List each question you asked, as well as a short, one-paragraph summary of the response you got to each question.

Option #2: Interview a Potential PartnerMost community action plans can benefit from recruiting partners—individuals or organizations that might help with the solution to the public health issue. These partners may have money, special tools or skills, and other resources.

 

For this option, select one person/stakeholder in your community who might have interest or expertise in your community action plan. Remember, a stakeholder is a person with an interest or concern in something. This stakeholder should have a connection to your portfolio topic in your chosen community as this may help you determine who you can interview. Plan a brief interview with this person to run your ideas for an action plan to implement in your community by him or her as you continue drafting your plan. Do not use this interview to verify that this person thinks the issue exists in your community. The existence of the issue should already be evident from your previous research.

Your interviewee could come from the following (don’t be limited by this list):

• Government officials (state, regional, local, or federal)
• Local health/public health department agent(s)
• Non-profits or non-governmental organizations (NGOs). Think broadly. For example, consider national and local organizations (e.g., men and women’s organizations, schools, government-funded services, and volunteer organizations).
• Businesses often help fund or implement community projects.
• Colleges or universities may have grants, special departments, or clubs/organizations.
• Churches or faith-based organizations

Instructions

• Before your interview, list 10 questions about the plan you are developing to tackle an issue in your community. These should be questions that you want to ask the person you have selected to interview.
• Take notes during the interview, in preparation for writing a summary of your conversation.
• After the interview, write a 2-pages summary of the interview, not including the title and reference pages, which are required.
• List each question you asked, as well as a short, one-paragraph summary of the response you got to each question.
• The paper must be formatted correctly using APA 7 style. Remember, all research material used in your paper must be paraphrased and include an in-text citation.
• Your paper must be properly cited and formatted according to the CSU Global Writing Center(Links to an external site.).
• This is an individual paper; however, you should reflect on our Discussion Forums and incorporate ideas from there, as appropriate.
• Be sure you utilize your text appropriately as a reference and cite at least one other credible external reference such as a website or journal article to support your proposed resolution of the case.
• Your external sources can be trade publications(Links to an external site.), government information, newspaper articles, or scholarly or peer-reviewed (Links to an external site.) journal articles. The CSU Global Library is a good place to find these sources.

Submit your paper.

Rubric

BIO201 Mod 4 CT

BIO201 Mod 4 CT
Criteria	Ratings	Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeRequirements	15.0 to >12.0 pts  Meets Expectation Includes all of the required components, as specified in the assignment. 12.0 to >9.0 pts  Approaches Expectation Includes most of the required components, as specified in the assignment. 9.0 to >6.0 pts  Below Expectation Includes some of the required components, as specified in the assignment. 6.0 to >0 pts  Limited Evidence Includes few of the required components, as specified in the assignment.	15.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeContent	15.0 to >12.0 pts  Meets Expectation Demonstrates strong or adequate knowledge of the materials; correctly represents knowledge from the readings and sources. 12.0 to >9.0 pts  Approaches Expectation Some significant but not major errors or omissions in demonstration of knowledge. 9.0 to >6.0 pts  Below Expectation Major errors or omissions in demonstration of knowledge. 6.0 to >0 pts  Limited Evidence Fails to demonstrate knowledge of the materials.	15.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCritical Analysis	10.0 to >8.0 pts  Meets Expectation Provides a strong critical analysis and interpretation of the information given. 8.0 to >6.0 pts  Approaches Expectation Some significant but not major errors or omissions in analysis and interpretation. 6.0 to >4.0 pts  Below Expectation Major errors or omissions in analysis and interpretation. 4.0 to >0 pts  Limited Evidence Fails to provide critical analysis and interpretation of the information given.	10.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDemonstrates college-level proficiency in organization, grammar, and style	10.0 to >8.0 pts  Meets Expectation Project is clearly organized, well written, and in proper format as outlined in the assignment. Strong sentence and paragraph structure; few errors in grammar and spelling. 8.0 to >6.0 pts  Approaches Expectation Project is fairly well organized and written and is in proper format as outlined in the assignment. Reasonably good sentence and paragraph structure; significant number of errors in grammar and spelling. 6.0 to >4.0 pts  Below Expectation Project is poorly organized; does not follow proper paper format. Inconsistent to inadequate sentence and paragraph development; numerous errors in grammar and spelling. 4.0 to >0 pts  Limited Evidence Project is not organized or well written and is not in proper paper format. Poor quality work; unacceptable in terms of grammar and spelling.	10.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDemonstrates proper use of APA style	10.0 to >8.0 pts  Meets Expectation Project contains proper APA formatting, according to the CSU Global Writing Center, with no more than one significant error. 8.0 to >6.0 pts  Approaches Expectation Few errors in APA formatting, according to the CSU Global Writing Center, with no more than two to three significant errors. 6.0 to >4.0 pts  Below Expectation Significant errors in APA formatting, according to the CSU Global Writing Center, with four to five significant errors. 4.0 to >0 pts  Limited Evidence Numerous errors in APA formatting, according to the CSU Global Writing Center, with more than five significant errors.	10.0 pts
Total Points: 60.0

PreviousNext

 

Solution: