PSYC30019 ASSIGNMENT INFORMATION 1
21st July 2023
WARNING
This material has been reproduced and communicated to you by
or on behalf of the University of Melbourne in accordance with
section 113P of the Copyright Act 1968 (Act).
The material in this communication may be subject to copyright
under the Act.
Any further reproduction or communication of this material by
you may be the subject of copyright protection under the Act.
Do not remove this notice
PSYC30019 ASSIGNMENT INFORMATION 2
21st July 2023
Development of the Thinking Child (PSYC30019)
Assignment Information
Melbourne School of Psychological Sciences
The University of Melbourne
PSYC30019 ASSIGNMENT INFORMATION 3
21st July 2023
Key Assignment Dates for PSYC30019 Semester 2 2023
Assessment Due before Word limit Assessment
Weight
Letter to a parent 8:00am – day of your lab class in
Week 5
1,500 34%
Lab report – Discussion
section
8:00am – day of your lab class in
Week 9
1,000 33%
Neuropsychological report 8:00am – day of your lab class in
Week 12
1,500 33%
PSYC30019 ASSIGNMENT INFORMATION 4
21st July 2023
Assignment One – Letter to a parent
A parent with a child with ADHD asks your opinion about a specific intervention (choose from
exercise or animal therapy) to help their child. Your task is to write a 1,500-word helpful and
empathic letter to the parent outlining your professional opinion about this intervention for
children with ADHD, citing scientific evidence.
Please include a reference list of the scientific evidence you cite in the letter, using APA 7th
format. Include at least six journal articles to support your argument in the letter.
Your letter should be submitted in Week 5 of semester, on the day of your lab class, before 8am.
This part of the assessment is worth 34% of your semester mark for this subject.
Here are some indicative articles on these interventions:
 Exercise (Neudecker, Mewes, Reimers, & Woll, 2019)
 Animal therapy (Schuck, Emmerson, Fine, & Lakes, 2015)
Your learning objectives:
 to understand ADHD and the intervention
 to find appropriate scientific literature on the intervention
 to analyze the scientific literature on the intervention
 to evaluate the scientific literature on the intervention
 to produce a logical argument
 to create a letter that is clearly written
There is an “Assignment One” Forum on the Discussion Board where you should put all
questions which will be addressed in the Q&A session for this assignment (apart from personal
concerns, which should be emailed to the head tutor).
Marking criteria for Assignment One
Marking rubric Conceptual
understanding
of the
nominated
intervention
and ADHD
(20%)
Marshalling of
evidence from
readings in
support of your
arguments
(20%)
Conceptual
analysis of the
findings from
the readings
(20%)
Logical writing
of your
argument (20%)
Clarity of
writing (20%)
H1 (80-100) Describes
concepts of the
intervention
and ADHD
clearly. Presents
a letter that
integrates an
advanced
Letter
integrates
appropriate
research
evidence into a
clear argument.
Demonstrates
evidence of
thoughtfully
and skilfully
analysing the
scientific
evidence for
and against the
intervention.
Structure of
complete letter
is very clear.
Introduction
soundly sets up
the rest of the
letter. Points
flow well.
Demonstrates
Demonstrates
excellent
editing,
grammar, and
language skill.
Sentences are
well
constructed.
The writing is
PSYC30019 ASSIGNMENT INFORMATION 5
21st July 2023
Marking rubric Conceptual
understanding
of the
nominated
intervention
and ADHD
(20%)
Marshalling of
evidence from
readings in
support of your
arguments
(20%)
Conceptual
analysis of the
findings from
the readings
(20%)
Logical writing
of your
argument (20%)
Clarity of
writing (20%)
understanding
of the concepts.
good ability to
expand on
points rather
than present a
travelogue of
points.
Concluding
statements are
a natural
progression
from the rest of
the letter
content and
show some
attempt to tie
up threads of
letter.
empathetic to
the situation
faced by the
parents. The
writing is
appropriate,
accessible,
articulate, and
succinct.
References are
used and cited
appropriately in
text.
H2 (70-79) Mostly
describes
concepts of the
intervention
and ADHD
clearly. Presents
a letter that
integrates a
sound
understanding
of the concepts.
Letter
integrates some
appropriate
research
evidence into a
clear argument.
Demonstrates a
good ability to
compare and
contrast the
scientific
evidence for
and against the
intervention.
