Experiential Paper
- For this assignment, you will conduct a mock interview with a friend or family member using two of the following tools: Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test, T-ACE, and/or Michigan Alcohol Screening Test.
- Compose a 1000-2000 word paper detailing the individual experience of administering 2 alcohol screening tools.
- In your paper, briefly describe the tools and describe their experience administering each tool.
- Identify the strengths and weaknesses of each tool
- Identify what questions were difficult to ask during the mock interview and why
- Make suggestions for future versions of the tool.
Format requirements:
- APA format style
- Separate title page
- 12-point font
- Numbered pages
- 1″ margins
Citations and References
- Include APA citations and references where appropriate, including references for the screening tools you select.
The Experiential Paper will be graded according to the following criteria:
|
|
Excellent 25 points |
Good 21 points |
Fair 17 points |
Poor 13 points |
Missing or Not Acceptable 0 points |
|
Identifies and describes two alcohol assessment tools |
Excellent description of two assessment tools. |
Good description of two assessment tools, with minor details missing. |
Fair description of two assessment tools, with 1 or 2 major details missing. -OR- Excellent description of only one screening tool. |
Poor description of two assessment tools, with several major details missing -OR- Good description of only one screening tool, with minor details missing. |
No description of screening tools. -OR- Description is not understandable due to serious writing errors. |
|
Describes the experience of administering each tool. |
Excellent description of the experience of administering each tool. |
Good description of the experience of administering each tool, with minor details missing. |
Fair description of the experience of administering each tool, with 1 or 2 major details missing. -OR- Excellent description of the experience of administering only one tool. |
Poor description of the experience of administering each tool, with several major details missing. -OR- Good description of the experience of administering only one tool, with minor details missing. |
No description of the experience of administering screening tools. -OR- Description is not understandable due to serious writing errors. |
|
Identifies the strengths and weaknesses of each tool |
Excellent analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of each tool. |
Good analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of each tool, with minor details missing. |
Fair analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of each tool, with 1 or 2 major details missing. -OR- Excellent analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of only one tool. |
Poor analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of each tool, with several major details missing. -OR- Good analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of only one tool. |
No analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of each tool. -OR- Analysis is not understandable due to serious writing errors. |
|
Identifies the questions that were difficult to ask during the mock interview and why |
Excellent description of the questions that were difficult to ask and why. |
Good description of the questions that were difficult to ask and why, with minor details missing. |
Fair description of the questions that were difficult to ask and why, with 1 or 2 major details missing. |
Poor description of the questions that were difficult to ask and why, with several major details missing. |
No description of the questions that were difficult to ask and why. -OR- Description is not understandable due to serious writing errors. |
|
Makes suggestions for future versions of each tool |
Excellent suggestions for improvements for each tool. |
Good suggestions for improvements for each tool, with minor details missing. |
Fair suggestions for improvements for each tool, with 1 or 2 major details missing. -OR- Excellent suggestions for improvements for only one tool. |
Poor suggestions for improvements for each tool, with several major details missing. -OR- Good suggestions for improvements for only one too, with minor details missing. |
No suggestions for improvements for each tool. -OR- Suggestions are not understandable due to serious writing errors. |
|
Writing Style |
All of the following criteria are met: Meets length requirement Properly formatted Correct citations and references Concise, with few or no writing errors |
Three of the following criteria are met: Meets length requirement Properly formatted Correct citations and references Concise, with few or no writing errors |
Two of the following criteria are met: Meets length requirement Properly formatted Correct citations and references Concise, with few or no writing errors |
One of the following criteria are met: Meets length requirement Properly formatted Correct citations and references Concise, with few or no writing errors |
None of the following criteria are met: Meets length requirement Properly formatted Correct citations and references Concise, with few or no writing |