Learning outcomes:
ILO4: Implement mental health nursing care informed by psychotherapeutic practice, neuroplasticity, psychological trauma, and recovery orientation.
ILO8: Use psychotherapeutic theory and practice to develop a meaningful formulation.
Criteria for assessment
In this assessment task you are required to write an academic essay based on a formulation of a psychotherapeutic session(s). You will be exploring the psychotherapeutic elements of a therapy session(s). The formulation should include the process of establishing a therapeutic relationship to understand the consumer’s narrative (for example, life events, social circumstance, relationships with others), the consumer’s explanation of the causes of their presentation and/or issue, and your explanation of the causes of their presentation and/or issue as a therapist. You will need to demonstrate an understanding of the psychotherapeutic relationship, power and its relationship in therapy, mutuality and connectedness, recovery alliance, and the use of trauma-informed principles of care. The essay should have contemporary and relevant evidence-based literature to support all formulations and clinical decision making.
The formulation can be based on a de-identified consumer. You are not required to provide the therapy session, but to access de-identified clinical information that will support your formulation of a session(s).
To ensure you do not breach consumer and/or carer/family confidentiality, you must make sure there are no identifiable factors, such as no consumer/carer or family member’s name, date of birth, address, dates of admission, health service, staff members associated with the consumer care, and any medical/clinical record dates. If you are unsure of any requirements re: breach of confidentiality, please review Maintaining confidentiality ( a guide for students): Psychotherapy Essentials (NURS90141_2021_SEP (Online)) (unimelb.edu.au)
In preparation for this task, you will need to:
1. Make use of the resources available in each module to support your understanding of the content discussed.
2. Attend the webinar in week 7 to gain a greater understanding of the requirements of the task and provides an opportunity for you to discuss this assessment task with your teacher and your peers.
3. Review the rubric to ensure you have a clear understanding of the criteria for marking.
4. Correctly apply academic rules of grammar, spelling and punctuation, and use APA 7th edition style referencing.
5. Upload your file onto Canvas using the Start Assignment button in the top right-hand corner of this page. Ensure you have followed the process for submissions as per university guidelines for submission. Refer to the LMS for assistance.
6. Check the TurnItIn similarity report for the assignment prior to submission.
7. Submit your essay before the due date and time.
Marking
You will be marked according to the rubric provided. The rubric will indicate a mark out of 50 marks that will be converted to 50 per cent.
Plagiarism declaration
By submitting work for assessment I hereby declare that I understand the University’s policy on academic integrity and that the work submitted is original and solely my work, and that I have not been assisted by any other person (collusion) apart from where the submitted work is for a designated collaborative task, in which case the individual contributions are indicated. I also declare that I have not used any sources without proper acknowledgment (plagiarism). Where the submitted work is a computer program or code, I further declare that any copied code is declared in comments identifying the source at the start of the program or in a header file, that comments inline identify the start and end of the copied code, and that any modifications to code sources elsewhere are commented upon as to the nature of the modification.
Rubric
NURS90141 Assessment task 3: Formulation
NURS90141 Assessment task 3: Formulation
Criteria Ratings Pts
Introduction 5 pts
Outstanding H1: 80–100%
Articulately outlines the key elements of the essay by clearly introducing and explaining what the essay intends to cover. The introduction is of excellent quality, and the parameters and scope are clearly specified with deep reasoning. 4 pts
High standard H2A: 75–79% H2B: 70–74
Outlines key elements of the essay by introducing and explaining what the essay intends to cover. The introduction is of high quality, and the parameters and scope are specified with moderate reasoning. 3 pts
Sound work H3: 65–69%
Outlines some key elements of the essay, introducing and explaining what the essay intends to cover. The introduction is reasonably good quality and the parameters are specified with some reasoning. 2.5 pts
Satisfactory Pass: 50–64%
Outlines minimal key elements of the essay, by introducing what the essay intends to cover. The introduction is of adequate quality; however, the parameters are not clearly specified and there is no associated reasoning. 2 pts
Unsatisfactory work Fail: 49%
Fails to outline the key elements of the essay. The introduction is of poor quality, either too long or brief and does not state the parameter of what it intends to cover.
