IO 613 UOPX Revised Intervention & Program Evaluation Methods Paper

Using the revised Interventions and Program Evaluation Methods Outline, and instructor feedback, begin to fill in the outline and convert it into a full draft of the respective sections for your ARP.

Your proposed interventions section should include three proposed interventions, and the selected intervention along with supporting research and a rationale for the selected solution. Refer to the ARP Standards guide for detail guidance on what should be included in the Interventions section.

Your Program Evaluation Methods section should include details on the participants and population of interest, data collection and data analysis strategies, and instruments and measures. Refer to the ARP Standards Guide for detail guidance on what should be included in the Program Evaluation Methods section.

Be sure to follow all normal writing conventions, keeping the following things in mind:

• Clearly state main points and sub-points

• Use transitions between main points and sub-points

• Use paragraphs with between 3 and 5 sentences

• Use a respectful, professional language throughout paper (i.e., tone is formal, unbiased, inclusive, and positive)

• Use hesitant language (e.g., may contribute, suggest…)

• Use strong, simple, direct statements without unnecessary words

• Use statements where concepts are presented first, followed by author citations (e.g., steer clear of “According to…”)

• Paraphrase all information; refrain from using direct quotations unless absolutely necessary

• Check for agreement, punctuation, spelling, and grammar errors prior to submitting the assignment

