Recent orders
Diagnosing Childhood Disorder With DSM V
Diagnosing Childhood Disorder With DSM V
Research Project – Pick a childhood disorder that has a DSM V diagnosis (see your textbook or
DSM V manual).
Research that disorder using professional journal articles (available through Troy library).
Describe the following:
1) A thorough description of the disorder and how it affects children and/or adolescents. Give the
diagnostic criteria for the disorder (available in your textbook and DSM V manual).
2) Any disorders which co-occur with the disorder you researched, and how that complicates
diagnoses as well as behavioral presentations and symptoms
3) how the disorder is treated. Be thorough with treatments and their effectiveness.
4) Prognosis: if a child is diagnosed with this disorder, how likely is it that the disorder will
improve over time? If not, what will the disorder look like into adulthood or later in life?
5) Find a case study of the disorder you chose (this is usually in research articles but it can be a
person you know ) and tell their story of living with the disorder and how it has impacted their life.
The project will be turned in using a link provided under Week Eight Modules.
Each answer to each question should be thorough.
Each page will be double spaced and 12 point font. Each question is worth 20 points for a total of
100 points for the assignment.
Each page is worth 10 points.
Provide references used to answer the questions on a separate page, labeled “References”. Cite
the references by using APA format as you are writing the answers as well as for the Reference
page.
After submitting the assignment, you will be able to access your paper via the link where you
turned it in if it has been submitted correctly. Make sure you read and understand all rules
against plagiarism before completing this assignment (see below). This assignment may be
turned in early, but not late! No exceptions, as it is available all term, and it can’t be graded in
time if this assignment is late.
As you read over requirements for your research you will notice there are 5 things to include in
your paper. You will write this paper exactly as you would any other research paper, and follow
APA style. That means your paper will include a Title Page, Abstract, content pages, and references pages. All will be doubled spaced and 12 point font. You won’t worry so much on the
number of pages for this paper, as much as you will need to make sure you address all 5 things
that should be included in the paper. The 5 things are listed out in the description of your
research project. Make sure you include the information asked for as listed 1-5, but the amount
of content for each of those 5 things will vary, depending on which disorder you have chosen.
You will be graded on APA format, organization, use of references, including all information and
content thoroughly, and grammar.
Disorders, Examples:
Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). Anxiety. Depression. Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD). Post-traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (OCD). Conduct Disorder (CD). Tourette Syndrome.
Business Ethics and Social Responsibility: Using Leeds Model for Values-Based Decision Making
Business Ethics and Social Responsibility: Using Leeds Model for Values-Based Decision Making
Business Ethics and Social Responsibility
INDIVIDUAL PAPER ASSIGNMENT—Cohort C
SUBMISSION AND GRADING
- 150 points are possible.
- Essays must be submitted electronically via Canvas before the start of class on the day the assignment is due.
- Hard copies will not be accepted and will receive a 0%.
- 10 points will be deducted each day for late papers for up to 5 days. After 5 days, including weekends, a 0% will be entered for your grade.
- The rubric below will be used in assessing your paper.
GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS
- You must read the entire text of the Zappos HBR case.
- Make sure that you are writing on the correct topic, as assigned to your cohort.
- (NOTE: This is a different topic than your debate case topic.)
- Before submission, please evaluate and revise your paper according to the rubric below.
- TA/Instructor cannot pre-assess papers. They cannot answer questions such as “What should I put in the analysis section?”
FORMAT
- Paper must include section headings.
- Length must be 2-3 pages, single-spaced.
- Font must be Times New Roman 12.
- Margins must be no larger than 1 inch; no smaller than ½ inch.
- Spell-check and proofread the paper before submitting it.
- Points will be deducted for the following:
- failure to follow instructions;
- use of contractions, slang, or inappropriate language;
- typos/spelling errors;
- grammatical errors (e.g. noun/pronoun agreement; incorrect verb tense).
CONTENT
- This paper is an analysis, not a book report or summary.
- Do not include a lengthy recap of the facts. Instead, analyze the facts according to the instructions given below.
- Use the Leeds Model for Values-Based Decision Making for brainstorming and paper design (see APPENDIX A).
- Include the following four sections in your paper. To receive full credit, you must label each of these four sections using a heading (for example, “A. ISSUE”).
- ISSUE [See Step 1 of the Leeds Decision Making Model]
- Read the entire case study. If you were the CEO of this company at the relevant time period, define—using your own language and ideas—one issue from the case that would cause your values to conflict and for which there is no clearly right or wrong answer. Identify and describe which values are in conflict and how this conflict has created a dilemma for you. A moral dilemma is a clearly-defined either/or alternative for which there is no obvious right or wrong answer.
- ANALYSIS: [See Steps 2 and 3 of the Leeds Decision Making Model]
- Describe the key stakeholders in the case who are implicated by the dilemma you have identified. Characterize at least two ethical frameworks for addressing this dilemma (for example, utilitarianism & deontology; shareholder & stakeholder theories). Apply those two (or more) ethical frameworks to the issue you defined in Part A (i.e. “A utilitarian would solve this by….”; “A proponent of stakeholder theory would address this dilemma as follows…”). The models you deploy in Part B must reflect the full range of course content introduced up to the point at which you are writing. Students writing later in the course need to include ethical theories introduced later in the course (though they may also draw on models from earlier modules).
- REFLECTION/CONCLUSION: [See Steps 4-6 of the Leeds Decision Making Model]
- After considering the two (or more) frameworks defined and applied to the issue in Part B, what would you do if you were the CEO of this company and had to resolve the dilemma? How would you justify your decision? How would you communicate your resolution of this dilemma to the key stakeholders of your company? What does your resolution of this dilemma say about your values?
- QUESTION:
- At the very end of your paper, you must include one question. (Just one sentence long.) In order to formulate the question, imagine that someone disagrees strongly with the conclusion that you reached in your paper. (Perhaps this person has somewhat different values or favors a different ethical framework than the approach you chose). What one question would you ask that person in order to get them to change their stance on the issue? (The question should not be a factual or true/false question: it should be a potential conversation starter.) During the debate, you will have a chance to ask your question to one or both of the debate teams.
PAPER GRADING RUBRIC |
||
Section
|
Points | Leeds Model Steps/Assessment Criteria |
| A. Issue | /30 /30
|
· Step One: Defining the dilemma
|
B. Analysis |
/30 | · Step Two: Alternatives for resolving the ethical dilemma
o Key stakeholders identified? o At least two ethical frameworks from class identified and accurately explained? · Step Three: Determine possible right courses of action o Each framework insightfully, effectively applied to the dilemma? |
| C. Reflection/Conclusion | /60 | · Step Four: Choose and justify one right course of action
o What action should the company take in responding to the dilemma? Why? o How would you justify your decision? · Step Five: Communicate the decision o How should the company communicate the dilemma and the decision to all affected stakeholders? · Step Six: Reflection o What does your decision say about your values? o What does it reflect about the role businesses should play in society? |
| D. Question | /20 | · Clear, insightful question that could prompt someone who disagrees with the main idea of your essay to reconsider their position?
· Question open-ended (not simply factual or true/false)? |
| Writing Style | /10 | · Followed formatting instructions (headings, rubric)?
· Each step clearly organized and connected to the others? · Used formal writing style and avoided abbreviations/slang? · Free of typos or grammatical errors? |
| Threshold for 80%:
*Must thoroughly apply each Step of the Leeds School Model |
Y/N | · Does paper draw on case facts clearly and insightfully while working through each of the six steps of the Leeds Model?
|
| Late per day (max 5 days at -10 points per day)
Late more than 5 days: O% |
(-10 x #) | |
| /150 | ||
APPENDIX A: PAPER BRAINSTORMING ASSISTANCE
The Leeds Model for Values-based Decision-Making
NOTE: This is a brainstorming document only. You do not need to mention every sub-bullet in your paper. You do need to reflect each of the six steps in your paper, however. Use this to guide you through the paper writing process.
Step 1: Defining the Dilemma: The Importance of Brainstorming
- Recognizing the dimensions of the ethical conflict(s)
- Personal values
- Interpersonal values
- Professional/organizational/institutional values
- Societal/cultural values
- How is there a values conflict?
Step 2: Alternatives for resolving the ethical dilemma
- Examine the situation in context
- Morally relevant facts
- Stakeholders
- points of views
- feelings, attitudes, beliefs, assumptions
- Identify salient moral considerations based on:
- Ethical theories discussed in class
- Conflicting ethical values
Step 3: Determine which, of the above choices for action, may be possible “right” choices
- Evaluate options for responding to the dilemma based on reference to:
- Conflicting ethical values from step 1, applied to the specifics of the situation
- Ethical theories from step 2, applied to the specifics of the situation
- Principles
- g., individual right to informed consent
- Corporate culture or character
- Consider the obstacles to choosing the “right” action
- What frustrations, challenges, or obstacles might you experience in choosing the “right” action?
- Are there any ways to mitigate the consequences (for yourself or others)?
- How might similar situations be averted in the future (trainings, etc.)?
Step 4: Based on analysis and evaluation, choose one “right” course of action
- In general, the “right” action should be something that results in more good than harm, upholds fundamental values, and is in accordance with established and agreed-upon standards.
- Make a decision
- What is the best alternative considering all points of view?
- What is the justification for your choice?
- How will others whose judgment you respect view your choice?
- How should the disaffected be addressed?
- What outcome is expected?
Step 5: Communicate the decision:
- To whom? By whom? When?
- What language or media should be employed?
Step 6: Reflection
- What have I learned about my character as a person and as a business leader?
- What have I learned about my values in relation to the values of the organization?
- Do the values of the organizational culture need to be strengthened or adjusted?
- How might the organization better educate others on managing similar ethical dilemmas? Do we need to repair any cultural or interpersonal damage?
Disscussion Board Response
Disscussion Board Response
Responding to a student post
Also….