5 pts
Content 20 to 18.0 pts
Outstanding H1: 80–100%
Demonstrates a high level of formulation by: emphasising the consumer narrative and an exploration of the consumer’s explanatory model; demonstrating a high level of understanding of the psychotherapeutic relationship, power and its relationship in therapy, mutuality and connectedness, recovery alliance, and trauma informed principles of care; accessing contemporary and relevant evidence-based literature to support all formulations and clinical decision making; exploring with reasoning the relationship between the theory and practice; and seeks to explore and analyse concepts on all occasions. 18 to 16.0 pts
High standard H2A: 75–79% H2B: 70–74
Demonstrates a moderate level of formulation by: stating the importance the consumer narrative and an exploration of the consumer’s explanatory model; demonstrating a moderate level of understanding of the psychotherapeutic relationship, power and its relationship in therapy, mutuality and connectedness, recovery alliance, and trauma informed principles of care; accessing contemporary evidence-based literature to support nearly all parts of the formulation and clinical decision making; exploring with reasoning the relationship between the theory and practice; and moderately seeks to explore and analyse concepts. 16 to 13.0 pts
Sound work H3: 65–69%
Demonstrates a reasonable level of formulation by: stating the consumer narrative and consideration to the consumer’s explanatory model; demonstrating a reasonable level of understanding of the psychotherapeutic relationship, power and its relationship in therapy, mutuality and connectedness, recovery alliance, and trauma informed principles of care; accessing evidence-based literature to support parts of the formulation and clinical decision making; exploring with some reasoning the relationship between the theory and practice; and reasonably seeks to explore and analyse concepts. 13 to 10.0 pts
Satisfactory Pass: 50–64%
Demonstrates some level of formulation by: incorporating the consumer narrative; demonstrating some level of understanding of the psychotherapeutic relationship, power and its relationship in therapy, mutuality and connectedness; however, it fails to discuss recovery alliance and trauma informed principles of care, accessing minimal evidence-based literature to support the formulation and clinical decision making; exploring with little reasoning the relationship between the theory and practice, and minimally seeks to explore and analyse concepts. 10 to 0 pts
Unsatisfactory work Fail: 49%
Fails to demonstrate any evidence of formulation by not addressing the consumer narrative, not demonstrating an understanding of any of the psychotherapeutic relationship, and not accessing evidence or exploring theory and practice.
20 pts
Critical analysis 15 to 13.0 pts
Outstanding H1: 80–100%
There is evidence of a strong critical analysis of the relationship between theory and practice. The academic writing demonstrates extensive reading in psychotherapeutic concepts and relationships. Critically and thoroughly examinines the formulation by accurately reflecting on all information discussed, exploring areas of improvement to improve therapeutic outcomes, analysing their own personal learnings, and considering alternatives and multiple perspectives with evidence. 13 to 11.5 pts
High standard H2A: 75–79% H2B: 70–74
There is evidence of moderate critical analysis of the relationship between theory and practice. The academic writing demonstrates reasonable reading in psychotherapeutic concepts and relationships. Critically examinines the formulation by reflecting on nearly all information discussed, exploring areas of improvement to improve therapeutic outcomes and analysing own personal learnings considering alternatives. 11.5 to 9.5 pts
Sound work H3: 65–69%
There is evidence of some critical analysis of the relationship between theory and practice. The academic writing demonstrates some reading in psychotherapeutic concepts and relationships. Examines the formulation by reflecting on parts of information discussed, exploring some areas of improvement and states own personal learnings but does not consider alternatives. 9.5 to 7.5 pts
Satisfactory Pass: 50–64%
There is evidence of minimal analysis of the relationship between theory and practice. The writing demonstrates limited reading in psychotherapeutic concepts and relationships. Makes attempts to examine the formulation by reflecting on some areas, but little evidence of the need to improve or provide personal learnings. 7.5 to 0 pts
Unsatisfactory work Fail: 49%
There is no evidence of analysis of the relationship between theory and practice. There is no demonstration in reading in psychotherapeutic concepts and relationships. No attempts to examine the formulation.
