relevant literature, citing all references correctly in APA7 style.
(8–10 marks)
Assessment is well structured and written with very good spelling and grammar.
Makes good use of the relevant literature, citing references correctly in APA7 style. (7–7.5 marks)
Assessment is written with good spelling and grammar.
Includes references to some literature, citing references correctly in APA7 style.
(6–6.5 marks)
Assessment has some spelling and grammar errors. Refers to some literature but with little adherence to APA7 referencing style.
(5–5.5 marks)
Assessment is poorly written with frequent errors; makes little or no use of the literature.
References are missing or not in APA7 style.
(<5 marks)
Grading criteria Introduction, aims and case study
This description is reflective of an A: Excellent grade (>80%).
Includes an excellent, plain-English introduction that crystallises the key message and engages readership.
Includes excellent and clear aims of the paper and addresses scope so that the paper is focused.
Includes a vivid case study that is excellent with clear focus on stage of change and assists in the development of the paper.
Maximum score20
Use of MI as assessment to change
This description is reflective of an A: Excellent grade (>80%).
Demonstrates mastery by identifying MI as an assessment tool with explicit references to relevant and diverse content and concepts.
Very high quality/quantity literature provided to support argument.
Maximum score20
Overview of one therapy model
This description is reflective of an A: Excellent grade (>80%).
Demonstrates mastery by appropriately analysing the issue with explicit references to relevant and diverse content and concepts.
Very high quality/quantity literature provided to support argument.
Maximum score20
Future implications
This description is reflective of an A: Excellent grade (>80%).
Makes excellent, in-depth recommendations that are consistent with the analysis and address all important identified problems or improvement opportunities.
Maximum score20
Conclusion
This description is reflective of an A: Excellent grade (>80%).
Includes an excellent, plain-English summary that crystallises the key message, suitable for a general readership.
Maximum score10
Communication and references
This description is reflective of an A: Excellent grade (>80%).
Assessment is well structured and written with excellent spelling and grammar.
Makes effective use of the relevant literature, citing all references correctbcily in APA7 style.
Maximum score10
Feeling overwhelmed with your essay workload? Relax– we've got your back! From research to citations, our writers can handle it all. Click now for quality essay writing!
