Rubric Detail Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric's layout. Exceeds Expectation 90%–100% Meets Expectation 80%–89% Fair 70%–79% Needs Improvement 0%–69% Name: SOCW_6361_Week6_Assignment_Rubric EXIT Grid View List View Exceeds Expectation 90%–100% Meets Expectation 80%–89% Fair 70%–79% Needs Improvement 0%–69% Submit a proposal that addresses the following: Provide a brief synopsis of the social problem you selected in Week 2. Provide a brief synopsis of the policy you selected in Week 4. Explain your selection of a policy—why, as a policy advocate, did you select this speci�c policy to promote change regarding the social problem? 8.1 (9%) - 9 (10%) Meets expectations and exceeds by drawing connections between prior social work experience and goals for advocacy in the selection of a policy. Two or more scholarly resources are used to support response. 7.2 (8%) - 8.01 (8.9%) The response contains a clear and concise synopsis of the social problem selected in Week 2 and of the policy selected in Week 4. The response accurately incorporates concepts from the Learning Resources or relevant topics from other research to explain why the policy was selected as a vehicle for policy advocacy and social change. At least one scholarly resource is used to support response. 6.3 (7%) - 7.11 (7.9%) The response provides a synopsis, but the required explanation is vaguely developed or does not clearly set a foundation for advocacy. 0 (0%) - 6.21 (6.9%) The response fails to or does not attempt to address all aspects of the prompt. Exceeds Expectation 90%–100% Meets Expectation 80%–89% Fair 70%–79% Needs Improvement 0%–69% Identify the person or group who enacted the policy and explain their motivation or reason for advocating for this policy. How does the reason di�er from your own advocacy and change goals? 16.2 (18%) - 18 (20%) Meets expectations and exceeds by incorporating relevant and/or added examples to highlight di�erent motivations for advocacy and social change. 14.4 (16%) - 16.02 (17.8%) The response accurately identi�es the person or group who enacted the policy and proposes logical motivations or reasons for developing this policy. The response compares how that reason di�ers from student’s advocacy and change goals. 12.6 (14%) - 14.22 (15.8%) The response attempts to explain the motivation or reason for advocating this policy for the identi�ed person or group, but the connections are vague or inaccurate in parts. The response attempts to make the required comparison, but the details between di�erent motivations are not clearly de�ned. 0 (0%) - 12.42 (13.8%) The response fails to or does not attempt to explore the motivations for developing the policy. Response does not demonstrate connection to the Learning Resources. Exceeds Expectation 90%–100% Meets Expectation 80%–89% Fair 70%–79% Needs Improvement 0%–69% Describe the ways in which.

1. Rubric Detail
Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric's layout.
Exceeds
Expectation
90%–100%
Meets
Expectation
80%–89%
Fair
70%–79%
Needs
Improvement
0%–69%
Name: SOCW_6361_Week6_Assignment_Rubric EXIT
Grid View List View
Exceeds

2. Expectation
90%–100%
Meets
Expectation
80%–89%
Fair
70%–79%
Needs
Improvement
0%–69%
Submit a
proposal that
addresses the
following:
Provide a brief
synopsis of
the social
problem you
selected in
Week 2.
Provide a brief
synopsis of
the policy you
selected in
Week 4.

3. Explain your
selection of a
policy—why,
as a policy
advocate, did
you select this
speci�c policy
to promote
change
regarding the
social
problem?
8.1 (9%) - 9 (10%)
Meets
expectations
and exceeds by
drawing
connections
between prior
social work
experience and
goals for
advocacy in the
selection of a
policy. Two or
more scholarly
resources are
used to support
response.
7.2 (8%) - 8.01
(8.9%)
The response

4. contains a
clear and
concise
synopsis of
the social
problem
selected in
Week 2 and of
the policy
selected in
Week 4.
The response
accurately
incorporates
concepts from
the Learning
Resources or
relevant topics
from other
research to
explain why
the policy was
selected as a
vehicle for
policy
advocacy and
social change.
At least one
scholarly
resource is
used to
support
response.
6.3 (7%) - 7.11

