Expert Answers

Instructions Instructions Step 1: Read the article from Hawkins et al. regarding Ethical Issues in FAs. Chapter 15: Ethical Issues in Functional Assessment (pp. 407-416). This article is located in your Course Resources. Step 2: Review Dr. Iwata’s Video, Functional Analysis of Problem Behavior (youtube.com) over FBA and FAs, especially the section where he begins to talk more about challenges inherent to FAs (45:09 in the video). Step 3: Review the helpful resource tutorial of How to Create a Decision-Tree. Step 4: Using the three most prevalent FA Models (Brief functional analysis (BFA); Full FA (All three test conditions & a control condition) and Trial-based FA. Create a decision tree for which FA method would be the most beneficial to utilize in different levels of risk. Situations or levels of risk are conceptualized in terms of risk to the client and risk to staff. Generally, risk is conceptualized using the following categories: Low Risk of Severity, Moderate Risk of Severity, and High Risk of Severity. The Self-Injury Trauma (SIT) Scale (Iwata et. al., 1990) was designed to assess these risks. Your decision tree, therefore, should have low-risk level, moderate risk level, and high-risk levels. Step 5: Provide a written summary at least 2 paragraphs in length explaining how you constructed your decision -tree and conceptualization of the components that are contained within the diagram. Step 6: Submit your completed decision tree, one that will be useful to you and those you provide services to for years to come! Length: Decision-Tree should be at least 2 pages in length. Sources: For this assignment, cite at least 2 APA formatted sources. Grading This assignment is worth 10 points. Refer to the rubric for details. Hide Rubrics Rubric Name: Module 6 Assignment: Create a Decision Tree Rubric Criteria Excellent 2 points Proficient 1 point Developing 0.5 points Criterion Score Applied (Make a difference of social importance) Each level of risk is thoroughly defined - Levels of risk should at least include: High Risk, Moderate Risk, Low Risk Each level of risk is explained in terms of social validity for the client. Each level of risk is defined. All three risk levels are included in decision-tree, and explained in write-up. Levels of risk are mentioned, however, not thoroughly defined. One or more risk levels are missing or a component of definition is missing. Score of Applied (Make a difference of social importance), / 2 Behavioral (Focus on observable & measurable behavior) Behaviors within each level of risk are operationally defined (observable & measurable) with at least one non behavior definition given for each behavior. Behaviors within all three levels of risk are operationally defined in observable & measurable terms. An attempt has been made to define behaviors, however, definition is not observable & measurable. Score of Behavioral (Focus on observable & measurable behavior), / 2 Analytic (Prove relationships between behavior and environment) Environmental variables are thoroughly explained in write-up. Each environment the FA would most likely be conducted in has been given consideration in terms of risk matched to the FA model. Environmental variables are explained in the write-up. An attempt has been made to explain environmental variables, however, only one environment is explained or explanations are missing key components. Score of Analytic (Prove relationships between behavior and environment), / 2 Conceptually Systematic (Relate procedures to behavior principles) FA methods are conceptually systematic (i.e., procedures are research-based and representative of the principles of ABA). In write-up, all procedures must be described in the language of ABA. Each FA method is explained/defined in conceptually systematic terms. An attempt has been made to explain FA methods in conceptually systematic terms, however, there are significant errors. Score of Conceptually Systematic (Relate procedures to behavior principles), / 2 Effective (Behavioral techniques result in socially significant change) Ethical issues in each model are thoroughly detailed and explanations given for rationale for specific model was chosen in reference to our ethics code. Ethical issues are explained in relation to each FA Model. An attempt has been made to explain ethical issues in FA Models, however, significant issues are left out or not all models are included. Score of Effective (Behavioral techniques result in socially significant change), / 2 TotalScore of Module 6 Assignment: Create a Decision Tree Rubric, / 10 Overall Score EXCELLENT 10 points minimum PROFICIENT 5 points minimum DEVELOPING 2.5 p

