Psychotherapy for Clients With Addictive Disorders Order Now
Addictive disorders can be particularly challenging for clients. Not only do these disorders typically interfere with a client’s ability to function in daily life, but they also often manifest as negative and sometimes criminal behaviors. Sometime clients with addictive disorders also suffer from other mental health issues, creating even greater struggles for them to overcome. In your role, you have the opportunity to help clients address their addictions and improve outcomes for both the clients and their families.
Resources
Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.
Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.
To prepare:
- Review this week’s Learning Resources and consider the insights they provide about diagnosing and treating addictive disorders. As you watch the 187 Models of Treatment for Addiction video, consider what treatment model you may use the most with clients presenting with addiction.
- Search the Walden Library databases and choose a research article that discusses a therapeutic approach for treating clients, families, or groups with addictive disorders.
The Assignment
In a 5- to 10-slide PowerPoint presentation, address the following. Your title and references slides do not count toward the 5- to 10-slide limit.
- Provide an overview of the article you selected.
- What population (individual, group, or family) is under consideration?
- What was the specific intervention that was used? Is this a new intervention or one that was already studied?
- What were the author’s claims?
- Explain the findings/outcomes of the study in the article. Include whether this will translate into practice with your own clients. If so, how? If not, why?
- Explain whether the limitations of the study might impact your ability to use the findings/outcomes presented in the article.
- Use the Notes function of PowerPoint to craft presenter notes to expand upon the content of your slides.
- Support your response with at least three other peer-reviewed, evidence-based sources. Explain why each of your supporting sources is considered scholarly. Provide references to your sources on your last slide. Be sure to include the article you used as the basis for this Assignment.
By Day 7
submission information
Before submitting your final assignment, you can check your draft for authenticity. To check your draft, access the Turnitin Drafts from the Start Here area.
- To submit your completed assignment, save your Assignment as WK8Assgn_LastName_Firstinitial
- Then, click on Start Assignment near the top of the page.
- Next, click on Upload File and select Submit Assignment for review.
Rubric
NRNP_6645_Week8_Assignment_Rubric
| NRNP_6645_Week8_Assignment_Rubric | ||
| Criteria | Ratings | Pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDevelop a 5- to 10-slide PowerPoint presentation on your selected research article discussing a therapeutic approach for treating clients, families, or groups with addictive disorders.•Provide an overview of the article you selected, including:What population (individual, group, or family) is under consideration?What was the specific intervention that was used? Is this a new intervention or one that was already used?What were the author’s claims? | 20 to >17.0 pts Excellent 90%–100% The presentation thoroughly and accurately defines the considered population…. The specific intervention used is fully and accurately described. The description clearly indicates whether the intervention is new or whether it was already studied…. The response includes a thorough and accurate description of the author’s claims. 17 to >15.0 pts Good 80%–89% The presentation defines the considered population…. The specific intervention used is described. The description indicates whether the intervention is new or whether it was already studied…. The response includes a description of the author’s claims. 15 to >13.0 pts Fair 70%–79% There is an incomplete definition of the considered population…. The specific intervention used is partially or inaccurately described…. The response includes a partial or inaccurate description of the author’s claims. 13 to >0 pts Poor 0%–69% There is an incomplete definition of the considered population, or it is missing…. The specific intervention used is partially or inaccurately described, or is missing…. The response includes a partial or inaccurate description of the author’s claims, or is missing. | 20 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcomeo Explain the findings/outcomes of the study in the article. Include whether this will translate into practice with your clients. If so, how? If not, why? | 25 to >22.0 pts Excellent 90%–100% The presentation includes a thorough and accurate review of the findings of the selected article…. The response fully addresses whether or not the outcomes will translate into practice with clients. 22 to >19.0 pts Good 80%–89% The presentation includes a review of the findings of the selected article…. The response addresses whether or not the outcomes will translate into practice with clients. 19 to >17.0 pts Fair 70%–79% The presentation includes a somewhat inaccurate or incomplete review of the findings of the selected article…. The response partially or inaccurately addresses whether or not the outcomes will translate into practice with clients. 17 to >0 pts Poor 0%–69% The presentation includes an inaccurate and incomplete review of the findings of the selected article, or is missing…. The response partially or inaccurately addresses whether or not the outcomes will translate into practice with clients, or is missing. | 25 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome• Explain whether the limitations of the study might impact your ability to use the findings/outcomes presented in the article. | 25 to >22.0 pts Excellent 90%–100% The presentation includes a thorough and accurate explanation of the whether the limitations of the study might impact your ability to use the findings presented in the article. 22 to >19.0 pts Good 80%–89% The presentation includes an explanation of the whether the limitations of the study might impact your ability to use the findings presented in the article. 19 to >17.0 pts Fair 70%–79% The presentation includes a somewhat inaccurate or incomplete explanation of the whether the limitations of the study might impact your ability to use the findings presented in the article. 17 to >0 pts Poor 0%–69% The presentation includes an inaccurate or incomplete explanation of the whether the limitations of the study might impact your ability to use the findings presented in the article, or is missing. | 25 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome•Use the Notes function of PowerPoint to craft presenter notes to expand upon the content of your slides. | 10 to >8.0 pts Excellent 90%–100% The Notes function of the presentation is appropriately used to comprehensively expand upon the presentation slides. 8 to >7.0 pts Good 80%–89% The Notes function of the presentation is adequately used to expand upon the presentation slides. 7 to >6.0 pts Fair 70%–79% The Notes function of the presentation is utilized but notes are vague or contain small inaccuracies. 6 to >0 pts Poor 0%–69% The Notes function of the presentation partially or inaccurately expands upon the presentation slides, or is not included. | 10 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome• Support your response with at least three peer-reviewed, evidence-based sources. Explain why each of your supporting sources is scholarly. References are included on your last slide. | 10 to >8.0 pts Excellent 90%–100% The presentation is strongly supported with at least three peer-reviewed, evidence-based, scholarly sources. References are included on the last slide. 8 to >7.0 pts Good 80%–89% The presentation is supported with at least three peer-reviewed, evidence-based, scholarly sources. References are included on the last slide. 7 to >6.0 pts Fair 70%–79% The presentation is supported with two or three peer-reviewed, evidence-based, scholarly sources. Accurate references may not be included on the last slide. 6 to >0 pts Poor 0%–69% The presentation is not supported with resources peer-reviewed, evidence-based, scholarly sources, and/or the reference list is missing. | 10 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting – Style and Organization: Slides are clear and not overly crowded. Sentences in presenter notes are carefully focused—neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. | 5 to >4.0 pts Excellent 90%–100% Slides are clear, concise, and visually appealing. Sentences in presenter notes follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity. 4 to >3.5 pts Good 80%–89% Slides are clear and concise. Sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time. 3.5 to >3.0 pts Fair 70%–79% Slides may be somewhat unorganized or crowded. Sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%–79% of the time. 3 to >0 pts Poor 0%–69% Slides are unorganized and/or crowded. Sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time. | 5 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting – English writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation | 5 to >4.0 pts Excellent 90%–100% Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors. 4 to >3.5 pts Good 80%–89% Contains 1 or 2 grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. 3.5 to >3.0 pts Fair 70%–79% Contains 3 or 4 grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. 3 to >0 pts Poor 0%–69% Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding. | 5 pts |
| Total Points: 100 | ||