Case Study – Podcast – Paper 1 (graded)
Assignment
Purpose
The purpose of this assignment is to apply a theory you have learned about in this course to a multicultural case study. You will apply the theory on micro, mezzo, and macro levels.
Course Outcomes
CO1: Critique and apply knowledge of multicultural purism when engaging individuals, families, communities, organizations, and groups.
CO2: Critically analyze practice in relation to advancing human rights and social and economic justice and adapt their interventions when needed.
Total Points
This assignment is worth a total of 200 points.
Due Date
You are to submit a written paper by Sunday, 11:59 p.m. MT, at the end of this module.
Requirements
The Case Study Paper assignment is worth 200 points and will be graded on use of citations, use of Standard English grammar, sentence structure, and overall organization/effectiveness based on the required components as summarized in the directions and grading criteria/rubric.
Create your exercise using Microsoft Word (a part of Microsoft Office), which is the required format for all Chamberlain College documents. You can tell that the document is saved as a MS Word document because it will end in “.docx”
Follow the directions and grading criteria closely. Any questions about your assignment may be posted under the Q & A Forum.
The length of the exercise is to be no less than 4 pages and no greater than 5 pages excluding title page and reference pages.
APA format is required with both a title page and reference page. Use the required components of the review as Level 1 headings (upper and lower case, centered, boldface):
Note: Introduction – Write an introduction but do not use “Introduction” as a heading in accordance with the rules put forth in the Publication manual of the American Psychological Association.
Guidelines
Write a paper applying a theory of your choice (feminist theory, multicultural, critical race theory, Latino critical perspective, empowerment theory, systems theory, ecological, theories of masculinity, intersectionality, etc) that is being covered to a case from a podcast series. For this assignment, review and consider from a micro, mezzo, and macro perspective how you would approach the case using the theory you have chosen as the foundation for your choices. Describe your reasons for your approach/decisions for each level. For instance, if I am choosing to do analyze the case from the podcast, Dirty John, I might choose feminist theory to conduct my analysis.
Choose a theory or combination of theories for analysis
Choose a podcast to serve as your case study (examples included below)
The assignment should be a minimum of four pages.
Use four current peer-reviewed journal articles to support your choices.
Example Podcasts
While students can choose any of the podcasts listed below, this is by no means an exhaustive list and students are more than welcome to choose a podcast that is not on the list below)
STown (Depression and mental health) (Links to an external site.)
Broken Harts (Child welfare, racial disproportionality) (Links to an external site.)
Cold (Domestic Violence) (Links to an external site.)
Missing and Murdered: Finding Cleo (Colonization, Child Welfare, Mental Health) (Links to an external site.)
Serial Season 3
Grading Criteria
Your paper will be graded based on following criteria:
Criteria Description
Introduction (30 Points)
Introduces the purpose of the exercise: to conceptualize an individual case using the application of one theoretical perspective to micro, mezzo, macro aspects of the case.
Identify needs (40 points)
Reviews and identifies needs specific to the case study.
Approaches (50 points)
Identifies the approach for each process from micro to macro.
Describes reasons for the choice of approaches to use for each level and in relation to the theory.
Rationale (50 points)
Explains the rationale for each approach given.
Scholarly sources (10 points) A minimum of four (4) scholarly sources, current within ten years, were used.
Clarity of Writing (10 points) Presents information using clear and concise language in an organized manner (NO errors in English grammar, spelling, syntax, and punctuation).
APA/page length (10 points)
All sources are credited using APA formatting
Paper is between 4-5 pages excluding title and reference pages.
Total (200 points) A quality paper will meet or exceed all of the above requirements.
Detailed grading rubric can be found below.
Rubric
MSW516: Case Study – Podcast- Paper 1
MSW516: Case Study – Podcast- Paper 1
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIntroduction
30 pts
Highest Level of performance
Short introduction related to the purpose of the paper
26 pts
Very Good or High Level of Performance
Partially addresses the purpose of the paper
23 pts
Acceptable Level of Performance
Minimal introduction of the purpose of the paper
0 pts
Failing Level of Performance
No introduction of the purpose of the paper
30 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIdentify Needs
40 pts
Highest Level of performance
Evaluates unique needs in detail after reviewing chosen theory.
34 pts
Very Good or High Level of Performance
Evaluates unique needs in less detail after reviewing chosen theory.
30 pts
Acceptable Level of Performance
Evaluates unique needs in minimal detail after reviewing chosen theory.
0 pts
Failing Level of Performance
Does not evaluate unique after reviewing chosen theory
40 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeApproaches
50 pts
Highest Level of performance
Identifies at least 3 approaches (micro, mezzo, macro). Describes each process in detail.
43 pts
Very Good or High Level of Performance
Identifies at least 3 approaches (micro, mezzo, macro). Describes each process in some detail.
38 pts
Acceptable Level of Performance
Identifies at least 3 approaches (micro, mezzo, macro). Describes each process in minimal detail.
0 pts
Failing Level of Performance
Identifies no more than 1 approach (micro, mezzo, macro). Describes each process minimally.
50 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeRationale
50 pts
Highest Level of performance
Provides reason and with detailed explanation for the choice of approaches to use for each level.
43 pts
Very Good or High Level of Performance
Provides reason and with little explanation for the choice of approaches to use for each level.
38 pts
Acceptable Level of Performance
Provides reason and with some explanation for the choice of approaches to use for each level.
0 pts
Failing Level of Performance
Provides no reason and unclear or no explanation for the choice of approaches to use for each level
50 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeClarity of Writing
10 pts
Highest Level of performance
Written content is clear, free from syntax and grammar issues and communicates intended thoughts effectively.
8 pts
Very Good or High Level of Performance
Written content is mostly clear, free from syntax and grammar issues and communicates intended thoughts effectively.
7 pts
Acceptable Level of Performance
Written content is somewhat clear, free from syntax and grammar issues and communicates intended thoughts effectively.
0 pts
Failing Level of Performance
Written content is not clear, has multiple syntax and grammar issues and does not communicate intended thoughts effectively.
10 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAPA Style/Page length
10 pts
Highest Level of performance
APA formatting contains multiple errors and selected citations are missing.
8 pts
Very Good or High Level of Performance
Some APA errors in formatting with three to five errors and/or one to two citations missing.
7 pts
Acceptable Level of Performance
APA formatting contains multiple errors and/or selected citations are missing.
0 pts
Failing Level of Performance
APA formatting contains multiple errors and selected citations are missing.
10 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeScholarly Sources
10 pts
Highest Level of performance
Used all (4 or more) peer reviewed
8 pts
Very Good or High Level of Performance
Used mostly peer reviewed sources (3)
7 pts
Acceptable Level of Performance
Used 1-2 peer reviewed sources
0 pts
Failing Level of Performance
Did not use peer reviewed sources
10 pts
