PYSC 3310 UTA Psychology Infant Brain Development and Child Care Settings Paper

Paper Assignment Guidelines
The goal of the four paper assignments you will write this semester is to strengthen your library skills, critical
thinking and analytical skills, and knowledge of the key issues within the developmental psychology literature.
Responses to each paper assignment should not be based on your opinion but based on the information in your
textbook and peer-reviewed research. Each paper assignment should be 4 pages long, double-spaced, 12-point
Times New Roman Font and in APA Format (abstract is not necessary). Up to 10 additional points will be
deducted from papers that are not in APA formatting and/or have grammatical errors that affect readability. In
addition to any sources that are provided within the paper assignment, for each assignment you will be
responsible for finding three additional peer-reviewed sources to help you develop and support your
response. When writing your paper assignments, please remember that your point of view should be informed
and supported by peer-reviewed research. To receive credit for your work please provide a reference page in
APA format for all the sources you used in your paper assignment. The reference page does not count toward
the page requirement for paper assignments. To assist you in writing your paper assignments, please review the
‘Paper Assignment Help’ pdf file on Canvas and the grading rubric that is posted on Canvas and found at the
end of the instructions for each paper assignment (the rubric is the same for all paper assignments).
Note: All paper assignments that you complete in this course will be processed using the anti-plagiarism software,
UniCheck. This software is integrated with Canvas and will give you a similarity score for your assignments that
will be visible to both you and your professor. If there are instances where your writing is similar to, or matches
against, a source within the database, it will be flag for your professor to review. Any work that is submitted that
has a similarity score over 25% will not be graded and will receive a zero. You can see your similarity score as
soon as you submit your assignment. In the event that your similarity score is too high, you may revise your
document and resubmit your assignment up until the assignment is due.
Paper Assignment #1 (50 pts)
Infant Brain Development and Child-Care Settings
This activity reviews research studies regarding infant brain development and applies the research findings to
the development of an infant child-care setting.
•
Using research articles and your textbook, identify how the brain develops during the first year of life.
Explain how experiences influence brain development.
•
Develop a child-care program for infants that would facilitate infant brain/perceptual development. The
child-care program should be based on suggestions from current research findings that would enhance
infants’ development. For example, you will want to consider what toys would be appropriate for infants of
different ages, and decide how you would decorate the setting. More stimulation is not always better.
Paper Assignment Rubric
Critical thinking is a habit of mind characterized by the comprehensive exploration of issues, ideas, artifacts, and events before accepting or
formulating an opinion or conclusion.
Explanation of issues
(5 pts)
Evidence
(10 pts)
Selecting and using
information to investigate
a point of view or
conclusion
Sources
(5 pts)
Influence of context and
assumptions
(10 pts)
Student’s position—
perspective,
thesis/hypothesis
(10 pts)
Conclusions and related
outcomes—implications
and consequences
(10 pts)
Excellent
Good
Okay
Needs Improvement
Issue/problem to be considered
critically is stated clearly and
described comprehensively,
delivering all relevant information
necessary for full understanding.
(5 pts)
Demonstrates skillful use of highquality, peer-reviewed, relevant
sources to develop ideas with
enough interpretation/evaluation to
develop a comprehensive analysis
of the issue. Viewpoints of experts
are questioned thoroughly. (10 pts)
Issue/problem to be considered
critically is stated, described, and
clarified so that understanding is
not seriously impeded by
omissions. (4 pts)
Issue/problem to be considered
critically is stated without
clarification or description. (2 pts)
Number of required peer-reviewed
sources is met (5 pts)
Thoroughly (systematically and
methodically) analyzes own and
others’ assumptions and carefully
evaluates the relevance of contexts
when presenting a position. (10
pts)
Specific position (perspective,
thesis/hypothesis) is imaginative,
taking into account the
complexities of an issue.
Limits of position (perspective,
thesis/hypothesis) are
acknowledged.
Others’ points of view are
synthesized within position
(perspective, thesis/hypothesis).
(10 pts)
Conclusions and related outcomes
(consequences and implications)
are logical and reflect student’s
informed evaluation and ability to
place evidence and perspectives
discussed in priority order. (10 pts)
Missing one required peerreviewed source. (4 pts)
Identifies own and others’
assumptions and several relevant
contexts when presenting a
position. (8 pts)
Issue/problem to be considered
critically is stated but description
leaves some terms undefined,
ambiguities unexplored,
boundaries undetermined, and/or
backgrounds unknown. (3 pts)
Demonstrates an attempt to use
credible and/or relevant sources to
support ideas with some
interpretation/evaluation, but not
enough to develop a coherent
analysis. Viewpoints of experts
are taken as mostly fact, with little
questioning. (6 pts)
Missing two required peerreviewed sources. (3 pts)
Questions some assumptions.
Identifies several relevant
contexts when presenting a
position. May be more aware of
others’ assumptions than one’s
own (or vice versa). (6 pts)
Specific position (perspective,
thesis/hypothesis) acknowledges
different sides of an issue. (6 pts)
Conclusion is logically tied to
information (because information
is chosen to fit the desired
conclusion); some related
outcomes (consequences and
implications) are identified
clearly. (6 pts)
Conclusion is inconsistently tied
to some of the information
discussed; related outcomes
(consequences and implications)
are oversimplified. (4 pts)
Demonstrates consistent use of
peer-reviewed, relevant sources to
support ideas with enough
interpretation/evaluation to
develop a coherent analysis.
Viewpoints of experts are subject
to questioning. (8 pts)
Specific position (perspective,
thesis/hypothesis) takes into
account the complexities of an
issue. Others’ points of view are
acknowledged within position
(perspective, thesis/hypothesis).
(8 pts)
Conclusion is logically tied to a
range of information, including
opposing viewpoints; related
outcomes (consequences and
implications) are identified
clearly. (8 pts)
Demonstrates an attempt to use
sources to support ideas in the
writing. Information is taken from
source(s) without any
interpretation/evaluation.
Viewpoints of experts are taken as
fact, without question. (4 pts)
Missing more than three peerreviewed sources. (2 pts)
Shows an emerging awareness of
present assumptions (sometimes
labels assertions as assumptions).
Begins to identify some contexts
when presenting a position. (4
pts)
Specific position (perspective,
thesis/hypothesis) is stated, but is
simplistic and obvious. (4 pts)