5. (7.9%)
The response
provides a
synopsis, but
the required
explanation is
vaguely
developed or
does not
clearly set a
foundation for
advocacy.
0 (0%) - 6.21
(6.9%)
The response
fails to or
does not
attempt to
address all
aspects of the
prompt.
Exceeds
Expectation
90%–100%
Meets
Expectation

6. 80%–89%
Fair
70%–79%
Needs
Improvement
0%–69%
Identify the
person or
group who
enacted the
policy and
explain their
motivation or
reason for
advocating for
this policy.
How does the
reason di�er
from your own
advocacy and
change goals?
16.2 (18%) - 18
(20%)
Meets
expectations
and exceeds by
incorporating
relevant and/or
added examples

7. to highlight
di�erent
motivations for
advocacy and
social change.
14.4 (16%) -
16.02 (17.8%)
The response
accurately
identi�es the
person or
group who
enacted the
policy and
proposes
logical
motivations or
reasons for
developing
this policy.
The response
compares how
that reason
di�ers from
student’s
advocacy and
change goals.
12.6 (14%) -
14.22 (15.8%)
The response
attempts to

8. explain the
motivation or
reason for
advocating
this policy for
the identi�ed
person or
group, but the
connections
are vague or
inaccurate in
parts.
The response
attempts to
make the
required
comparison,
but the details
between
di�erent
motivations
are not clearly
de�ned.
0 (0%) - 12.42
(13.8%)
The response
fails to or
does not
attempt to
explore the
motivations
for developing
the policy.

9. Response
does not
demonstrate
connection to
the Learning
Resources.
Exceeds
Expectation
90%–100%
Meets
Expectation
80%–89%
Fair
70%–79%
Needs
Improvement
0%–69%
Describe the
ways in which
the policy
impacts the
populations
and discuss
the

10. consequences,
intended and
unintended.
Hint: Build on
your answer
to the
following part
of your Week
4 Assignment:
Explain how
this policy
a�ects clients
you might see
in a clinical
setting and
why, as a
clinical social
worker, it
would be
important to
advocate for
change.
20.25 (22.5%) -
22.5 (25%)
Meets
expectations
and exceeds by
enhancing or
expanding upon
the evaluation of
the policy’s
development or
impacts on the
population with

11. professional
experiences and
examples. Two
or more
scholarly
resources are
used to support
response.
18 (20%) -
20.02 (22.25%)
The response
accurately
incorporates
concepts from
the Learning
Resources or
relevant topics
from other
research to
analyze the
consequences,
intended and
unintended, of
the policy on
speci�c
populations.
At least one
scholarly
resource is
used to
support
response.
15.75 (17.5%) -

12. 17.77 (19.75%)
The response
attempts to
explore the
consequences
of the policy,
but the
impacts
and/or the
relationship to
the
marginalized
populations
is/are unclear.
0 (0%) - 15.53
(17.25%)
The response
fails to or
does not
attempt to
explore the
consequences
of the policy.
Describe your
initial work to
change the
policy (i.e.,
plan for social
advocacy).
20.25 (22.5%) -
22.5 (25%)

13. Meets
expectations
and exceeds by
drawing
connections
between the
social problem,
population, and
speci�c
components of
the policy to
detail the plan.
18 (20%) -
20.02 (22.25%)
Response
incorporates
details from
the social
problem or
population to
propose an
initial plan for
social
advocacy.
15.75 (17.5%) -
17.77 (19.75%)
The response
attempts to
describe a
plan, but the
steps or

14. speci�c
actions are
vague or
missing.
0 (0%) - 15.53
(17.25%)
The response
fails to or
does not
attempt to
describe a
plan.
Exceeds
Expectation
90%–100%
Meets
Expectation
80%–89%
Fair
70%–79%
Needs
Improvement
0%–69%

15. Competency –
Advance
Human Rights
and Social,
Economic, and
Environmental
Justice
4.05 (4.5%) - 4.5
(5%)
Student’s social
advocacy plan
demonstrates
exceptional
ability to apply
understanding
of social justice
to advocate for
human rights at
the policy level.
This is
demonstrated
through a
detailed plan
that provides
speci�c
actionable steps
that clearly
aligns with social
justice goals.
3.6 (4%) - 4
(4.45%)

