The Iterative Nature of the Dissertation ProcessTo this point, being a graduate student has involved reading assignments, writing papers, and perhaps taking exams and may not have been very different from your undergraduate course work. The dissertation, on the other hand, is a new kind of academic project, unlike anything else you have done. The dissertation is the independent academic project that marks your transition from student to scholar. In addition, the dissertation process is iterative in nature. To Prepare:Review Part 1 of the Dissertation Guidebook (Dissertation Process) found in this week’s Learning ResourceslpostPost and explain what is meant by the cyclical or iterative nature of writing a dissertation.How does this concept impact how you approach working on the prospectus, proposal, final dissertation? Describe how this iterative process is integral to your working relationship with your chair.We need to fix the problem statement Probabli the name too I am sending the instructor feedbak

Assignment ContentImagine you work in a correctional institution and have been asked to create a strategy plan for working with specific correctional populations. Your supervisor would like you to create an executive summary of your strategy.Select 1 correctional population to focus on.Write a 700-word executive summary in which you:Describe elements in the classification process. Explain the importance of proper classification.Discuss what challenges are associated with special populations, such as mental ill and elderly, in the prison system. Provide examples.Explain strategies or considerations that are used to service special populations. Submit your assignment.

Details:Part One: Read "Topic 2: Vargas Case Study." Complete a Cultural Formulation Interview based on the “Cultural Formulation” section in the DSM-5 and given the new information learned in session two of the Vargas case study. Refer to the attached CFI form for guidance and complete the CFI template.Include a citation for the Cultural Formulation Interview. APA format is not required, but solid academic writing is expected.Part Two: Review the Topic 2: Vargas Family Case Study. Write a 750-1,000-word paper in which you demonstrate how therapists apply psychoanalytic and cognitive-behavioral theories to analyze the presenting problem(s) and choose appropriate interventions.Be sure to answer the following questions in your paper: What are the two main presenting problems for the Vargas family?How are the problems maintained according to: a) The psychoanalytic perspective? b) The cognitive-behavioral perspective?What interventions would you plan to use in your next session?From the psychoanalytic perspective (identify and describe your plan for two interventions)From the cognitive-behavioral perspective (identify and describe your plan for two interventions) Cite at least three academic sources (peer-reviewed journal articles, books, etc.).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. Refer to the directions in the Student Success Center.This assignment meets the following CACREP Standard: 5.F.2.g. Impact of crisis and trauma on marriages, couples, and families.RUBRICnsatisfactory0.00%2Less than Satisfactory74.00%3Satisfactory79.00%4Good87.00%5Excellent100.00%70.0 %Content 10.0 %Part One: Cultural Formulation InterviewThe assignment omits a copy of a completed cultural formulation interview.The cultural formulation interview is vague and/or incorrect.The cultural formulation interview is complete and included with the assignment.The completion of the cultural formulation interview shows an advanced understanding of the course content.The completion of the cultural formulation interview provides a comprehensive understanding of the course content.20.0 %Part Two: Two Main Presenting ProblemsThe paper does not discuss two main presenting problems for the Vargas family and does not make any connections through scholarly, academic research.The paper vaguely discusses two main presenting problems for the Vargas family and makes few connections through scholarly, academic research.The paper fully discusses two main presenting problems for the Vargas family and makes clear connections through scholarly, academic research.The paper provides an advanced discussion of two main presenting problems for the Vargas family and makes sound connections through scholarly, academic research.The paper provides a comprehensive discussion of two main presenting problems for the Vargas family and makes insightful connections through scholarly, academic research.20.0 %Part Two: How Problems are MaintainedThe paper does not discuss how the problems are maintained according to the psychoanalytic and cognitive-behavioral perspectives for the Vargas family and does not make any connections through scholarly, academic research.The paper vaguely discusses how the problems are maintained according to the psychoanalytic and cognitive-behavioral perspectives for the Vargas family and makes few connections through scholarly, academic research.The paper fully discusses how the problems are maintained according to the psychoanalytic and cognitive-behavioral perspectives for the Vargas family and makes clear connections through scholarly, academic research.The paper provides an advanced discussion on how the problems are maintained according to the psychoanalytic and cognitive-behavioral perspectives for the Vargas family and makes sound connections through scholarly, academic research.The paper provides a comprehensive discussion on how the problems are maintained according to the psychoanalytic and