15 pts
Academic writing: grammar, spelling and punctuation 2.5 pts
Outstanding H1: 80–100%
Presents ideas that are highly logical. Uses mental health terminology throughout the discussion and within context. Correctly applies academic rules of grammar, spelling and punctuation. 2 pts
High standard H2A: 75–79% H2B: 70–74
Presents ideas that are moderately logical. Uses mental health terminology on nearly all occasions throughout the discussion and within context. Correctly applies academic rules of grammar, spelling and punctuation. 1.5 pts
Sound work H3: 65–69%
Presents ideas that are logical. Uses mental health terminology on most occasions throughout the discussion and within context. Mostly applies correct academic rules of grammar, spelling and punctuation. 1.25 pts
Satisfactory Pass: 50–64%
Presents ideas that are minimally logical. Uses mental health terminology rarely throughout the discussion and within context. Correctly applies some academic rules of grammar, spelling and punctuation. 1 pts
Unsatisfactory work Fail: 49%
Fails to present logical ideas, use mental health terminology, and/or apply academic rules of grammar, spelling and/ or punctuation.
2.5 pts
Sources and referencing 2.5 pts
Outstanding H1: 80–100%
Uses credible, contemporary and relevant references. This includes mostly peer-reviewed journal articles. Accurate use of APA 7th edition citation referencing style (as set out in Re:cite) on all occasions. In-text referencing and reference list demonstrate a high level of consistency and are formatted correctly and according to APA guidelines. 2 pts
High standard H2A: 75–79% H2B: 70–74
Uses mostly credible, contemporary and relevant references. This includes mostly peer-reviewed journal articles and few grey literature. Accurate use of APA 7th edition citation referencing style (as set out in Re:cite) on nearly all occasions. In-text referencing and reference list demonstrate a moderate level of consistency and are formatted correctly and according to APA guidelines. 1.5 pts
Sound work H3: 65–69%
Uses some relevant references. More use of grey literature than journal articles cited. Accurate use of APA 7th edition citation referencing style (as set out in Re:cite) on some occasions. In-text referencing is good but reference list has some inconsistent adherence with APA guidelines. Some references are more than five years old. 1.25 pts
Satisfactory Pass: 50–64%
Uses limited relevant references and mostly grey literature cited. Minimal accurate APA 7th edition citation referencing. In-text referencing and reference list is inconsistent with the APA guidelines. Many references are more than five years old. 1 pts
Unsatisfactory work Fail: 49%
Fails to use APA 7th edition references both in text and in the reference list. Many inconsistencies with referencing overall.
2.5 pts
Conclusion 5 pts
Outstanding H1: 80–100%
Articulately summarises the main points of the essay and succinctly restates the reasoning and critical analysis. The submission’s conclusion is of excellent quality and links well to the essay. 4 pts
High standard H2A: 75–79% H2B: 70–74
Summarises the main points of the essay and concisely restates the reasoning and critical points. The submission’s conclusion is of high quality, and links well to the essay. 3 pts
Sound work H3: 65–69%
Summarises some of the main points of the essay and restates the reasoning. The submission’s conclusion is of reasonably good quality and links to the essay. 2.5 pts
Satisfactory Pass: 50–64%
States a main point of the essay. The submission’s conclusion is of adequate quality, but does not clearly link to the essay. 2 pts
Unsatisfactory work Fail: 49%
Fails to summarise or state the main point of the essay. Reintroduces new topics to the essay. The submission’s conclusion is of poor quality and not linked to the essay.
5 pts
Total Points: 50