Assignment 2: Self-Reflection Paper—Recognition of One’s Own Values and Beliefs About the Etiology of Substance Use (20%)

Assignments

Assignment 2: Self-Reflection Paper—Recognition of One’s Own Values and Beliefs About the Etiology of Substance Use (20%)

Note

Recommended due date is the end of Lesson 4.

Submit Assignment

Description

In this assignment, you are asked to clearly articulate your value perspectives on the etiology of substance use and substance use disorders. Although it is a self-reflection paper, it is not personal opinion or a cathartic reveal of who you are. It is an academic self-reflection paper in which you are asked to integrate the themes developed so far in this course into your personal/professional perspectives and existing knowledge. Your paper should draw on the multiple knowledges that you have, including orthodox (scientific, rational, objective) knowledge, your experiential knowledge, and a conscious articulation of your tacit or intuitive knowledge (which may have developed through your own personal and professional experiences). The focus of the paper is on the perspectives you bring to the course and those that emerge while doing the course with respect to the substance use population and the etiology of substance use problems.

This self-reflection paper is an academic paper that draws on the themes and readings from the first 4 weeks of the course. It should be 7–10 pages in length, double-spaced, 11 font, and written using APA style references. Feel free to use subheadings to provide a strong structure for your writing and your Open Learning Faculty Member’s response.

Include the following in your paper:

• An introduction of yourself as a practitioner (or developing practitioner). What are your starting values and beliefs, at the beginning of the course, about the etiology of substance use problems? How did you come to have these beliefs and values? How closely aligned are you to the CCSA competencies, what are your areas of strength, and what are your areas for continued growth? You might want to consider your own, or potential, job requirements in this discussion.
• Your definition of addictions and your perception (based on the evidence) of the etiology of substance use. How would you present/describe the etiology of substance use to an undergraduate nursing/social work student group interested in joining the substance use workforce?
• Since adolescents are a particularly vulnerable population, provide an analysis of their enhanced vulnerability and risk, and the protective factors associated with adolescent substance use.
• A conclusion that includes how your new knowledge gained throughout the course so far has changed your perspectives and/or values, and how this will inform your current (or future) practice.

Criteria for Assessment

Marking Rubric

	Exemplary100%	Excellent85%	Very Good75%	Satisfactory60%	Unsatisfactory40%
Evidence of self-awareness of multiple knowledge, and self-reflexivityValue 20%	Provides analytical response that shows high self-awareness (strengths and areas for continuing growth).Response integrates three types of knowledge into a competency framework. Can clearly articulate her/his values and beliefs about the substance use population and the etiology of substance problems.	Provides analytical response that shows high self-awareness (strengths and areas for continuing growth).Shows high level of awareness of multiple knowledges.   Can articulate a strong argument regarding the values and beliefs about the substance use population and the etiology of substance use problems.	Provides a strong descriptive response that indicates a good degree of self- awareness.Shows some understanding of multiple knowledges.   Describes his/her stances and opinions about the substance use population and the etiology of the substance use problem.   Overall response is descriptive rather than analytical.	Response is primarily descriptive and may be missing linkages to CCSA competencies. Response may not develop a high level of self-awareness.Response may not provide a clear position on values and beliefs about the substance use population or the etiology of substance use problems.         Overall, this is a descriptive response with some missing elements.	Response does not show a strong self-awareness.Response doesn’t clarify clearly her/his values and beliefs about the substance use population or the etiology of substance use problems.   Overall, this response has some missing elements; or it is inconsistent with the values and beliefs expected of an emerging substance use worker.
Definition of Addiction and Perception of EtiologyValue 30%	Definition is succinct and clear and consistent with the material presented.The etiology indicates a well- referenced argument that is multi-factorial.   Written in an analytical style that weaves in all themes and considers co-morbidities.	Definition is succinct and clear and consistent with the material presented.The etiology is clearly presented and linked well to the readings and materials.   Writing is analytical, but themes may not be woven together analytically.	Definition lacks some clarity or is not consistent with the themes provided in the course.The etiology is descriptive but includes a multi- factorial approach.   Overall writing is descriptive and complete.	Definition is not clear or is inconsistent with the themes of course (may be a core component missing)The etiology is not balanced and may be missing some of the key themes of the course   Overall writing is descriptive, but is missing some elements.	Definition may be missing or not consistent with course ideas.  The etiology does not reflect the multi-factorial approach used in the course.   Likely that some major element is missing.
Adolescence EtiologyValue 20%	Provides a strong analysis of adolescent vulnerability from a multi-factorial perspective (and is differentiated from previous section).Pays attention to differing vulnerabilities for different youth groups. Includes a discussion of protective factors.	Provides a clear multi-factorial analysis that is differentiated from the previous discussion.    Provides some inclusive discussion about youth’s differing risk.   Includes a discussion of protective factors.	Provides a strong multi-factorial description that is (for the most part) differentiated from the previous discussion.  May be missing the differing youth risk and/or protective factors.	Discussion is not differentiated clearly from the previous discussion.    Any inclusion of differing youth risk and/or protective factors is very brief and/or missing.	Haven’t captured the differentiation and special vulnerability of adolescence.    Is missing some major elements.
Identification of transformational learningValue 15%	Includes a  conclusion that links to the rest of the body, and indicates clearly how new learning has occurred and how that new learning has changed his/her perspectives and professional practice paradigms.	A conclusion that is linked to the rest of the paper; clearly describes transformational learning; and indicates how this new learning will affect professional practice.	A good descriptive conclusion. Linkage to the rest of the paper might be weak.Shows new learning, but not transformational.Integration into practice is brief.	This section doesn’t flow easily from rest of the paper.Describes some new learning, but this learning not profound or transformational.Minimal, if any, application to practice	The conclusion doesn’t identify the student’s growth in the first part of the course.
Grammar/StructureValue 15%	Written to publishing standards.Structure is strong.   Paragraph/Sentence structure has minimal (less than 5) errors. Breadth of literature included. APA referencing excellent throughout.	Excellent writing. Good flow and a pleasure to read.Organizational structure is strong.   Paragraph/sentence structure good with few errors (5–10).   Good range of literature used. APA referencing very good.	Very good writing that is clear, but primarily descriptive.Organization/ structure of the paper could be strengthened.Paragraph/sentence structure has some errors (10–15).   Literature is limited.   Some APA referencing problems.	Writing is hard to follow.  Organization/Structure of paper is weak.   Many paragraph/sentence structural problems (more than 20). Literature usage is limited. APA referencing weak.	Writing does not provide clarity to the points the student is trying to make.Overall, the writing detracts from the readability.   Extremely limited linkage to the literature.   Inaccurate APA.