cognitive-behavioral perspectives for the Vargas family and makes insightful connections through scholarly, academic research.20.0 %Part Two: Interventions Planned for Next SessionThe paper does not discuss two interventions from the psychoanalytic and cognitive-behavioral perspectives to use in the next session with the Vargas family and does not make any connections through scholarly, academic research.The paper vaguely discusses two interventions from the psychoanalytic and cognitive-behavioral perspectives to use in the next session with the Vargas family and makes few connections through scholarly, academic research.The paper fully discusses two interventions from the psychoanalytic and cognitive-behavioral perspectives to use in the next session with the Vargas family and makes clear connections through scholarly, academic research.The paper provides an advanced discussion of two interventions from the psychoanalytic and cognitive-behavioral perspectives to use in the next session with the Vargas family and makes sound connections through scholarly, academic research.The paper provides a comprehensive discussion of two interventions from the psychoanalytic and cognitive-behavioral perspectives to use in the next session with the Vargas family and makes insightful connections through scholarly, academic research.20.0 %Organization and Effectiveness 7.0 %Thesis Development and PurposePaper 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.8.0 %Argument Logic and ConstructionStatement 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.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 %Research Citations (in-text citations for paraphrasing and direct quotes, and reference page listing and formatting, as appropriate to assignment and style)No reference page is included. No citations are used.Reference page is present. Citations are inconsistently used.Reference page is included and lists sources used in the paper. Sources are appropriately documented, although some errors may be present.Reference page is present and fully inclusive of all cited sources. Documentation is appropriate and citation style is usually correct.In-text citations and a reference page are complete and correct. The documentation of cited sources is free of error.100 %Total Weightage PCN-521 Topic 2: Vargas Case StudyElizabeth arrives on time with Frank and Heidi for the second session. Elizabeth appears somewhat frazzled and tells you that she had just heard from Bob who said he would be “a little late” because he “lost track of time.” You note Elizabeth’s frustration which she confirms by saying this is “typical.” She proceeds to share that she feels “completely disregarded,” especially after having shared with Bob the night before how important these sessions are to her. You notice that Heidi seems upset as well and looks as if she has been crying. You ask her how her day is going and she tearfully tells you that Frankie tore up her school paper with the gold star on it. Elizabeth elaborates that Frank had become angry and ripped up the picture that Heidi was proudly sharing with her. Frank, who had gone directly to the Legos, appears oblivious to the others in the room. When you ask him about his sister’s sadness, he replies, “Who cares? She always gets gold stars!”As you were about to further explore these feelings, Bob arrives stating, “She probably told you I’m always late, but hey, at least I’m consistent.” You notice Elizabeth’s eye rolling and direct your attention to the children, asking them about what brought them to your office. Heidi says, “I’m good but Frankie’s bad at school, and it makes Mommy and Daddy fight.” Frank, who had helped himself to one of your books to use as a car ramp argues, “I hate school. It’s boring and my teacher is mean.” Bob attributes Frank’s boredom to being “too smart for the second grade…what do they expect?” Elizabeth responds that they, like her, expect him to follow rules and be respectful, and suggests that Bob should share those same expectations. Bob dismisses Elizabeth’s concerns by saying, “He’s a normal boy, not like all your friends from work who you say are “creative.” You notice Elizabeth’s reaction and decide to redirect your attention to Frank. You ask him what bothers him most about school, to which he replies, “I get in trouble, then I don’t get to have all the recess time, then I can’t play soccer because they already started and they won’t let me play.” You notice Frank’s interest in sports and probe for more information. You learn that he is quite athletic and has been asked to join a competitive youth soccer team that plays on Saturdays and Sundays. You discover another source of discord when Elizabeth shares that Bob “feels strongly” that Sundays are to be spent only at church and with family. Bob confirms that after church on Sundays, they spend the rest of the day with his parents, siblings, nieces, and nephews. Elizabeth says that Sunday mornings are the only time she gets to be by herself and that she typically joins the family around 1:00. Bob adds, “Apparently Liz needs time to herself more than she needs God and her family,” and suggests she should appreciate his family more because “it’s the only family she has.” As the session comes to a close, you share your observations of the family by noting their common goal of wanting to enjoy family time together. You also suggest that while Frank’s behavior challenges are concerning, perhaps you could focus next week on learning more about each parent’s family of origin in hopes of gaining a better understanding of the couple’s relationship.