Description
Discussion: Interview Format
Despite what you may believe (or may have been told), there is no such thing as one “right” way to do an interview. In fact, there are numerous books written about the various ways of conducting the clinical interview. In actual clinical practice, you will find the format that “works” best for you and addresses your unique strengths and the needs of the client.
In this Discussion, you will practice finding the interview format that works for you and share those ideas with your colleagues for feedback.
Learning Objectives
Students will:
Develop formats for initial interviews of mental health clients
Note: For this Discussion, you are required to complete your initial post before you will be able to view and respond to your colleagues’ postings. Begin by clicking on the “Post to Discussion Question” link and then select “Create Thread” to complete your initial post. Remember, once you click submit, you cannot delete or edit your own posts and cannot post anonymously. Please check your post carefully before clicking Submit!
To prepare for this Discussion:
Review the Learning Resources.
Develop an interview format you would use for an initial interview of a client.
By Day 3
Post:
Attach the interview format document you would use for an initial interview of a client.
Describe what interview format your preceptor uses for the initial interview of a client.
Describe which element of your interview format is most helpful in your practice.
By Day 6
Respond to at least two of your colleagues by constructively critiquing their interview format and providing feedback.
Submission and Grading Information
Grading Criteria
To access your rubric:
Week 1 Discussion Rubric
Post by Day 3 and Respond by Day 6
To participate in this Discussion:
Rubric Detail
Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.
Name: NRNP_6670_Week1_Discussion_Rubric
Grid View
List View
Outstanding Performance Excellent Performance Competent Performance Proficient Performance Room for Improvement
Main Posting: Response to the discusion question is reflecive with critical analysis and synthesis representive of knowledg gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.
44 (44%) – 44 (44%)
* Thoroughly responds to the discusion question(s) *is reflecive with critical analysis and synthesis representive of knowledg gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources. * supported by at least 3 current, credible sources
40 (40%) – 43 (43%)
* Responds to the discusion question(s) *is reflecive with critical analysis and synthesis representive of knowledg gained from the course readings for the module. * 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth * supported by at least 3 credible references
35 (35%) – 39 (39%)
* Responds to most of the discusion question(s) *is somewhat reflecive with critical analysis and synthesis representive of knowledg gained from the course readings for the module. * 50% of post has exceptional depth and breadth * supported by at least 3 credible references
31 (31%) – 34 (34%)
* Responds to some of the discusion question(s) * one to two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addresed *is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis *somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. * post is cited with fewer than 2 credible references
0 (0%) – 30 (30%)
* Does not respond to the discusion question(s) * lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria *lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis *does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. * contains only 1 or no credible references
Main Posting: Writing
6 (6%) – 6 (6%)
* Written clearly and concisely * Contains no grammatical or spelling errors * Fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style
5.5 (5.5%) – 5.5 (5.5%)
* Written clearly and concisely * May contain one or no grammatical or spelling error * Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
* Written concisely * May contain one to two grammatical or spelling error * Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style
4 (4%) – 5 (5%)
*Writtten somewhat concisely * May contain more than two2 spelling or grammatical errors * Contains some APA formatting erros
0 (0%) – 4 (4%)
* Not written clearly or concisely * Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors * Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style
Main Posting: Timely and full participation
10 (10%) – 10 (10%)
* meets requirements for timely and full participation * posts main discussion by due date
0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
0 (0%) – 6 (6%)
* does not meet requirement for full participation
First Reponse
Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.
9 (9%) – 9 (9%)
* response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings * responds to questions posed by faculty * the use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives
8.5 (8.5%) – 8.5 (8.5%)
* response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings
7.5 (7.5%) – 8 (8%)
* response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting
6.5 (6.5%) – 7 (7%)
* response is on topic, may have some depth
0 (0%) – 6 (6%)
* reponse may not be on topic, lacks depth
First Reponse: Writing
6 (6%) – 6 (6%)
* Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues * Response to faculty questions are fully answered if posed * Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources * Response is effectively written in Standard Edited English
5.5 (5.5%) – 5.5 (5.5%)
* Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues * Response to faculty questions are answered if posed * Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources * Response is effectively written in Standard Edited English
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
* Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues * Response to faculty questions are mostly answered if posed * Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources * Response is written in Standard Edited English
4.5 (4.5%) – 4.5 (4.5%)
* Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication * Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered if posed * Few or no credible sources are cited
0 (0%) – 4 (4%)
* Responses posted in the discussion lack effective * Response to faculty questions are missing * No credible sources are cited