Structure of
letter is mostly
clear.
Introduction
soundly sets up
the rest of the
letter. Most
points
appropriately
flow. Shows
some attempt
to expand on
some points,
rather than
presenting a
travelogue of
points.
Concluding
statements
attempt to tie
up threads of
letter.
Demonstrates
good editing,
grammar, and
language skills.
Language use
and writing
style is
appropriate for
a helpful letter
and sentences
are mostly well
constructed.
Attempts to
reference and
cite works in
text
appropriately.
PSYC30019 ASSIGNMENT INFORMATION 6
21st July 2023

Marking rubric Conceptual
understanding
of the
nominated
intervention
and ADHD
(20%)
Marshalling of
evidence from
readings in
support of your
arguments
(20%)
Conceptual
analysis of the
findings from
the readings
(20%)
Logical writing
of your
argument (20%)
Clarity of
writing (20%)
H3 to High Pass
(58-69)
Demonstrates
some
understanding
of the concepts
of the
intervention
and ADHD.
Presents a letter
that makes an
attempt to
describe the
concepts.
Letter
integrates some
appropriate
research
evidence into
an argument.
Clarity of
argument could
be improved.
Demonstrates a
basic ability to
compare and
contrast the
scientific
evidence for
and against the
intervention.
Shows some
attempt to
structure the
letter in a clear
way. Presents
points that
mostly
appropriately
link to
introduction.
Flow between
introduction,
body, and
conclusion is
sometimes
clear.
Demonstrates
satisfactory
editing,
grammar, and
language skills.
Language use
and writing
style are mostly
appropriate for
a helpful letter.
Some sentences
are well
constructed.
Some attempts
to reference
appropriately
for in text and
reference list.
Low Pass (50-
57)
Demonstrates
minimal
understanding
of the concepts
of the
intervention
and ADHD.
Presents a letter
that describe
the concepts in
a basic way.
Letter
integrates a
limited amount
of research
evidence into
an argument.
Clarity of
argument could
be improved
greatly.
Demonstrates
some attempt
to compare and
contrast the
scientific
evidence for
and against the
intervention.
Demonstrates a
basic ability to
construct a
helpful letter.
Shows an
attempt to
construct the
introduction,
body, and
conclusion.
Demonstrates
some basic skill
with editing,
grammar, and
language use.
Shows a
satisfactory
attempt to use
language and
write in a way
that is
acceptable for a
helpful letter.
Basic attempt to
provide in text
citations and
reference list.
PSYC30019 ASSIGNMENT INFORMATION 7
21st July 2023
Marking rubric Conceptual
understanding
of the
nominated
intervention
and ADHD
(20%)
Marshalling of
evidence from
readings in
support of your
arguments
(20%)
Conceptual
analysis of the
findings from
the readings
(20%)
Logical writing
of your
argument (20%)
Clarity of
writing (20%)
Fail (<50) Demonstration
of a basic
understanding
of the concepts
is absent.
Letter fails to
integrate
appropriate
research
evidence.
Argument is not
clear.
Demonstrates
no attempt to
compare and
contrast the
scientific
evidence for
and against the
intervention.
Demonstration
of a basic ability
to construct a
helpful letter is
absent.
Document
shows no
evidence of
basic editing,
grammar, and
language skills.
Writing is
inappropriate
for a helpful
letter. No
attempt to
reference or
cite works in
text
appropriately.
PSYC30019 ASSIGNMENT INFORMATION 8
21st July 2023
Assignment Two – Discussion section of lab report
The second assignment is a 1,000-word Discussion section based on the findings from a model
Results Section. The aim of the assessment exercise is to practice writing a discussion section of
a lab report, considering the observed patterns of findings, how the findings support and/or
extend previous research, and making suggestions for future research.
The Introduction, Method, and Results sections of the lab report are available below. The theory
and methodology surrounding this research will be discussed in Labs 3 and 4 (on Weeks 6 and
7).
Your discussion section of the lab report should be submitted in Week 9 of semester, on the day
of your lab class, before 8am. Your tutor will mark the Discussion and provide you with
feedback. This part of the assessment is worth 33% of your semester mark for this subject.
