four different case scenarios

Criteria

Exceeds All Expectations (94%-100%)

Exceeds Most Expectations (90%-93%)

Meets Expectations (83%-89%)

Below Expectations (73%-82%)

Does Not Meet Expectations (0% – 72%)

Criterion Score

Case conceptualizations are presented for four (4) fictional cases that highlight a breadth of possible presenting problems that students might see in relationship therapy. 3 Points 20%

3 points
Case scenarios and presenting problems were presented with detailed explanation, examples, reflection, and critical thought.

2.8 points
There was sufficient information provided on case scenarios and the student presented a range of presenting problems.

2.7 points
There was adequate information provided on case scenarios and/or adequate presenting problems mentioned.

2.5 points
There was some information provided on case scenarios and/or a couple presenting problems mentioned. More information and variety is needed.

2.2 points
There was insufficient information provided on case scenarios and/or they did not present a range of presenting problems.

Score of Case conceptualizations are presented for four (4) fictional cases that highlight a breadth of possible presenting problems that students might see in relationship therapy. 3 Points 20%,
/ 3

Models, techniques, approaches, and systemic application are considered and discussed. 3 Points 20%

3 points
Student thoroughly discussed techniques, models, approaches, or systemic application, their own understanding of these, and critical thought related to how these will fit for them.

2.8 points
Student explored techniques, models, approaches, or systemic application and their own reflection of these.

2.7 points
Student discussed general points about techniques, models, approaches, or systemic application.

2.5 points
Student mentioned general points about techniques, models, approaches, or systemic application; however, they were incomplete, lacking, or inaccurate.

2.2 points
Student did not address techniques, models, approaches, or systemic application.

Score of Models, techniques, approaches, and systemic application are considered and discussed. 3 Points 20%,
/ 3

Cases and reflection that are presented reflect an awareness and understanding of difference, personal biases, and cultural humility. 3 Points 20%

3 points
Student reflected on biases and elements of self and how they have been exploring these in their own life. Student discussed their blind spots or challenges and what this might mean as a therapist.

2.8 points
Student gave a careful reflection on the uniqueness of the cases and presented a thoughtful reflection on their biases and blind spots.

2.7 points
Student highlighted a couple important uniquenesses within client scenarios and shared a general reflection of their reactions.

2.5 points
Student mentioned a couple of elements of self or uniquenesses in scenarios; however, it was general or lacking depth.

2.2 points
Student did not address backgrounds, differences or uniquenesses in client scenarios, and/or did not reflect on personal reflections or biases.

Score of Cases and reflection that are presented reflect an awareness and understanding of difference, personal biases, and cultural humility. 3 Points 20%,
/ 3

Paper reflects Integration of at least 5 readings and reflections from the course as a whole. 3 Points 20%

3 points
Student integrates over 5 references, reflection on elements from the course, and the role these play in their work as an MFT.

2.8 points
Student integrates over 5 or more references and provides some reflection on elements from the course.

2.7 points
Student highlights 5 references and a couple major elements from course content.

2.5 points
Student brings in fewer than 5 references and little reflection from course content overall.

2.2 points
There is a lack of references and/or student does not bring in other elements of the course.

Score of Paper reflects Integration of at least 5 readings and reflections from the course as a whole. 3 Points 20%,
/ 3

The writing is clear and compelling. 7% – 1 point

1.1 points
Student demonstrated strength in all the following areas: a well-developed focus, a logical organization of ideas, integration of readings revealing conceptual knowledge and skills, and inclusion of several scholarly citations to support ideas presented in the assignment.

1 point
Student demonstrated strength in almost all the following areas: a well-developed focus, a logical organization of ideas, integration of readings revealing conceptual knowledge and skills, and inclusion of some scholarly citations to support ideas presented in the assignment.

0.9 points
Student mostly demonstrated a well-developed focus, a logical organization of ideas, and exhibited an integration of readings revealing conceptual knowledge and skills.

0.8 points
Student demonstrated some focus, some logical organization of ideas, and some integration of readings revealing conceptual knowledge and skills.

0.7 points
Student failed to demonstrate a well-developed focus, and there is little evidence of integration of reading material or conceptual knowledge.

