C‌‍‍‍‌‍‍‌‌‍‍‍‌‍‍‍‍‌‍‍ourse Objectives CO 1: Integrate cultural, ecological and social justice perspectives into assessment and engagement at all ecological levels.

CO 3: Empower groups, families, communities and organizations through the application of Motivational Interviewing, group facilitation, and

family work theories and skills. Total Points: 120 Due Date Please see the due dates below. The Late Assignment Policy applies to this assignment. Requirements This paper will be in APA format, Times New Roman 12-point font, at least five pages, including title page and

reference page. References to the textbook are not necessary; provide evidence of your analysis of a behavioral problem using academic articles and investigative journalism. Your force field analysis charts should be integrated into the paper using Word document tools. For the

RPS and Social Thinking sections, use these prompts: Rational Problem Solving Decide on a goal or target: Gather information about the problem: Generate alternative solutions: Assess and compare alternatives: (Force Field Analyses go here) Choose the best solution: Develop a strategy or plan of action: Implement the strategy: Evaluate the results: Social Thinking Eliciting cognitive dissonance: Accessing feelings:

Engaging values: Stimulating cognition: Obtaining information: Internal reflection: Use imagination to envision: Move to action: Closing the Circle: Grading Criteria and Directions Your paper will be graded on your ability to apply the steps of both Rational Problem Solving and Social Thinking to a current social problem. Having contemplated these steps for the effects of racism on African American neighborhoods, choose

another issue that places vulnerable families and communities at risk. Trace behavioral problems like violence against Native American women, or low academic achievement related to contaminated drinking water back to their sources in organizational, institutional or systemic deviance. After introducing the problem using current statistics and analysis of root causes, follow the format we used for Rational Problem Solving and

Social Thinking and answer all prompts. At the appropriate place, insert a Force Field Analysis for two alternative plans to address the problem. Estimate the weights of each driving and restraining force, calculate the overall power and direction, and explain why you are choosing one alternative over the other. Then conclude with a discussion of how you see RPS and Social Thinking complementing each other in working

toward solutions to this problem. Category Points Description Analysis of social problem 22 Using current statistics and sources, explain how the problem is rooted in systemic deviance from social goods. RPS approach 22 Using the steps defined in the text and module, identify the goals, objectives, tasks, tactics, targets and strategy you will use, as well as how you will evaluate your success. Force Field Analyses 24 Using the textbook example on page 117, make a chart for two different solutions and compare their relative advantages from qualitative and values-based perspectives. Social Thinking approach 22 Using the steps defined in the text and module, respond to all prompts. Imagine you are leading a task group and design Open-Ended Questions to heighten dissonance and elicit responses. Conclusion 20 Discuss how you will integrate the strengths of RPS and Social Thinking to optimize results while empowering the community. Clarity and Format 10 Writing is objective in tone, clear, with no grammatical errors, and follows APA format with relevant references. Total 120 Rubric Thinking Globally, Acting Locally Thinking Globally, Acting Locally Criteria Ratings Pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAnalysis of social problem 22 pts Highest Level of performance Analyzes clearly with abundant evidence how the problem is rooted in systemic deviance from social goods. 20 pts Very Good or High Level of Performance Explains clearly with some evidence how the problem is rooted in systemic deviance from social goods. 17 pts Acceptable Level of Performance Explains somewhat clearly or with little evidence how the problem is rooted in systemic deviance from social goods. 0 pts Failing Level of Performance Does n‌‍‍‍‌‍‍‌‌‍‍‍‌‍‍‍‍‌‍‍ot explain with evidence how the problem is rooted in systemic deviance from social goods. 22 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeRPS approach 22 pts Highest Level of performance Using all steps of RPS, identifies the goals, objectives, tasks, tactics, targets, strategy and evaluation methods you will use. 19 pts Very Good or High Level of Performance Using most steps of RPS, identifies most of the goals, objectives, tasks, tactics, targets, strategy and evaluation methods you will use. 17 pts Acceptable Level of Performance Using some steps of RPS, identifies some of the goals, objectives, tasks, tactics, targets, strategy and evaluation methods you will use. 0 pts Does Not Meet Criteria Using few if any steps of RPS, identifies few if any of the goals, objectives, tasks, tactics, targets, strategy and evaluation methods you will use. 22 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeForce Field Analyses 24 pts Highest Level of performance Creates a chart for two solutions with logic-based forces and strengths; very thoughtfully compares their relative advantages from quantitative and values-based perspectives. 20 pts Very Good or High Level of Performance Creates a chart for two solutions with somewhat logical forces and strengths; mostly thoughtfully compares their relative advantages from quantitative and values-based perspectives. 18 pts Acceptable Level of Performance Creates a chart for two solutions with somewhat arbitrary forces and strengths; compares their relative advantages from either quantitative or values-based perspectives. 0 pts Failing Level of Performance Creates a chart for one or two solutions with arbitrary forces and strengths; compares their relative advantages from neither quantitative nor values-based perspectives. 24 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSocial Thinking Approach 22 pts Highest Level of performance Creates fitting open-ended questions and other forms of team facilitation for all prompts (dissonance, feelings, values, cognition, information, reflection, action, and review). 19 pts Partially Meets Criteria Creates somewhat fitting open-ended questions and other forms of team facilitation for most prompts (dissonance, feelings, values, cognition, information, reflection, action, and review). 18 pts Acceptable Level of Performance Creates somewhat fitting or closed-ended questions or other forms of team facilitation for most prompts (dissonance, feelings, values, cognition, information, reflection, action, and review). 0 pts Failing Level of Performance Creates poorly fitting or closed-ended questions or other forms of team facilitation for few if any prompts (dissonance, feelings, values, cognition, information, reflection, action, and review). 22 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeConclusion 20 pts Highest Level of performance Integrates the strengths of RPS and Social Thinking to optimize results while clearly empowering the community. 18 pts Partially Meets Criteria Integrates most of the strengths of RPS and Social Thinking to optimize results while

mostly clearly empowering the community. 15 pts Acceptable Level of Performance Integrates some of the strengths of RPS and Social Thinking to optimize results while somewhat empowering the community. 0 pts Failing Level of Performance Integrates few if any of the strengths of RPS and Social Thinking to optimize results while not empowering the community. 20 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeClarity & Format 10 pts Highest Level of performance Writing is objective in tone, clear, with no grammatical errors, and follows APA format, with

appropriate references. 8 pts Partially Meets Criteria Writing is mostly objective in tone, is mostly clear, and has a few grammatical and/or formatting errors. 4 pts Acceptable Level of Performance Writing is subjective at times, is unclear at times, and has some errors including APA 7th format. 0 pts Failing Level of Performance Writing is often subjective, often unclear, and has frequent errors including APA format. 10 pts Total Points: 120 Another article to use