• Introduction and Conclusion	5.0 pts Introduction and conclusion are included in narrative; introduction sets the stage for the literature review succinctly; conclusion summarizes the literature completely 4.5 pts Introduction and conclusion are included in narrative 4.0 pts Introduction and/or conclusion are brief, does not set the stage for the literature review, or does not summarize the literature review 3.5 pts Fails to include either of the following: introduction and conclusion in narrative	5.0 pts
  This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeBackground Statement	10.0 pts Background statement has a very clear focus on the topic that is precise and well-articulated 9.0 pts Background statement has a clear focus that is adequately precise 8.0 pts Background statement has a discernable focus but lacks precision 7.0 pts Background statement has an imprecise or unclear focus or focus needs to be narrowed or clarified	10.0 pts
  This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeProblem Statement	10.0 pts Problem is clear, focused and well stated. Very concise and wellformed/ measureable problem 9.0 pts Problem statement is adequately stated and precise 8.0 pts Problem statement is too broad or vague 7.0 pts Problem statement does not identify a problem or undesired state	10.0 pts
  This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeGoal/Purpose Statement	10.0 pts Accurately and completely describes the purpose of the project with a high level of detail 9.0 pts Describes the purpose of the project but, it may lack minor details 8.0 pts Describes the purpose of the project, but it may lack in level of detail 7.0 pts Fails to describe the purpose of the project	10.0 pts
  This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMain Points (Proposed Interventions)	10.0 pts Proposed interventions contain overall main themes, with a clear connection to the theory/framework described in the literature narrative, clearly support student’s ARP Topic, and are aligned with sound I/O Psychology principles. 9.0 pts Proposed interventions contain overall main themes, with some connection to theory. Main themes or interventions somewhat support the ARP topic, but align with sound I/O Psychology principles. 8.0 pts Proposed interventions contain overall main theme, but does not connect to theory. At least one intervention supports the ARP topic, but does not align with sound I/O Psychology principles. 7.0 pts One or more interventions are missing or does not contain an overall main theme. Proposed interventions do not connect to theory or align with I/O Psychology.	10.0 pts
  This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSupporting Points	10.0 pts Several supporting points with multiple pieces of evidence or arguments are included for each main point and proposed intervention. 9.0 pts At least one supporting point is included for each main point and proposed intervention; one piece of evidence or one argument is included with each supporting point. 8.0 pts Some supporting points are added to main topics in narrative; supporting points may or may not include evidence or an argument 7.0 pts Fails to include supporting points to main topics in narrative; includes supporting points without evidence or an argument	10.0 pts
  This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFunnel Structure/ Logical Order	10.0 pts Themes are in logical order that leads reader to understand the topic, provides background literature to the problem, and delivers the foundation of that topic area 9.0 pts Themes follow a logical order; provides some background literature to the problem, and provides some foundation of that topic area 8.0 pts Themes are in a somewhat logical order, but may not provide background literature or the foundation of that topic area 7.0 pts Fails to place themes in logical order so that reader understands what the research topic is	10.0 pts
  This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeProgram Evaluation Detail	10.0 pts Program evaluation methodology is detailed and thorough; logical order of narrative is clearly supported by the completeness of the information provided by the student. It is very clear how the student will evaluate the program; the detail provided supports replication. 9.0 pts Several details are included that mostly support logical order of the program evaluation methodology. It is clear how the student will evaluate the program; however, additional detail is needed. 8.0 pts Some details are included that somewhat support logical order of the program evaluation methodology. It is somewhat clear how the student will evaluate the program. 7.0 pts Very few details, if any, are included to support logical order of the narrative. It is not clear how the student will evaluate the program.	10.0 pts
  This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAPA Style & Formatting	5.0 pts Exceptional application of APA Style to paper with only a minor error 4.5 pts Reasonable APA Style applied to paper; less than 2 APA Style requirements are incorrect 4.0 pts Fails in 2 or more APA Style requirements for paper, e.g., no title page, references are incorrect, citations not included, etc. 3.5 pts Fails to reasonably apply APA style to paper, e.g., no title page, references are incorrect, citations not included, etc.	5.0 pts
  This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Communication	20.0 pts See Below 19.0 pts See Below 18.0 pts See Below 17.0 pts See Below 15.0 pts see	20.0 pts
  This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeA. Organization (Clearly States Main Points)	0.0 pts Clearly states the main points at the beginning of the paper and sticks to them 0.0 pts Clearly states the main points at the beginning of the paper, but fails to stick to them throughout the paper 0.0 pts States the main points but not at the beginning of the paper 0.0 pts Vaguely states the main points or fails to state the main points at the beginning of the paper	0.0 pts
  This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome(Clearly States Sub-Points)	0.0 pts Clearly outlines the sub-points of each main point 0.0 pts Does not outline the sub-points of one of the main points 0.0 pts Does not outline the sub-points of several main points 0.0 pts Fails to outline the sub-points of each main point	0.0 pts