Review Part 4 “Ethics(new tab)” in Dew and Gould’s Philosophy: A Christian Introduction, p. 223-254. Read the following selections: The article The Dangerous Denial of Sex(new tab) offers a non-Christian defense of a binary perspective on sexual identity. The article Christian Bioethics: Sex and/or Gender?(new tab) provides a Christian defense of a binary perspective on sexual identity. This article Sex Redefined(new tab) espouses the replacement of a binary perspective with a wider “Gender Spectrum” perspective on sexual identity. PLEASE NOTE: You must click the PDF option on the left-side menu to read the article. Do additional research on the “Binary Sex – Gender Spectrum” debate as needed. Access the threaded discussion and in 150-200 words respond to the following. Describe the arguments for both the “Binary Sex” and “Gender Spectrum” perspectives on sexual identity. Explain which view is the best response to this issue

Read the following selections: Part 4 “Ethics”(new tab) in Dew and Gould’s Philosophy: A Christian Introduction, which includes Chapters 16-17. Read this article that summarizes the Top 10 Pro & Con Arguments(new tab) for euthanasia. Read this article which summarizes Arguments For and Against Euthanasia(new tab) and then offers an evaluation of which are most compelling. Watch the following videos: The video Assisted Death & the Value of Life(new tab) provides an overview of pro and con positions on euthanasia. The video What Determines a Person's Value?(new tab) offers reasons to oppose euthanasia. Do additional research on reasons for and/or against euthanasia as needed. Access the threaded discussion and in 150-200 words respond to the following: Describe the arguments for and against euthanasia. Explain which view is the best response to this issue

Instructions Review the Module 7 Lecture and Schalock et. Al. (2011) Quality of Life Model Development and Use in the Field of Intellectual Disability, found in your Course Resources. Use the information to create your own chart and discussion points for each component of your created model. One of the most significant dependent variables, if not the most, is your client’s overall Quality of Life (QOL). This is the section of treatment planning where you discuss the current state of your client’s status – happy, well-adjusted, socially aware, especially in relation to their developmental and chronological age. You obtain this information either from your clients, a standardized questionnaire, or a criteria-based assessment. If your clients are unable to give you this information, you can obtain it from parents/caregivers through the treatment plan/program meeting, or standardized questionnaire, or perhaps both! The discussion points added to each component of the chart could be discussed with parents/guardians, or clients during treatment planning. This chart can be embedded into the actual treatment plan to indicate respect for the client’s overall quality of life; to place the focus on long-term outcomes and to match treatment goals with these quality-of-life indicators. Length: Assignment should be at least 1 page. Criteria Excellent Proficient Developing Criterion Score 3.5 points Quality of Life (QOL) Chart is original and is evident that thought and planning were put into the design and components. At least 4 QOL components are presented in the chart. 2 points Quality of Life (QOL) Chart is original and contains at least 4 QOL components. 0 points Quality of Life (QOL) Chart is submitted. No evidence of thought & planning, nor is it evident this is the original author’s work. Score of Quality of Life Chart, / 3.5 3.5 points At least 2 discussion points per component in the QOL chart are presented. Discussion points are framed in a respectful, professional tone. 2 points At least 1 discussion point per component in the QOL chart are presented. Discussion points are framed in a respectful, professional tone. 0 points Less than 1 point per QOL component is presented. Score of Discussion Points, / 3.5 3 points The chart is arranged in a clear and organized fashion. The format is uncluttered and easy to read. 2 points The chart is fairly organized and easy to read, however, it’s not evident at first what the purpose is. 0 points The chart appears thrown together, not arranged in a clear and organized fashion. The format is cluttered and difficult to read. Score of Clarity & Format, / 3 Score of Module 7 Assignment: Quality of Life Model, / 10 Overall Score EXCELLENT 10 points minimum Proficient 6 points minimum Developing 0 points minimum

Introduction to Ethics Directions: Respond to 3 of the following 8 prompts in typewritten essay format (up to 8 points each). There is no set length requirement, but good answers are usually about 250 – 500 words (1 – 2 double-spaced pages) each. This is a take-home exam, so you are welcome to use any resources available to you, but be sure to include proper citations. Your completed exam should consist of a heading or cover page, three 1-2-page essays, and a works cited or references page. 1. (a) Summarize Plato’s Allegory of the Cave. (b) Analyze the symbolism in the story. 2. (a) Define and describe Philosophy. (b) Are you philosophical? Explain. 3. (a) Define and describe Ethics. (b) Are you ethical? Explain. 4. (a) Who was Socrates? (b) Would Socrates admire your lifestyle? Why or why not? 5. (a) Define and describe moral skepticism. (b) Are you a moral skeptic? Why or why not? 6. (a) Define and describe ethical relativism. (b) What do you think of the theory? Explain. 7. (a) Define and describe divine command theory. (b) Do you find the theory plausible? Why or why not? 8. (a) Define and describe ethical egoism. (b) Do you find the theory plausible? Why or why not?

