Learning Goal: I’m working on a powerpoint presentation and need an explanation

Learning Goal: I’m working on a powerpoint presentation and need an explanation and answer to help me learn.Assessment Description Create a PowerPoint presentation of 16-18 slides for the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI-2-RF). Address and include the following in your PowerPoint: A title, introduction, and conclusion slide.
What is the MMPI-2-RF and what does it measure?
What are the legal and ethical requirements for a professional to administer, interpret, and/or report the results of an MMPI-2-RF?
How would information gathered from the MMPI-2-RF assist in the intake and treatment planning process?
Describe potential treatment strategies that would likely be incorporated into a treatment plan based on results from an MMPI-2-RF.
Include speaker notes below each content-related slide that represent what would be said if giving the presentation in person. Expand upon the information included in the slide and do not simply restate it. Please ensure the speaker notes include a minimum of 50 words.
A reference slide with a minimum of four scholarly references in addition to the textbook.
While APA style is not required for the body of this assignment, solid academic writing is expected, and documentation of sources should be presented using APA formatting guidelines, which can be found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.MMPI-2-RF PowerPoint Presentation – RubricCollapse All MMPI-2-RF PowerPoint Presentation – RubricCollapse AllMMPI-2-RF and What it Measures22 pointsCriteria DescriptionMMPI-2-RF and What it Measures5. Excellent22 pointsThe MMPI-2-RF is identified and the description of what it measures is completely appropriate. Description of measurement is comprehensively articulated, with strong evidence to support claims; rationale is virtually flawless. Demonstrates an exceptional understanding of the MMPI-2-RF and what it measures.4. Good19.14 pointsThe MMPI-2-RF is identified and the description of what it measures is very appropriate. Description of measurement is clearly articulated, with some evidence to support claims. Demonstrates a good understanding of the MMPI-2-RF and what it measures.3. Satisfactory17.38 pointsThe MMPI-2-RF was identified, and an appropriate description of what it measures is included. Demonstrates a basic understanding of the MMPI-2-RF and what it measures.2. Less Than Satisfactory16.28 pointsThe MMPI-2-RF was identified, but a less than appropriate description of what it measures is included. The description is unclear or inappropriate for the MMPI-II. Demonstrates poor understanding of the MMPI-2-RF and what it measures.1. Unsatisfactory0 pointsDoes not identify what the MMPI-2-RF is or what it measures.Legal and Ethical Requirements (administration, interpretation, and reporting)44 pointsCriteria DescriptionLegal and Ethical Requirements (administration, interpretation, and reporting)5. Excellent44 pointsComprehensively details the legal and ethical requirements. Requirements for administration, interpretation, and reporting are comprehensive and completely appropriate. Description clearly details why all are necessary; rationale is virtually flawless. Demonstrates an exceptional understanding of the requirements of the MMPI-2-RF.4. Good38.28 pointsAdequately details the legal and ethical requirements. Requirements for administration, interpretation, and reporting are appropriate and the description shows why they are necessary. Demonstrates a good understanding of the requirements of the MMPI-2-RF.3. Satisfactory34.76 pointsMinimally details the legal and ethical requirements. A limited grasp of the requirements for administration, interpretation, and/or reporting is shown. Demonstrates a basic understanding of the requirements of the MMPI-2-RF.2. Less Than Satisfactory32.56 pointsGives details of the legal and ethical requirements in a less than satisfactory manner; unclear or inappropriate requirements related to administration, interpretation, and/or reporting are listed. Demonstrates poor understanding of the requirements of the MMPI-2-RF.1. Unsatisfactory0 pointsDoes not include legal and ethical requirements.Intake and Treatment Planning Process44 pointsCriteria DescriptionIntake and Treatment Planning Process5. Excellent44 pointsComprehensively details how gathered information assists the intake and treatment planning processes. Information and processes are comprehensive and completely appropriate. Description clearly details the interrelation of each; rationale is virtually flawless. Demonstrates an exceptional understanding of how gathered information can assist in processes.4. Good38.28 pointsAdequately details how gathered information assists the intake and treatment planning processes. Information and processes are appropriate and show why they are necessary. Demonstrates a good understanding of how gathered information can assist in processes.3. Satisfactory34.76 pointsMinimally describes how gathered information assists the intake and treatment planning processes. A limited grasp of the information and processes is shown. Demonstrates a basic understanding of how gathered information can assist in processes.2. Less Than Satisfactory32.56 pointsDescribes how gathered information assists the intake and treatment planning processes in a less than satisfactory manner. The description is unclear or inappropriate for the content. Demonstrates poor understanding of how gathered information can assist in processes.1. Unsatisfactory0 pointsDoes not discuss how gathered information assists the intake and treatment planning processes.Potential Treatment Strategies44 pointsCriteria DescriptionPotential Treatment Strategies5. Excellent44 pointsComprehensively details treatment strategies. Potential strategies are comprehensive and completely appropriate. Description clearly details why all strategies are relevant and necessary; rationale is virtually flawless. Demonstrates an exceptional understanding of potential strategies to incorporate.4. Good38.28 pointsAdequately details treatment strategies. Potential strategies are appropriate and the description shows