Essay Assignment Discussion Project

Part 1: Case Studies

Pick four stages to illustrate early childhood development. Pick two from Erickson’s Stage Theory and two from Piaget’s theory of development. Create one case study for each of the chosen stages, which is a total of four case studies.

ORDER NOW FOR COMPREHENSIVE, PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPERS

Label each case study with the theorist/stages relevant to it.

Each case study should be a minimum of 250 words.

For each case study, include how you as a therapist would plan to work with someone at the identified stage.

Part 2: Summary

Include a 250-500-word summary that explains the similarities and differences between Piaget’s and Erickson’s theories. Essay Assignment Discussion Project

APA style is not required, but solid academic writing and a title page is expected.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

You are not required to submit this assignment to LopeWrite.

This assignment assesses the following programmatic competency: 3.4: Demonstrate understanding of human growth and development and how they impact counseling efforts.

This assignment is informed by the following CACREP Standard: 2.F.3.h. A general framework for understanding differing abilities and strategies for differentiated interventions.

Rubric_Print_Format6.xlsx

Rubic_Print_Format

Course Code	Class Code	Assignment Title	Total Points
CNL-518	CNL-518-O501	Benchmark – Developmental Psychology (Erikson/Piaget) Case Studies (Obj. 2.1 and 2.5)	100.0
Criteria	Percentage	Unsatisfactory (0.00%)	Less Than Satisfactory (74.00%)	Satisfactory (79.00%)	Good (87.00%)	Excellent (100.00%)	Comments	Points Earned
Content	70.0%
Part 1: Label Each Case Study with Relevant Theorist/Stages	20.0%	None of the case studies are labeled with the relevant theorist/stages.	Some of the case studies are labeled with the relevant theorist/stages or are labeled incorrectly.	All of the case studies are labeled correctly with the relevant theorist/stages. Demonstrates a basic understanding of how the theorist/stages relate to each case study.	All of the case studies are labeled correctly with the relevant theorist/stages. Demonstrates an advanced understanding of how the theorist/stages relate to each case study.	All of the case studies are labeled correctly with the relevant theorist/stages. Demonstrates a comprehensive understanding of how the theorist/stages relate to each case study.
Part 1: Length of Each Case Study is at Least 250 Words	10.0%	None of the case studies are at least 250 words in length.	Some of the case studies are at least 250 words in length. Demonstrates a minimal understanding of how the theorist/stages relate to each case study.	All of the case studies are at least 250 words in length. Demonstrates a basic understanding of how the theorist/stages relate to each case study.	All of the case studies are at least 250 words in length. Demonstrates an advanced understanding of how the theorist/stages relate to each case study.	All of the case studies are at least 250 words in length. Demonstrates a comprehensive understanding of how the theorist/stages relate to each case study.
Part 1: Plan to Work with Someone at Identified Stage (Comp 3.4).	20.0%	The case studies did not demonstrate how the student, as a therapist, would plan to work with someone at the identified stage.	The case studies demonstrate a minimal understanding of how the student, as a therapist, would plan to work with someone at the identified stage.	The case studies demonstrate a basic understanding of how the student, as a therapist, would plan to work with someone at the identified stage.	The case studies demonstrate an advanced understanding of how the student, as a therapist, would plan to work with someone at the identified stage.	The case studies demonstrate a comprehensive understanding of how the student, as a therapist, would plan to work with someone at the identified stage.
Case Study Summary	20.0%	The assignment omitted a summary statement that explains the similarities and differences between Piaget’s and Erickson’s theories.	The summary demonstrates a minimal understanding of the similarities and differences between Piaget’s and Erickson’s theories.	The summary demonstrates a basic understanding of the similarities and differences between Piaget’s and Erickson’s theories.	The summary demonstrates an advanced understanding of the similarities and differences between Piaget?s and Erickson?s theories.	The summary demonstrates a comprehensive understanding of the similarities and differences between Piaget?s and Erickson?s theories.
Organization, Effectiveness, and Format	30.0%
Thesis Development and Purpose	7.0%	Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.	Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.	Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.	Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.	Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.
Argument Logic and Construction	8.0%	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.
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)	5.0%	Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.	Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.	Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they 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.
Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)	5.0%	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.
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)	5.0%	Sources are not documented.	Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.	Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.	Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.	Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.
Total Weightage	100%