Course Project: Final Paper Assignment REQUIRED RESOURCES Read/review the following resources for this activity: Textbook: Chapter 13 Lesson Your "Argumentative Paper Checklist" INSTRUCTIONS Course Project Overview Week 7 Assignment This week, all the hard work you have done in researching your topic and issue will come to fruition in your argumentative paper. Address the requirements below to complete your paper: Follow the directions in the assigned textbook reading on how to write an argumentative essay on the issue you chose in Week 1. Write a 4–6 page argumentative essay on your chosen topic. Be sure your essay contains the following: An opening paragraph that states a clear thesis that is focused, plausible, and arguable and that gives direction and purpose to the paper A fair-minded, balanced, and objective development of the pros and cons of the issue in a well-organized sequence of ideas, free of mechanical errors Credible, reliable, and authoritative evidence in support of the points made A minimum of five authoritative sources that support your claim A strong conclusion that summarizes your views, reminds the audience of the issue and its importance, and shows in brief that you have successfully defended your thesis Once you feel you have got the final draft, try to put the paper aside, even for a few hours, and then read it again. Consider these questions when you review your paper: Did you address at least three aspects of the issue you chose? Does each aspect have relevant and authoritative evidence in support of your point? Have you included a view that is in opposition to your viewpoint, and have you answered that opposing view, pointing out its flaws in such a way as to refute it? Edit your paper Look for wordiness, repetition, vagueness, and ambiguity. Check the organization of the paper as a whole; make sure each paragraph maintains focus. After you are satisfied that the content of your paper is good, carefully proofread it and correct mechanical errors. WRITING REQUIREMENTS Length: 4–6 pages (not including title page or references page) 1-inch margins Double spaced 12-point Times New Roman font Title page References page GRADING This activity will be graded using the W7 Course Project Grading Rubric. OUTCOMES CO?4: Evaluate arguments by applying standard tests. CO?5: Evaluate the role of cognitive bias and fallacies of relevance in critical reasoning and decision-making. CO?6: Apply principles of critical reasoning to political, educational, economic, and/or social issues. CO?7: Create a fallacy-free argument that incorporates principles of ethical decision-making. DUE DATE By 11:59 p.m. MT on Sunday Rubric Course Project: Final Paper Rubric Course Project: Final Paper Rubric Criteria Ratings Pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeLength 5 pts Meets length requirement, 4-6 pages 0 pts Does not meet length requirement 5 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFocus and Organization - Clarity 40 pts The essay presents a thesis statement that is exceptionally clear, focused, and effectively guides the reader through the main argument. It succinctly encapsulates the essence of the essay's position and sets a strong foundation for the subsequent discussion. The essay maintains focus throughout. 34 pts The thesis statement is clear and focused, providing a solid foundation for the essay's argument. It effectively outlines the main points of discussion and guides the reader, though there may be minor room for improvement in terms of precision or depth. The essay maintains focus, with few instances of tangential discussion. 28 pts The thesis statement is clear, providing a foundation for the essay's argument. It outlines the main points of discussion. The essay mostly maintains a focus on the throughout, with some instances of tangential discussion. 25 pts The thesis statement lacks clarity and focus, making it difficult for the reader to discern the main argument of the essay. It may be too broad or vague, failing to provide clear guidance for the subsequent discussion. The essay struggles to maintain focus. 0 pts The thesis statement is unclear, unfocused, or entirely absent, hindering the reader's ability to understand the main argument of the essay. Its quality is severely lacking, resulting in a disjointed or confusing presentation of ideas. The essay lacks focus with significant digressions and off-topic discussions that obscure the central argument. 40 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeReasoning 40 pts The essay demonstrates sophisticated reasoning, with well-developed arguments that anticipate and address counter arguments effectively. Logical reasoning and critical thinking skills are consistently applied throughout the essay 34 pts The essay presents sound reasoning, with clear arguments supported by relevant evidence. Counter arguments are addressed. Reasonable inferences support conclusions and there is evidence of good critical thinking skills 28 pts The essay provides reasonable arguments, but there may be gaps in logic or limited consideration of counterarguments. Reasoning is generally sound but may lack depth or complexity. 25 pts The essay lacks coherent reasoning, with weak or unsupported arguments. Counterarguments are either ignored or addressed inadequately, and logical fallacies may be present. 0 pts The essay demonstrates little to no logical reasoning. Arguments are unsupported or based on flawed reasoning, and counterarguments are neither acknowledged nor addressed effectively. 40 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeQuality of Evidential Support 40 pts The essay provides a wealth of relevant and credible evidence to support each argument. Sources are recent, authoritative, and predominantly from scholarly works. Evidence is effectively integrated into the essay and critically analyzed to strengthen the argument. Throughout, contains factual and accurate, detailed, current information to provide strong support for the thesis statement and the topics addressed in the body. 34 pts The essay utilizes a variety of relevant evidence to support arguments. While sources are generally credible, there may be occasional lapses in recency or authority but sources are primarily scholarly. Evidence is mostly well-integrated into the essay. 28 pts The essay presents evidence to support arguments, but there may be instances of insufficient or tangentially related evidence. The integration of sources could be improved for greater effectiveness. Most sources are scholarly. 24 pts The essay lacks sufficient or appropriate evidence to support arguments. Sources may be unreliable or irrelevant, and there is little analysis of evidence provided. There are few or no scholarly sources. 0 pts The essay relies heavily on anecdotal evidence or fails to provide any substantive evidence to support arguments. Sources, if any, are poorly integrated or lack credibility. 40 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCoherence 40 pts The essay demonstrates exceptional coherence, with seamless transitions between ideas and paragraphs. Each paragraph contributes to the overall coherence of the argument, and the flow of the essay enhances readability and comprehension. 34 pts The essay maintains coherence, with clear connections between ideas and paragraphs. Transitions are generally smooth, though there may be occasional lapses that do not significantly detract from the overall coherence. 28 pts The essay exhibits some coherence, but there are noticeable disruptions in the flow of ideas. Transitions between paragraphs may be abrupt or unclear, impacting the overall coherence of the argument. 24 pts The essay lacks coherence, with disjointed or unrelated ideas presented throughout. Transitions between paragraphs are often absent or ineffective, hindering the reader's understanding of the argument. 0 pts The essay is highly disjointed, with little to no coherence between ideas or paragraphs. Transitions are nonexistent or confusing, making it difficult for the reader to discern the argument's progression. 40 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeTone 15 pts The essay maintains a consistently appropriate academic tone throughout, using formal language and demonstrating a thorough understanding of the subject matter. 13 pts The essay generally maintains an appropriate academic tone, with occasional lapses in formality or language usage. Overall, the tone is respectful and scholarly. 9 pts The essay's academic tone is somewhat inconsistent or inappropriate at times. Language may be overly casual or informal, detracting from the overall professionalism of the essay. 7 pts The essay's academic tone is largely inappropriate, with frequent lapses in formality or professionalism. Language may be colloquial or overly subjective, undermining the credibility of the argument. 0 pts The essay's academic tone is consistently inappropriate or absent. Language is highly informal or unprofessional, and the essay may contain slang, personal opinions, or other elements that are not conducive to scholarly discourse. 15 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMechanics: Punctuation, Spelling, and Capitalization 10 pts Virtually free of punctuation, spelling, or capitalization errors. 8 pts Occasional punctuation, spelling, or capitalization errors. 7 pts Many punctuation, spelling, or capitalization errors. Interfere with meaning in some places. 6 pts Punctuation, spelling, or capitalization errors that hinder communication. 0 pts Severe punctuation, spelling and capitalization errors. 10 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAPA Format 10 pts Contains properly formatted APA requirements, all 5 criteria: a. Length: 4-6 pages; b. 1-inch margins ; c. Double spaced; d.12-point Times New Roman font; e.Title page. 8 pts Contains mostly properly formatted APA (3 of the 5 criteria): a. Length: 4-6 pages; b. 1-inch margins ; c. Double spaced; d.12-point Times New Roman font; e.Title page. 7 pts Contains some properly formatted APA (3 of the 5 criteria): a. Length: 4-6 pages; b. 1-inch margins ; c. Double spaced; d.12-point Times New Roman font; e.Title page. 6 pts Contains a few properly formatted APA (2 of the 5 criteria): a. Length: 4-6 pages; b. 1-inch margins ; c. Double spaced; d.12-point Times New Roman font; e.Title page. 0 pts No APA formatting 10 pts Total Points: 200