why strategies are relevant and necessary. Demonstrates a good understanding of potential treatment strategies to incorporate.3. Satisfactory34.76 pointsMinimally details treatment strategies. A limited grasp of potential strategies is shown. Demonstrates a basic understanding of potential treatment strategies to incorporate.2. Less Than Satisfactory32.56 pointsGives details of treatment strategies in a less than satisfactory manner; unclear or inappropriate strategies are listed. Demonstrates poor understanding of potential treatment strategies to incorporate.1. Unsatisfactory0 pointsDoes not include potential treatment strategies.Detailed Speaker Notes11 pointsCriteria DescriptionDetailed Speaker Notes5. Excellent11 pointsThe presentation includes comprehensive speaker notes that give a complete picture of what would be said if the presentation were given in person.4. Good9.57 pointsThe presentation contains advanced speaker notes that indicate what might be said if giving the presentation in person.3. Satisfactory8.69 pointsThe presentation’s speaker notes are present and are generally competent.2. Less Than Satisfactory8.14 pointsThe presentation contains vague speaker notes and/or inaccurate or poorly written speaker notes.1. Unsatisfactory0 pointsThe presentation does not contain speaker notes.Presentation of Content11 pointsCriteria DescriptionPresentation of Content5. Excellent11 pointsThe content is written clearly and concisely. Ideas universally progress and relate to each other. The project includes motivating questions and advanced organizers. The project gives the audience a clear sense of the main idea.4. Good9.57 pointsThe content is written with a logical progression of ideas and supporting information exhibiting a unity, coherence, and cohesiveness. Includes persuasive information from reliable sources.3. Satisfactory8.69 pointsThe presentation slides are generally competent, but ideas may show some inconsistency in organization and/or in their relationships to each other.2. Less Than Satisfactory8.14 pointsThe content is vague in conveying a point of view and does not create a strong sense of purpose. Includes some persuasive information.1. Unsatisfactory0 pointsThe content lacks a clear point of view and logical sequence of information. Includes little persuasive information. Sequencing of ideas is unclear.Layout11 pointsCriteria DescriptionLayout5. Excellent11 pointsThe layout is visually pleasing and contributes to the overall message with appropriate use of headings, subheadings, and white space. Text is appropriate in length for the target audience and to the point. The background and colors enhance the readability of the text.4. Good9.57 pointsThe layout background and text complement each other and enable the content to be easily read. The fonts are easy to read and point size varies appropriately for headings and text.3. Satisfactory8.69 pointsThe layout uses horizontal and vertical white space appropriately. Sometimes the fonts are easy to read, but in a few places the use of fonts, italics, bold, long paragraphs, color, or busy background detracts and does not enhance readability.2. Less Than Satisfactory8.14 pointsThe layout shows some structure, but appears cluttered and busy or distracting with large gaps of white space or a distracting background. Overall readability is difficult due to lengthy paragraphs, too many different fonts, dark or busy background, overuse of bold, or lack of appropriate indentations of text.1. Unsatisfactory0 pointsThe layout is cluttered, confusing, and does not use spacing, headings, and subheadings to enhance the readability. The text is extremely difficult to read with long blocks of text, small point size for fonts, and inappropriate contrasting colors. Poor use of headings, subheadings, indentations, or bold formatting is evident.Language Use and Audience Awareness (includes sentence construction, word choice, etc.)11 pointsCriteria DescriptionLanguage Use and Audience Awareness (includes sentence construction, word choice, etc.)5. Excellent11 pointsThe writer uses a variety of sentence constructions, figures of speech, and word choice in distinctive and creative ways that are appropriate to purpose, discipline, and scope.4. Good9.57 pointsThe writer is clearly aware of audience, uses a variety of appropriate vocabulary for the targeted audience, and uses figures of speech to communicate clearly.3. Satisfactory8.69 pointsLanguage is appropriate to the targeted audience for the most part.2. Less Than Satisfactory8.14 pointsSome distracting inconsistencies in language choice (register) and/or word choice are present. The writer exhibits some lack of control in using figures of speech appropriately.1. Unsatisfactory0 pointsInappropriate word choice and lack of variety in language use are evident. Writer appears to be unaware of audience. Use of primer prose indicates writer either does not apply figures of speech or uses them inappropriately.Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)11 pointsCriteria DescriptionMechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)5. Excellent11 pointsWriter is clearly in control of standard, written academic English.4. Good9.57 pointsSlides are largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present.3. Satisfactory8.69 pointsSome mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader.2. Less Than Satisfactory8.14 pointsFrequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader.1. Unsatisfactory0 pointsSlide errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning.Documentation of Sources11 pointsCriteria DescriptionDocumentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)5. Excellent11 pointsSources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.4. Good9.57 pointsSources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.3. Satisfactory8.69 pointsSources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.2. Less Than Satisfactory8.14 pointsDocumentation of sources is inconsistent and/or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.1. Unsatisfactory0 points Sources are not documented.
Requirements: 16-18 slides

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *