Petition Letter
Hi,
My name is Bailey Kaye and I am appealing the marks of short answer questions 2,5,6, and long answer question 1 on the winter term PSYC 100 exam.
On short answer question number 2, I lost 0.5 marks for my description of the parenting-temperament interaction. In my answer, I described that a child with secure attachment will be uncomfortable and display signs of distress when the parent leaves, but find comfort upon the return of the parent. According to week 16 online lesson slide 37, ¿¿They are unlikely to be comforted by the stranger in the caregiver¿¿s absence but become calm when the caregiver returns¿. I believe that my description of this behaviour is of the same information, thus the loss of the mark is unjust.
On short answer question number 5, I received ¿¿0/1 for the why¿. I stated that in order for a clinical psychology to develop a proper treatment plan, they would need to know the individual¿¿s family history, as well as their own mental health history, for which I received the full marks. In terms of the of the why, I explicitly stated that the family history would be relevant to develop a proper treatment plan because it provides the clinical psychologist as it guides the psychologist as to a possible reason for them experiencing their symptoms. For the individual¿¿s personal history, I stated that it was important to acquire that information because a diagnosis for the patient may have already been made by another clinician, and/or inform the clinical psychologist of medications used or not used in the past, which may influence what the choose to treat their client with. This explains the ¿¿why¿ behind my statements, therefore I believe that the loss of the mark is lacking in basis.
On short answer question number 6, I lost 0.25 ¿¿for not correctly describing the correct rationale for cognitive therapy¿. The question made clear that Rebecca was experiencing a phobia, thus the choice of cognitive therapy was because of this. As described in the online lesson for week 23, ¿¿systematic desensitization is a very effective type of exposure therapy, especially for phobias¿. I described that Rebecca needed to slowly be exposed to her phobia in order to overcome it, therefore providing the rationale for cognitive therapy. I went on to describe how she could be slowly exposed to it, also proving I have a clear understanding, which I believe deserves the mark.
On long answer question 1, I received a mark of 1/2 for my explanation on why the same job stress may not be expressed the same way in both people. In my re-mark, I was told, ¿¿you mention personality differences, but there are others¿. This is an unfair assessment of my answer because I did not only discuss personality as described, but I also explained that genetic predisposition to PTSD would also be a factor in why one of the paramedics would be diagnosed and the other not. Since the criticism of the question was that personality was not the only factor for why the same job stress may impact 2 people differently, but I did in fact provide another possible reason for this, it is my opinion that this mark has been earned.
Thanks very much,
Bailey Kaye
20021344
My name is Bailey Kaye and I am appealing the marks of short answer questions 2,5,6, and long answer question 1 on the winter term PSYC 100 exam.
On short answer question number 2, I lost 0.5 marks for my description of the parenting-temperament interaction. In my answer, I described that a child with secure attachment will be uncomfortable and display signs of distress when the parent leaves, but find comfort upon the return of the parent. According to week 16 online lesson slide 37, ¿¿They are unlikely to be comforted by the stranger in the caregiver¿¿s absence but become calm when the caregiver returns¿. I believe that my description of this behaviour is of the same information, thus the loss of the mark is unjust.
On short answer question number 5, I received ¿¿0/1 for the why¿. I stated that in order for a clinical psychology to develop a proper treatment plan, they would need to know the individual¿¿s family history, as well as their own mental health history, for which I received the full marks. In terms of the of the why, I explicitly stated that the family history would be relevant to develop a proper treatment plan because it provides the clinical psychologist as it guides the psychologist as to a possible reason for them experiencing their symptoms. For the individual¿¿s personal history, I stated that it was important to acquire that information because a diagnosis for the patient may have already been made by another clinician, and/or inform the clinical psychologist of medications used or not used in the past, which may influence what the choose to treat their client with. This explains the ¿¿why¿ behind my statements, therefore I believe that the loss of the mark is lacking in basis.
On short answer question number 6, I lost 0.25 ¿¿for not correctly describing the correct rationale for cognitive therapy¿. The question made clear that Rebecca was experiencing a phobia, thus the choice of cognitive therapy was because of this. As described in the online lesson for week 23, ¿¿systematic desensitization is a very effective type of exposure therapy, especially for phobias¿. I described that Rebecca needed to slowly be exposed to her phobia in order to overcome it, therefore providing the rationale for cognitive therapy. I went on to describe how she could be slowly exposed to it, also proving I have a clear understanding, which I believe deserves the mark.
On long answer question 1, I received a mark of 1/2 for my explanation on why the same job stress may not be expressed the same way in both people. In my re-mark, I was told, ¿¿you mention personality differences, but there are others¿. This is an unfair assessment of my answer because I did not only discuss personality as described, but I also explained that genetic predisposition to PTSD would also be a factor in why one of the paramedics would be diagnosed and the other not. Since the criticism of the question was that personality was not the only factor for why the same job stress may impact 2 people differently, but I did in fact provide another possible reason for this, it is my opinion that this mark has been earned.
Thanks very much,
Bailey Kaye
20021344