| Instructions | |
BackgroundThis assignment challenges you to address a realistic (graduate student) study skills scenario with an evidence‑informed approach by (1) choosing an appropriate framework (preferably an ABA‑based one we discussed in class), (2) using AI to brainstorm how it might help, and (3) verifying/correcting those ideas with recent peer‑reviewed research. InstructionsWhat you will turn in (2 items):
1) Write your scenario. Begin by describing a single graduate student from who is facing a study or test‑taking challenge. In two to four sentences, state the learning context, the specific difficulty (for example, inefficient note‑taking, lack of practice, time management, test anxiety), and at least one cultural or access consideration such as work and family responsibilities, language, cultural variables, learning barriers, or technology constraints. This individual scenario is the anchor for everything that follows. 2) Choose one framework that plausibly fits. Select a behavior‑analytic framework covered in this course. You may use a closely related, interdisciplinary framework if you seek approval from your instructor. In a few sentences, name its key components in plain language and explain why this framework is appropriate for the individual you described. As a reminder, these are the frameworks we discussed: Acceptance and Commitment Training (ACTr) ), Non-Linear Contingency Analysis (NLCA) , Positive Behavioral Interventions And Supports (PBIS), Social Justice , Evidence-Based Practice (EBP), Or Organizational Behavior Management (OBM). 3) Use AI to explain how the framework might help; document results. Ask an AI assistant (e.g., ChatGPT or Claude) to explain how your chosen framework could improve this student’s study/test performance. Ask it to give a few practical strategies, outline pros and cons of the framework, and how the framework complements or conflicts with the ABA and radical behaviorist perspective. Treat the AI’s output as brainstorming, not proof. Document your exact prompt, the tool/model/date/time, a 2–3 bullet summary of the most useful ideas you received, and cite the AI tool. Refer to the slide deck template for more help and suggestions. 4) Check the ideas against recent peer‑reviewed research. Locate at least four peer‑reviewed articles, from the NU Library or Google Scholar, published within the last five to seven years that are relevant to both your framework and this individual’s challenge. Extract one or two findings from each study that speak directly to study or test performance for the learner. 5) Compare the AI output with the literature and explain differences. State where the AI suggestions align with the studies, where they do not, and why you think the differences might occur (for example, model recency, your prompting skill, context mismatch, or over‑generalization by AI). Based on this comparison, refine or replace any AI‑generated strategies so they are consistent with the best available evidence. 6) Conclude — Utility, Limitations, and Final Recommendations Briefly judge, based on your scenario and the peer‑reviewed literature you reviewed, how useful the chosen framework may be. What are the most important limitations of the framework, in this scenario? Base your conclusion on the AI‑vs‑scholarship comparison (where they aligned, where they differed, and why). Finally, state your best 2–3 evidence‑based intervention recommendations for this individual (one sentence each). Keep each recommendation specific to the scenario and clearly tied to the supporting research. 7) Submit your presentation and documentation. Submit a four‑to‑five‑minute recorded VIDEO (not just audio) presentation (Kaltura, PowerPoint, Zoom, or similar) and a copy of your slide deck with written speaker notes. These notes may be within the slides or in a separate document. Include APA‑style references for both the studies and the AI tool, and make sure your notes show the exact AI prompt and the tool/model/date/time used. Students may use the Kaltura software provided, PowerPoint, or other digital presentation tools (such as Zoom) to record their video presentation. Additional ResourcesApplication of Behavioral Frameworks Deck Template.pptx Creating a Video with Kaltura Personal Capture.pdf - Google Drive https://drive.google.com/file/d/1MArb0iPFpp-WaxJ8XMCsx0GK-G21TBdW/viewCriteriaLevel 4 Level 3Level 2 Level 1 Criterion Score Description of Framework (3 points): Clarity and depth of the framework’s description, including its theoretical basis and practical relevance to educational settings. 3 points 2.7 points 2.4 points 2.25 points Score of Description of Framework (3 points): Clarity and depth of the framework’s description, including its theoretical basis and practical relevance to educational settings., / 3 Framework Application Discussion (3 points): Effectiveness in illustrating how the framework addresses the specific academic performance issues of diverse graduate students. 3 points 2.7 points 2.4 points 2.25 points Score of Framework Application Discussion (3 points): Effectiveness in illustrating how the framework addresses the specific academic performance issues of diverse graduate students., / 3 Literature Review (3 points): Comprehensiveness and relevance of the scholarly articles reviewed, and insightfulness of the analysis. 3 points 2.7 points 2.4 points 2.25 points Score of Literature Review (3 points): Comprehensiveness and relevance of the scholarly articles reviewed, and insightfulness of the analysis., / 3 Discrepancies Between AI and Scholarly Work (3 points): Quality of the comparison between AI’s initial findings and scholarly literature, including insightful discussion on discrepancies. 3 points 2.7 points 2.4 points 2.25 points Score of Discrepancies Between AI and Scholarly Work (3 points): Quality of the comparison between AI’s initial findings and scholarly literature, including insightful discussion on discrepancies., / 3 Presentation Quality (3 points): Creativity and clarity in the use of video and content exhibition, effectiveness of communication, and adherence to presentation guidelines. 3 points 2.7 points 2.4 points 2.25 points Score of Presentation Quality (3 points): Creativity and clarity in the use of video and content exhibition, effectiveness of communication, and adherence to presentation guidelines., / 3 TotalScore of Assignment 4 Rubric, / 15 Overall Score Level 4 13.5 points minimum Level 3 12 points minimum Level 2 11.25 points minimum Level 1 0 points minimum |
Philosophy · Studypool