Your learning objectives (using numerical cognition as the example):
 to understand the different analytic methods used to study the development of “the
thinking” child
 to characterize the different patterns of development of numerical cognition
 to analyze some of the methodological issues involved in measuring cognition
 to evaluate typical and atypical patterns of development of numerical cognition
to produce a discussion section of a research report that demonstrates an
understanding of the points above
There is an “Assignment Two” Forum on the Discussion Board where you should put all
questions which will be addressed in the Q&A session for this assignment (apart from personal
concerns, which should be emailed to the head tutor).
PSYC30019 ASSIGNMENT INFORMATION 9
21st July 2023
Clarifying Dot Enumeration’s Association with Children’s Arithmetic Ability
Background, Research Rationale, Hypotheses, Method and Results
Survival in most cultures depend on effective quantitative reasoning abilities (math
abilities in the education context), and socio-emotional costs are often associated with deficits
in these abilities. Unsurprisingly developmentalists have long been interested in the reasons for
differences in these abilities. And, until recently, general social/cultural (e.g., school experience,
background) and/or general cognitive (e.g., IQ, working memory) accounts have most often
been most invoked to explain differences in children’s quantitative reasoning skills. More
recently, however, contemporary numerical cognitive theorists have argued that neurological
factors may underlie differences in quantitative reasoning skills. Specifically, they suggest we
possess two “innate” evolutionary significant, neuro-cognitive, number specific systems that
support quantitative reasoning abilities: an approximate number system, and a precise small
number system. We may characterise the social/cultural/general cognitive account as a domain
general explanation, and the evolutionary “innate” account as domain specific explanation.
Clarifying the domain-general and domain-specific account has significant implications for how
we assess children’s maths abilities and how we might help them overcome math learning
difficulties.
The approximate number system allows us to judge quickly the relative numerosity of
two competing sets (e.g., are there more “lions” in the group to the left, or the group to the
right—of course, we use dots rather than lions as stimuli in our research!). The second
system—the precise small number system—involves the ability to enumerate small sets of
objects (typically n < 4 objects or dots) without counting each individual object or dot in turn.
This ability is also known technically as subitizing ability. Subitizing ability is usually
distinguished from counting ability in terms of the time taken to enumerate different sized dot
arrays. Subitizable dot sets are enumerated quickly and without error, whereas dot arrays
beyond the subitizing range are enumerated more slowly and counting is more error prone. Of
interest is the change is reaction time (RT) slope between the subitizing and counting ranges.
This change in the enumeration RT slopes (i.e., from subitizing to counting) is also known
PSYC30019 ASSIGNMENT INFORMATION 10
21st July 2023
euphemistically as the “dot enumeration elbow”. Both core number abilities are evident at
birth, and differences in measures of the two abilities are correlated with differences in
mathematical skills throughout childhood. In this study, we focus on subitizing ability.
Indeed, evidence shows a link between subitizing and maths abilities, supporting the
claim that the precise small number system scaffolds early math development. What is the
nature of this evidence and can we refine our understanding of the processes involved in
subitizing? Moreover, a small number of studies find mixed results for the link between
subitizing and math abilities. More recently, research shows that different patterns (i.e.,
profiles) of dot enumeration abilities can be identified from variation in children’s dot
enumeration abilities. These profiles (highlighting differences in subitizing ability) were
differentially related to early math abilities (i.e., arithmetic), and some argue that they provide a
better characterization of dot enumeration abilities. However, the association between dot
enumeration performance patterns and maths ability is an empirical observation that requires
replication, and the processes underlying the relationship requires clarification.
The domain general account suggests general cognitive processes may underpin the
relationship between dot enumeration performance patterns and math ability. For instance,
some argue that poor subitizing may merely reflect a limited capacity to extract and process
visuospatial information. Insofar as this account is true, it is suggested that subitizing may
reflect a general cognitive ability (i.e., visuospatial working memory) rather than a number-
specific cognitive ability. This is further supported by studies that have found correlations
between subitizing and visuospatial working memory (VSWM). Moreover, VSWM is often
implicated in early math abilities- i.e., differences in VSWM are associated with differences in
math abilities, leading to the suggestion that VSWM is for critical early math development.
Other general “visual processing” factors such as non-verbal visual-spatial IQ may also underlie
subitizing abilities. Other general cognitive factors, such as the speed with which each individual
process information, could also account for dots processing differences. This is because we are
assessing the speed with which individuals enumerate dot arrays.
