Select Page
  

i will post 3 articles that you have to use in the argument. And use three quotes from the book. the book is Benokraitis, N.V. (2014). Marriages and families: Changes, choices, and constraints (8th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education.I want it to be new familys are better and use chapters from 1 through 7. You have to at least write about the other side of the argument.and i posted the grade rubric.and the instruction. I included all what you need to know about the assignment.
position_paper__1_.pptx

student_position_paper_grading_rubric__1_.doc

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
Argumentative Essay New Family is Better than Old Family Homework Help
Just from $10/Page
Order Essay

contentserver.pdf

american_families_are_drifting_apart.pdf

fcsp_framing_paper.40ac19781c8346d59786b2b1cc973fae.pdf

Unformatted Attachment Preview

Position Paper
75 POINTS
Position Paper Overview
•Debatable topic
•Take a position/stand on ONE side
•Given articles to read
•Use research from the textbook
•Grading rubric
Assignment Intro
•Marriage:
• social arrangement (American history)
•provides structure
•provides meaning
•marks entry into adulthood:
• gain economic independence from parents
• leave the family home
• engage in sexual activity
• make their own families
Assignment Intro Continued
•Traditional gender roles provide scripts:
• Work (both inside and outside the home) divided between spouses
• How children are raised
•Over the last 60 years we have seen major shifts in marriage
•What these changes will mean for the future of families:
• Are those changes working against families?
• Are they signs of increased diversity and a need to think more broadly about
what family life means?
Assignment Topic
For this assignment you will need to reflect
on these issues and take a stand on one
side of the argument:
•“Families” are becoming stronger
•“Families” are weakening
Assignment Instructions
•Read assigned articles (will be available electronically through BB)
•After reading articles, determine which side of the debate you align yourself
with.
•Using textbook, find four or more additional pieces of research/information
that further supports the position (beyond what is described in the articles
themselves).
Paper Details
•Your position papers must be:
• APA Format***
• Two to three pages in length
• 12-point font
• Times New Roman font
• Double-spaced lines
• Standard one-inch margins on all sides
•In-text citations MUST include information from:
• All articles
• 4 textbook research/information that further supports the position
Paper Details Continued
•Be sure to include the following (APA format):
• Title page
• Running head
• Page numbers
• In-text citations of fact-based information
• Reference page
Assignment Points
•The full assignment is worth 75 total points:
•65 points (paper)
•10 points (in-class activity)
Grading Rubric
•Created by FMST Assessment Committee
•You will submit paper assignment through
Blackboard using SafeAssign
•This will automatically happen when you submit
•Let’s take a look….
Due Date
Thursday
March 14
11:00am
Name: _________________________________________________________________
SP19 FMST 101 Position Paper Grading Rubric -EHF
Points and Quality Markers
Content (40 Points)
Includes brief description of both of the topic positions
Describes social and cultural characteristics used to
rationalize the weakness position
Describes social and cultural characteristics used to
rationalize the strength position
Evaluates strengths/weaknesses of both positions and
takes a clear stand on one side of the debate
Organization (10 points)
Are the main ideas presented in a clear, concise
manner? Does the content logically follow and work to
develop ideas? Did they transition smoothly from one
section to the next? Were paragraphs well-organized?
Language (15 points)
Is the writing free of grammatical & spelling mistakes?
Have they correctly used APA citations and
referencing?
Poor
The topic is poorly developed.
Supporting details are absent.
Trite ideas and/or unclear
wording reflect a lack of
understanding of topic and
audience.
1
2
3
4
Overall Comments:
Acceptable
Excellent
The topic is evident with some
supporting details, generally
meeting requirements of the
assignment.
Topic is well developed,
effectively supported and
appropriate for the assignment.
Effective, critical thinking is
clearly and creatively expressed.
7
8
9
10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Writing is rambling and