  This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome(Transitions for Main Points)	0.0 pts Fails to transition between main points 0.0 pts Transitions between each main point by connecting the two points 0.0 pts Transitions between each main point by using meaningless transitions (however, in other words, furthermore, thus…) 0.0 pts Transitions between one or two main points by using meaningless transitions (however, in other words, furthermore, thus…)	0.0 pts
  This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome(Transitions for Sub-Points)	0.0 pts Fails to transition between sub-points 0.0 pts Transitions between each sub-point by connecting the two points 0.0 pts Transitions between each sub-point by using meaningless transitions (however, in other words, furthermore, thus…) 0.0 pts Transitions between one or two sub-points by using meaningless transitions (however, in other words, furthermore, thus…)	0.0 pts
  This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome(Paragraphing length)	0.0 pts Consistently uses no fewer than 3 sentences and no more than 5 sentences per paragraph 0.0 pts Lengthy, rambling, paragraphs throughout the paper 0.0 pts Many paragraphs are too long or too short 0.0 pts One or two paragraphs are too long or too short	0.0 pts
  This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome(Paragraphing focus)	0.0 pts Each paragraph sticks to its theme and clearly makes a point 0.0 pts Many paragraphs’ themes do not make clear points or some themes stretch across more than one paragraph 0.0 pts Most paragraphs make a clear point but a couple of paragraph themes do not make a clear point 0.0 pts Paragraphs lack themes or themes are strewn incoherently across multiple paragraphs	0.0 pts
  This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeB. Reference citation	0.0 pts Appropriate and consistent APA citations and reference page 0.0 pts Excessive errors in APA citations and/or reference page or does not use APA Style 0.0 pts Multiple errors in APA citations and/or reference page 0.0 pts Two or less errors in APA citations and/or reference page	0.0 pts
  This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome(Reference page)	0.0 pts Reference page is in APA style but contains multiple errors in the majority of the references 0.0 pts Reference page is in correct APA style 0.0 pts Reference page is in correct APA style with minor errors in a few of the references 0.0 pts Reference page is not APA style or contains excessive errors in most or all of the references	0.0 pts
  This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeC. Professional Style	0.0 pts Addresses the topic through respectful language (tone is formal, unbiased, inclusive, and positive) 0.0 pts Contains a two or three instances of informality, bias, directive and/or negative style 0.0 pts Contains more than three instances of informality, bias, directive and/or negative style 0.0 pts Contains very few instances of informality, bias, directive and/or negative style	0.0 pts
  This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome(Hesitant language)	0.0 pts Periodically uses absolute language 0.0 pts Rarely uses absolute language 0.0 pts Uses absolute language (e.g. always, never, will contribute, proves…) 0.0 pts Uses hesitant language (e.g. may contribute, suggest…)	0.0 pts
  This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome(Crisp sentences)	0.0 pts Almost all sentences use strong, simple, direct statements with a few unnecessary words 0.0 pts Many statements are wordy with unnecessary words, or partial sentences in some areas of the document 0.0 pts Uses strong, simple, direct statements without unnecessary words 0.0 pts Wordy sentences. Overuse of adjectives/adverbs (very, really…) or partial, incomplete sentences throughout the document	0.0 pts
  This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome(Citations)	0.0 pts Authors are cited at the beginning of sentence or with “According to…” 0.0 pts Information from citations not integrated into the paper well 0.0 pts Rarely cites authors at the beginning of sentences. States the concepts first, followed by author citations in most instances 0.0 pts States the concepts first, followed by author citations	0.0 pts
  This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome(Use of quotations)	0.0 pts Authors are cited at the beginning of sentence or with “According to…” 0.0 pts No quotations; All information is paraphrased 0.0 pts Quotations used throughout 0.0 pts Use two or three quotations	0.0 pts
  This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome(Plagiarism)	0.0 pts Always cites other’s work; paraphrases information clearly; all quotations are appropriately cited and referenced. 0.0 pts Fails to cite others’ work or paraphrases poorly or directly copies other’s work word for word without proper attribution; violates Chicago School Academic Integrity Code 0.0 pts First offense for plagiarism communicated and person corrects actions without further incident. 0.0 pts Incorrectly cites others’ work or paraphrases poorly; does not properly cite or format quotation, but errors are mechanical	0.0 pts
  This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeD. Fundamental Writing Errors (Agreement)	0.0 pts Paper contains excessive agreement errors (e.g., subject/verb, noun/pronoun, plural nouns, correct use of pronouns) 0.0 pts Paper contains many agreement errors 0.0 pts Paper contains very few agreement errors 0.0 pts Paper is free from agreement errors	0.0 pts
  This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome(Punctuation)	0.0 pts Paper contains excessive punctuation errors (e.g., comma, semi-colon, period, apostrophe) 0.0 pts Paper contains many punctuation errors 0.0 pts Paper contains very few punctuation errors 0.0 pts Paper is free from punctuation errors	0.0 pts
  This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome(Spelling)	0.0 pts Paper contains excessive spelling errors (e.g., their/there, who/whom, its/it’s, etc.) 0.0 pts Paper contains many spelling errors 0.0 pts Paper contains very few spelling errors 0.0 pts Paper is free from spelling errors	0.0 pts
  This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome(Grammar)	0.0 pts Paper contains excessive grammar errors (e.g., dangling modifiers, parallel structure, prepositions at end of sentence, overuse of meaningless words) 0.0 pts Paper contains fewer than three grammar errors

• I am attaching my intervention paper with and without comments
• There are 5 pages to review from my completed work