Score of The writing is clear and compelling. 7% – 1 point,
/ 1.1

The writing reflects correct punctuation, grammar, word usage, and APA style. 7% – 1 point

1.1 points
Student used correct grammar, punctuation, and APA formatting, with no more than one or two errors.

1 point
Student used correct grammar, punctuation, and APA formatting, with only three or four errors.

0.9 points
Student used mostly correct grammar, punctuation, and APA formatting, having less than five errors.

0.8 points
Student used some correct grammar, punctuation, and APA formatting.

0.7 points
Student needs to refine grammar, punctuation, and APA formatting because many errors were evident.

Score of The writing reflects correct punctuation, grammar, word usage, and APA style. 7% – 1 point,
/ 1.1

Criteria

Exceeds All Expectations (94%-100%)

Does Not Meet Expectations (0% – 72%)

Criterion Score

Week 11 Resources
Week 11 Resources
· Acknowledgment and Possibility: The Two Cornerstones to Successful Couples Therapy
O’Hanlon, B. (2013).  Acknowledgment and possibility: The two cornerstones to successful couples therapy [Video]. Milton H. Erickson Foundation. This is a good video on technique, solution-oriented with Bill O’Hanlon; it includes movie clips and a discussion.
· A Critical Review of Help-Seeking for Couples Therapy: Clinical Implications and Next Steps
Hubbard, A., & Harris, S. A critical review of help-seeking for couples therapy: Clinical implications and next steps.  Contemporary Family Therapy, 42, 152–162. This article explores reasons that couples may or may not seek therapy during times of conflict. It is an introduction to the types of conflicts couples experience.
· Comfort in Treating Sexual Problems: Current Training and Counselor Self-Efficacy
Hipp, C. J., & Carlson, R. G. (2019) Comfort in treating sexual problems: Current training and counselor self-efficacy.  The Family Journal, 27(2), 105-114. This research highlights struggles that therapists might experience when working with sex therapy.
· Queer Polyfamily Performativity: Family Practices and Adaptive Strategies Among LGBTQ+ Polyamorists
Pain, E. (2019). Queer polyfamily performativity: Family practices and adaptive strategies among LGBTQ+ polyamorists.  Journal of GLBT Family Studies, 16(3), 277-292. This is an introduction to couple and family formation in poly queer communities.
· Therapist Values: Assessing and Treating Traditional and Nontraditional Relationships
McCarthy, B., & Wald, R. L. (2019). Therapist values: Assessing and treating traditional and nontraditional relationships.  The Family Journal, 27(1), 11-16. Explores some of the challenges that therapists might experience while working with couples whose experiences and desires differ from their own.
Optional Resources

Week 11 Resources

Week 11 Resources

Week 11 Resources

QUALITY: 100% ORIGINAL – NO PLAGIARISM

(USA, AUS, UK & CA PhD. Writers)

CLICK HERE TO GET A PROFESSIONAL WRITER TO WORK ON THIS PAPER AND OTHER SIMILAR PAPERS

The Best Custom Essay Writing Service

About Our Service

We are an online academic writing company that connects talented freelance writers with students in need of their services. Unlike other writing companies, our team is made up of native English speakers from countries such as the USA, UK, Canada, Australia, Ireland, and New Zealand.

Qualified Writers

  • At ClassicWritersBay.com, most of our writers are degree-holding native speakers of English who are familiar with various writing styles. Our writers are proficient in many fields, including Economics, Business, Accounting, Finance, Medicine, Chemistry, Literature, Mathematics, Statistics, and many others.
  • Making our customers happy is an important part of our service. So do not be surprised if you get your paper well before the deadline!
  • We pay a lot of attention to ensuring that you get excellent customer service. You can contact our Customer Support Representatives 24/7. When you order from us, you can even track the progress of your paper as it is being written!
  • We are attentive to the needs of our customers. Therefore, we follow all your instructions carefully so that you can get the best paper possible.
  • It matters to us who writes for you, and we are serious about selecting the best candidates.
  • Our writers are always learning something new, so they are familiar with the latest developments in the scientific world and can write papers with updated information and the latest findings.

Our Guarantees:

  • Quality original papers that follow your instructions carefully.
  • On time delivery – you get the paper before the specified deadline.
  • Attentive Customer Support Representatives available 24/7.
  • Complete confidentiality – we do not share you details or papers with anybody else.
CLICK TO SUBMIT YOUR ORDER