unfocused. Main theme and
supporting details are absent or
unclear.
1
2
3
4
Writing lacks sentence variety.
Significant deficiencies in
wording, spelling, grammar,
punctuation, or presentation.
No citations used.
1
2
3
1
2
4
1
2
3
Writing demonstrates
some grasp of organization
with main theme, supporting
details presented in a
disorganized, unrelated way.
5
6
Needs more sentence variety.
Deficiencies in wording,
spelling, grammar,
punctuation, or presentation.
Too few citations used or
used incorrectly.
5
6
Writing demonstrates
adequate grasp of
organization, with a
discernible theme and
supporting details
7
4
Minimal participation.
Contributions lacked
depth/detail or were entirely
off topic.
5
6
Writing is clearly organized
around a central theme. Each
paragraph is clear and relates to the
others in a well-planned
framework.
8
9
Adequate sentence variety;
adequate use of wording,
grammar, and punctuation.
Cited sources used with some
errors.
7
3
Did not contribute to the debate
or contributed in minor ways.
Other (10 points)
Participated in class activity about topic positions.
Needs Improvement
The topic is not fully evident.
Supporting details are vague.
Unclear ideas or unclear
wording reflect need to
improve understanding of
topic and audience
5
6
8
4
Wide variety of sentence
structures. Excellent word usage,
spelling, grammar, punctuation.
Sources correctly cited using APA.
Effective integration of
information.
9
10
5
Contribution reflected general
understanding of the material
7
10
8
Participated multiple times;
contributed valid points that
reflected critical thinking and
mastery of the readings
9
10
Total Points: __________________
Note: This grading rubric is based on the following: Brenau U. Office of Assessment (2005). Brenau University Writing Skills Assessment Form. Gainesville, GA: Brenau U.
F a m ily S tr e n g th s a n d R e s ilie n c e :
Insights from a National Study
E u g en e C. R o e h lk e p a rta in & A m y K. S yvertsen
The Search Institute conducted a study of family assets by surveying parents and adolescents
on family strengths and challenges. Remarkably, family strengths, particularly relational
factors, are powerfully related to the ability to surmount adversity.
e often have opportunities to talk with
practitioners in education, youth devel­
opment, family services, and other fields about
today’s families. When asked about their own
families, they will most often admit their quirks
and challenges—but they generally express great
appreciation for their families and how they
add meaning, purpose, and joy to their lives.
In contrast, when asked about the families they
serve or the families of the young people they
seek to teach or engage, they often share quite
a different story. There is general consternation
with the perceived state of today’s families and
a defeatist attitude about the chances that they
can effectively engage and work with families
in ways that improve the well-being of the fam­
ily, its children, and the broader community.
Emerging research is stimulating new under­
standing about the strengths of families. These
strengths emphasize relationships and practices
of family life that are malleable and may repre­
sent untapped leverage points for engaging with
families.
W
Study Methodology
The American Family Assets Study (Syvertsen,
Roehlkepartain, & Scales, 2012) focused on fami­
lies with young adolescents (a critical period of
transitions in family relationships), surveying
one parenting adult and one young person (age
10 to 15) in about 1,500 families nationwide. The
survey was developed based on a review of the re­
search on family processes, strengths, resilience,
interviews and focus groups with youth and par­
ents, and input from a national advisory board.
Data were collected online in collaboration with
Harris Interactive. Quotas were set to ensure the
socioeconomic and cultural diversity of families
and the final dataset was weighted to reflect the
U.S. Census.
Search Institute’s framework
of family strengths
Through the years, qualitative researchers have
identified more than 80 different strengths
that are valued in families around the world
(e.g., DeFrain & Asay, 2007). This new study
from Search Institute focused on 21 strengths
that are relevant to diverse families, widely val­
ued, and measurable through online quantita­
tive surveys. The family strengths we identified
(shown in detail in Table 1) are organized in five
categories:

Nurturing Relationships—Healthy rela­
tionships begin and grow as we show each oth­
er we care about what each has to say, how we
feel, and our interests.

Establishing Routines —Shared routines,
traditions, and activities give a dependable
rhythm to family life and help to imbue it with
meaning.

M aintaining Expectations —Each person
participates in and contributes to family life.
Shared expectations require talking about
tough topics.

Adapting to Challenge—Every family faces
difficulties, large and small. The ways families
adapt to those changes together helps them
through adversity.

Connecting to Community —Community
connections, relationships, and participation
sustain, shape, and enrich how families live
their lives together.
A portrait of families with
young adolescents
How are families with young adolescents doing?
We created a composite Family Assets Index, ranges
from o to 100. On average, U.S. families scored 47
out of roo. Dividing families into quartiles pro­
duced this distribution:

Struggling [Index Score: o to 25]
17%

Challenged [Index Score: 26 to 50] 39%

Adequate [Index Score: 51 to 75]
34%

Thriving [Index Score: 76 to 100]
11%
What is surprising to many who have seen the
data is that the overall level of family strengths
does not differ significantly by parent education,
single-parent versus two-parent families, im­
migration status, parents’ sexual orientation, or
household income. At the same time, there are
slight differences by race-ethnicity and different
types of communities. However, the study’s ma­
jor conclusion is that there are more similarities
than differences in overall family strengths across
demographic groups. This reinforces the message
that all types of families have strengths to tap
and challenges to overcome.
14 | reclaiming children and youth www.reclaimingjournal.com
Table i
Search Institute’s Framework of Family Strengths
Search Institute has identified 21 research-based family strengths that directly relate to positive outcomes for
parenting adults and youth. The percentages indicate how many families experience each asset, based on a
study of 1,511 diverse families including at least one parenting adult and one child between the ages of 10 and
15 from across the United States.
Nurturing Relationships
1.
Positive Communication—Family members listen attentively and speak in respectful ways.
56%
2.
Affection—Family members regularly show warmth to each other.
71%
3. Emotional Openness—Family members can be themselves and are comfortable sharing their feelings.
54%
4. Support for Sparks—Family members encourage each other in pursuing their talents and interests.
64%
Establishing Routines
5.
Family Meals—Family members eat meals together most days in a typical week.
58%
6.
Shared Activities—Family members regularly spend time doing everyday activities together.
41%
7.
Meaningful Traditions—Holidays, rituals, and celebrations are part of family life.
51%
8.
Dependability—Family members know what to expect from one another._____________________ 27%
Maintaining Expectations
9.
Openness about Tough Topics—Family members openly discuss sensitive issues,
such as sex and substance use.
60%
10. Fair Rules—Family rules and consequences are reasonable.
44%
11. Defined Boundaries—The family sets limits on what young people can do
and how they spend their time.
28%
12. Clear Expectations—The family openly articulates its expectations for young people.
84%
13. Contributions to Family—Family members help meet each other’s needs
and share in getting things done._____________________________________________________ 57%
Adapting to Challenge
14. Management of Daily Commitments—Family members effectively navigate competing activities
and expectations at home, school, and work.
41%
15. Adaptability—The family adapts well when faced with changes.
28%
16. Problem Solving—Family members work together to solve problems and deal with challenges.
33%
17. Democratic Decision Making—Family members have a say in decisions that affect the family.____ 53%
Connecting to Community
18. Neighborhood Cohesion—Neighbors look out for one another.
33%
19. Relationships with Others—Family members feel close to teachers, coaches, and others in the community.
22%
20. Enriching Activities—Family members participate in programs and activities that deepen their lives.
56%
21. Supportive Resources—Family members have people and places in the community
they can turn to for help._____________________________________________________________45%
Note. Cut-off criterions were selected to best reflect the ideal we strive for in family well-being. The exact cut-off
point for each family strength was determined based on a literature review and previous Search Institute research.
In general, individuals scoring 75% or higher on a family strength—measured using a Likert-type scale—
were considered to have satisfied the criterion for each strength.
summer 2014 volume 23, number 2 | 15
Why family strengths m atter
families with high or low levels of family strengths.
Simply,
do family strengths offset the potential
Most of the family strengths identified in this re­
negative
effects of stresses on family life so youth
search are common sense. This study, though, be­
become
more
resilient in the face of adversity?
gins to show the relationship between these every­
day strengths and key aspects of well-being for both
What we found is that the odds of youth from highyouth and families. The more of these strengths
stressed families achieving the high level of six mea­
youth and parents experience, the better off they
sures
of well-being are significantly greater if they
are in many areas of
experience high lev­
life.1 These general pat­
