Want create site? With you can do it easy.
Discussion: distinct styles of parenting
Discussion: distinct styles of parenting
Permalink:
Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
Discussion: distinct styles of parenting
Just from $13/Page
Discussion: Four distinct styles of parenting
The textbook highlights four distinct styles of parenting: authoritarian, authoritative, permissive, and uninvolved. Conduct an Internet search to broaden your understanding of these styles.
Write a short essay (500- words) in which you:
First, define each style.
Then, explore each style’s effect on the socioemotional development of a 10-year-old child.
Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.
This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
You are required to submit this assignment to Turnitin. Please refer to the directions in the Student Success Center.
| 30.0 %Each parenting style (authoritarian, authoritative, permissive, and uninvolved) is defined. | Paper omits a definition for each of the parenting styles. Paper does not demonstrate understanding of the topic. | Paper inadequately defines the parenting styles and/or not all styles are defined. Paper demonstrates poor understanding of the topic. | Paper adequately defines each of the four parenting styles. Paper demonstrates a basic understanding of the topic. | Paper clearly defines each parenting style, and the definition is strong with sound analysis and some evidence to support claim. Paper demonstrates understanding that extends beyond the surface the topic. | Paper expertly defines each parenting style, and the definitions are comprehensive and insightful with relevant evidence to support claims. Paper demonstrates an exceptional understanding of the topic. |
| 40.0 %Paper includes a description of each style’s effect on the socioemotional development of a 10- year-old child. | Paper omits or incompletely describes each style’s effect on the socioemotional development of a 10-year-old child. Paper does not demonstrate understanding of the topic. | Paper inadequately describes each style’s effect on the socioemotional development of a 10-year-old child. Paper demonstrates poor understanding of the topic. | Paper adequately describes each style’s effect on the socioemotional development of a 10-year-old child. Paper demonstrates a basic understanding of the topic. | Paper clearly describes each style’s effect on the socioemotional development of a 10-year-old child, and description is strong with sound analysis and some evidence to support claim. Paper demonstrates understanding that extends beyond the surface the topic. | Paper expertly describes each style’s effect on the socioemotional development of a 10-year-old child and description is comprehensive and insightful with relevant evidence to support claims. Paper demonstrates an exceptional understanding of the topic. |
| 20.0 %Organization and Effectiveness | |||||
| 7.0 %Thesis Development and Purpose | Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim. | Thesis and/or main claim are insufficiently developed and/or vague; purpose is not clear. | Thesis and/or main claim are apparent and appropriate to purpose. | Thesis and/or main claim are clear and forecast the development of the paper. It is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose. | Thesis and/or main claim are comprehensive. The essence of the paper is contained within the thesis. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear. |
| 20.0 %Organization and Effectiveness | |||||
| 8.0 %Argument Logic and Construction | Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources. | Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility. | Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis. | Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative. | Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative. |
| 20.0 %Organization and Effectiveness | |||||
| 5.0 %Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) | Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are used. | Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) and/or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied. | Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed. | Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech. | Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English. |
| 10.0 %Format | |||||
| 5.0 %Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) | Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly. | Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent. | Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present. | Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style. | All format elements are correct. |
| 5.0 %Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) | Sources are not documented. | Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors. | Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present. | Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct. | Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error. |
| 100 %Total Weightage | |||||
Did you find apk for android? You can find new and apps.