Use only the assigned materials to craft your responses. Using different versions of the reading will result in a "0" grade. Discussion Prompt (The entire post must be within 300-500 words) Number and respond to all prompt questions below. The total word count should be at least 300 words and no more than 500 words. Aim to be clear and concise. Support your reasoning using only the Post-Truth links above. What is the most convincing explanation for why we are in the so-called "post-truth era"? What is the source of this problem? Explain your reasoning using examples from the Post-Truth links above. Share a personal goal with the class (Lots of things can be a personal goal: something artistic, ethical, political, spiritual, academic, work-related, family-related, personal enrichment related, etc.) Don't forget to write your word count at the end! Use these Post-Truth Materials for Discussion https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-37995600 https://theconversation.com/post-truth-politics-and-why-the-antidote-isnt-simply-fact-checking-and-truth-87364 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lCNkgj-FlE8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o7bkyWV_PU8 The goal is to demonstrate an understanding of the assigned reading by applying course concepts to real world issues. However, perhaps you could cite a small example from an outside source, but it should not be at the expense of addressing the prompt and demonstrating your understanding of the assigned reading. Check with me if you are ever unsure. Do not falsify citations or include fabricated evidence. Assignments that include falsified evidence or AI hallucinations will earn zero (0) points. Number all prompt questions and organize your writing into paragraphs when appropriate. Write your responses in complete sentences--No bullet point list You do not have to include the prompt in your response, but you may if you wish. However, do not reword or summarize the prompt questions. Do not include title pages, separate conclusion paragraphs that repeat what you just said, or section headings. Respond to the prompt only. Formatting: 12 point font, Times New Roman, 1 inch margins Use MLA in-text citationsLinks to an external site. when citing or explaining evidence from the assigned reading/watching. Books and articles: include the author's name and the page number (if applicable). For example, (author-last-name 88). If the chapter or article does not have page numbers, then use the PDF numbering instead. News articles with no page numbers: (source-name) -- for example (The Atlantic). Videos: cite the time-stamp. For example, "Quotation from the assigned video" (author-name X:XX:XX). Direct quotations must be identical to what's written in the text. If you are summarizing the text, then you do not put the summary in quotation marks. Assignments with false quotations will earn a "0" grade. Pro Tip: it's ok to shorten direct quotes from the reading. You can include [...] when you are omitting unnecessary text from the passage to shorten it.

Instructions Review the TRIAD’s extremely thorough guide for embedding social validity into practice, as well as the Carter and Wheeler (2019) document, which presents instruments and methods designed to evaluate social validity. Discuss these models for assessing social validity. How would you embed this process into applied practice? Your initial post should be roughly 150-200 words in length, and your responses to peers should be roughly 100 words each. Posts are due by Sunday. Cite sources you reference in-text and under a “Refe Criteria Level 4 Level 3 Level 2 Level 1 Criterion Score Demonstration o f Knowledge 2 points 1.8 points 1.6 points 1.5 points Score of Demonstration o f Knowledge, / 2 Contribution to the Conversation 2 points 1.8 points 1.6 points 1.5 points Score of Contribution to the Conversation, / 2 Collaboration 1 point 0.9 points 0.8 points 0.75 points Score of Collaboration, / 1 TotalScore of Discussion Rubric 5 points,rences” section in APA format.

Please write a three page essay answering the question “ Can we truly redefine ourselves, or are we always shaped by the choices we’ve made” can you answer this question from Plato’s options and thoughts using the provided text ( I can’t add the link) but its called “The Republic” by Plato and can you use the section - BOOK Vll-

please review the file for directions. I will also upload the abstract that needs to be used as an intro for Prospectus. Do not write it as an essay ( no need to include conclusion). Let me know if you have any questions on the topic. I will also attach a box document that describes the topic more.