16. Student’s
social
advocacy plan
demonstrates
clear ability to
apply
understanding
of social
justice to
advocate for
human rights
at the policy
level.
3.15 (3.5%) -
3.56 (3.95%)
Student’s
social
advocacy plan
demonstrates
some ability to
apply
understanding
of social
justice to
advocate for
human rights
at the policy
level.
0 (0%) - 3.1
(3.45%)
Student’s
social

17. advocacy plan
demonstrates
no or little
ability to apply
understanding
of social
justice to
advocate for
human rights
at the policy
level.
Writing 12.15 (13.5%) -
13.5 (15%)
The paper
meets length
requirements,
meets
expectations, is
generally error
free (two or
fewer), and
further exceeds
by showcasing
an exemplary
scholarly voice
to develop its
message or
communicate
ideas.
The paper
appropriately
paraphrases

18. 10.8 (12%) -
12.02 (13.35%)
The paper
meets length
requirements
and is clear
and coherent.
Errors in
grammar,
sentence
structure, and
punctuation
are minor, are
minimal (three
to �ve), and do
not interfere
with the
scholarly
message. The
paper displays
e�ective
organization
9.45 (10.5%) -
10.66 (11.85%)
The paper
does not meet
length
requirements
and is either
somewhat too
short or too
long. The
paper is

19. somewhat
clear and
coherent.
Errors in
grammar,
sentence
structure, and
punctuation
are minor but
frequent (�ve
to 10) and
0 (0%) - 9.31
(10.35%)
The paper
does not meet
length
requirements
and is either
signi�cantly
too short or
too long. The
paper lacks
clarity and
coherence.
Errors in
grammar,
sentence
structure, and
punctuation
are major, are
pervasive
(11+), and
interfere with

20. Exceeds
Expectation
90%–100%
Meets
Expectation
80%–89%
Fair
70%–79%
Needs
Improvement
0%–69%
sources, using
one or fewer
quotes. Presents
polished APA
Style. Citations,
reference list,
and
paper formatting
are generally
error free (two
or fewer).
Tone and
presentation of

21. ideas are free
from bias and
objective, unless
otherwise
directed in the
prompt.
and focus to
communicate
ideas.
The paper
appropriately
paraphrases
sources. The
paper may use
two to three
short quotes
but provides
appropriate
references,
consistently
documents
sources in APA
Style, and
uses citations
for ideas
requiring
attribution,
with a few
minimal errors
(three to �ve).
The reference
list is complete
and contains

22. only minimal
errors (three
to �ve). Paper
formatting is
appropriate.
There is a
clear
distinction
between cited
content and
original
thought.
Tone and
presentation
of ideas are
free from bias
and objective,
occasionally
interfere with
the message.
The paper
lacks clear
organization
or
occasionally
strays from
the focus.
The paper
may rely on
four short
quotes or one
to two long
quotes (more

23. than 40
words) and/or
does not
su�ciently
paraphrase
material from
other
resources into
student's own
words. The
paper
attempts to
document
sources in APA
Style and
citations are
present but
contain
frequent APA
errors or
omissions.
A reference
list is provided
but is
incomplete
and/or
contains
frequent APA
errors. The
the message.
The paper is
not organized
or lacks focus.

24. The paper
relies
excessively on
quoting (�ve
or more
quotes) or
three or more
long quotes
(more than 40
words), and/or
uses quoted
material
without
paraphrasing
or referencing
the source of
the
material. Little
or no attempt
is made to
document
sources in APA
Style.
Citations are
infrequent or
missing, and a
reference list
is not
provided.
Little or no
attempt has
been made to
format the
paper in APA
Style.

25. There is no
distinction
between cited
content and
original
Exceeds
Expectation
90%–100%
Meets
Expectation
80%–89%
Fair
70%–79%
Needs
Improvement
0%–69%
unless
otherwise
directed in the
prompt.
paper
formatting

26. may be
incorrect (e.g.,
single-spaced
or without a
title page) and
occasionally
lacks a clear
distinction
between cited
content and
original
thought.
thought.
Tone and
presentation
of ideas reveal
bias and
subjectivity.
Name: SOCW_6361_Week6_Assignment_Rubric
EXIT