els of family strengths
terns are illustrated with
Emphasize relationships
when compared to
the measures shown in
their peers in high-risk
Table 2. We found the
more than structure.
families that do not ex­
following:
perience high levels of
family strengths. Thus,
• Young people in families with more strengths
for
example,
youth
in
high-stressed
families who
are more engaged in school, take better care of
experienced
high
levels
of
family
strengths
were
their health, express positive values, and devel­
compared
with
those
experiencing
low
levels
of
op the social competencies they need to thrive.
strengths. Those with family strengths were nine
times more likely to exhibit personal responsibil­
• When parents experience these strengths in
ity, seven times more likely to show self-regulation
their families, they also take better care of their
and school engagement, and five times more likely
physical and mental health and they contrib­
to
show caring behavior.
ute more to their communities.
A key finding is that the levels of family strengths
generally have a much stronger relationship to pos­
itive outcomes than many “fixed” or demographic
factors, such as family structure, socioeconomic
status, and race-ethnicity. For example, depending
on the measure of well-being in question, family
strengths account for between 20 and 30 percent
of the variance in youth well-being, compared to
less than 10 percent of the variance that can be at­
tributed to 10 different demographic measures for
the family and the youth (Roehlkepartain, 2013).
That is good news, because we have the power to
build these strengths, which are malleable even if
circumstances do not change.
Family strengths in the face of adversity
Family resilience involves the capacity to with­
stand adversity and overcome challenges. To exam­
ine resilience, we focused our analysis on a subset
of 207 families (about r percent of the sample) that
reported the highest levels of family stress based on
a new measure of 13 different challenges such as the
death of a parent, a separation or divorce in the fam­
ily, having an accident, being unemployed, being
the victim of crime, dealing with substance abuse
in the family, or imprisonment of a family mem­
ber (Roehlkepartain, 2013). We then calculated the
odds that the young people would experience high
levels of well-being based on whether they were in
1 Because this is a cross-sectional and correlational study, we
cannot establish causality.
These findings provide important, if preliminary,
evidence of the role of family strengths in young
people’s resilience in the face of challenges. Family
relationships, processes, and practices may contrib­
ute to well-being for young people whose families
face sustained challenges (Walsh, 2006). One does
not have to have a perfect, challenge-free life in or­
der to flourish, and many families facing adversity
have the capacities needed to survive, regenerate,
and do well.
Strategies for enhancing
family strengths
Search Institute is seeking opportunities to explore
the impact of this study on families in greater depth
with partners in communities and organizations,
recognizing that the research only points the way
toward innovation, which requires ongoing dia­
logue, experimentation, and refinement over time
to discover what really works. In the meantime,
here are some initial thoughts on the opportunities
this research presents.
Emphasize relationships more than structure. Re­
search, rhetoric, policy, and practice have often fo­
cused on the structure and form of families while
deemphasizing the relational, affective dimensions
of family life. This evidence emphasizes relational
mechanisms as foundational, often underdevel­
oped, pathways for positive growth.
16 | reclaiming children and youth www.reclaimingjournal.com
In contrast to the dominant evidence-based pro­
grams, Li and Julian (2012) propose designing inter­
ventions in which building and strengthening de­
velopmental relationships—“the active ingredient
upon which the effectiveness of other program ele­
ments depend” (p. 163)—is a primary focus. Thus,
“in program design, the focal question ought to be
‘How does a (practice, program, system, or policy)
help to strengthen relationships in the develop­
mental setting?’ ” (p. 163).
Recognize both strengths and challenges. Too often,
research on families has been framed in terms of
their risks or vulnerabilities. Without denying the
challenges families face, a shift to understanding
strengths can increase the self-efficacy in families,
highlighting the potential of resilience in the face
of adversity. This shift in emphasis has tremendous
implications for how programs are designed, how
professionals are equipped, and how funding and
policies are shaped to strengthen rather than label
or shame families because of their risks.
T able 2
Percent of youth and parenting adults who maintain good health and exhibit positive
behaviors and values, by levels of family strengths
a. Youth
Level of Family Strengths
Struggling
Challenged
Adequate
Thriving
Health Behavior Index3
39
48
75
79
Depression6
83
76
72
54
Regulates Emotions and Behaviors0
31
43
60
76
Responsible0
37
58
71
85
Civically Engaged0
24
38
62
86
Socially Responsible0
47
63
81
92
b. Parenting adults
Level of Family Strengths
Struggling
Challenged
Adequate
Thriving
Health Behavior Index3
22
32
52
68
Depression6
71
69
55
25
Stressed as a Parent0
17
13
12
1
Politically Engaged0
5
14
27
35
Family Serves Community6
43
54
70
88
Satisfied with Life0
72
87
94
99
Notes.a Percent who engage in a range of health …
Purchase answer to see full
attachment

Order your essay today and save 10% with the discount code ESSAYHSELP