PSYC30019 ASSIGNMENT INFORMATION 11
21st July 2023
Hypotheses:
1. Consistent with previous research, it is hypothesized that different distinct profiles of dot
enumeration ability (i.e., subitizing ability) can be identified from the overall ability distribution.
2. Insofar as subitizing ability is a number-specific cognitive ability, it is hypothesised that
general cognitive factors (visuospatial working memory, non-verbal IQ and processing speed)
would be unrelated to subitizing ability profile membership.
3. It is hypothesized that subitizing ability profile membership would be associated with single-
digit addition ability (i.e., the outcome measure).
Method
Participants
One hundred and fifty-six Year 1 children comprising 85 girls and 71 boys (Mmonths =
84.72, SDmonths = 4.49), with an approximately equal number of males and females from three
non-government schools in (1) a low SES regional Victorian town, (2) a low SES suburb of
Melbourne, and (3) a middle SES suburb of Melbourne participated in the study. All schools
were ethnically and culturally diverse; however, all participating children spoke fluent English.
According to the children’s teachers, none of the children had known learning difficulties and all
had normal or corrected-to-normal vision. The study was conducted in accordance with the
requirements of the University of Melbourne’s Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC No.
0123456).
Materials and Procedure
Children were tested individually in a quiet room at their school. They completed five
tasks in two interviews. Each session lasted about fifteen minutes. The tasks included (1) a dot
enumeration task, (2) a single-digit addition task; and three general cognitive tests: (3) the
Raven’s Coloured Progressive Matrices (Raven’s) task; (4) a Basic Reaction Time task; and (5)
PSYC30019 ASSIGNMENT INFORMATION 12
21st July 2023
the Corsi Block Span task. All tasks except the Raven’s and Corsi were presented on a laptop
computer with controlled presentation times.
Dot enumeration
The dot enumeration (DE) task is a widely used index of precise small number ability.
Randomised arrays of 1–9 dots (eight presentations for each set size, i.e., 72 trials) were
presented on a laptop computer screen. (see Figure 1 for exemplar arrays). Presentation order
of the arrays was automatically randomised by the presentation software. Children were asked
to say, as quickly and accurately as possible, how many dots they could see. Children’s
accuracy, reaction times, and counting behaviours were recorded.
Figure 1
Exemplar randomised arrays for 4, 6, and 8 dots from the Dot Enumeration task
Single-digit Addition
The single-digit addition (SDA) task is widely used as a measure of children’s early
computation abilities (i.e., culturally acquired number competence) and the ability to combine
two numbers is an instance of set-based reasoning. Following two practice problems, children
completed 30 two-term addition problems presented visually on the computer screen. All
problems were presented in the form of “a + b”. Problems contained two addends ranging from
2 to 7, excluding tied pairs (2 + 2) (see Figure 2 for exemplar problems). Children were asked to
answer each addition problem, were then asked to explain how they had “worked it out”. The
interviewer recorded children’s answers and problem-solving strategies, plus any apparent
PSYC30019 ASSIGNMENT INFORMATION 13
21st July 2023
counting support (e.g., finger-use, head nodding or (sub) vocal counting). Reaction time was
recorded by the presentation software.
Figure 2
Exemplar problems from the single-digit addition task
Raven’s Coloured Progressive Matrices
This is a commonly used, standardised measure of non-verbal IQ. It was administered
and scored in accordance with the test manual. The task required participants to select one of
six possible pieces to complete an image pattern or to match the logical relations of three
existing images (see Figure 3 for an example). Responses were coded by correctness and scaled
according to age.
Figure 3
Exemplar stimulus from the Raven’s Coloured Progressive Matrices task (reproduced from
Raven, 1965)
PSYC30019 ASSIGNMENT INFORMATION 14
21st July 2023
Basic reaction time
A basic reaction time task was used as a measure of general processing speed.
Processing speed is also assessed as performance on proposed measures of core number
competencies may be due to underlying cognitive processing speed. After viewing a central
fixation point, a red dot appeared near the centre of the screen. The child’s task was to press a
computer key as soon as the dot appeared. There were three inter-stimulus intervals (ISI)
between the fixation point and the dot: 500, 1000 and 1500 milliseconds. Following four
practice trials, nine randomized trials at each ISI were presented (27 trials in total). The
measure of interest was response time for correct target trials at the 500ms ISI.
Figure 4
Exemplar stimulus from the Basic RT task
Fixation Point Inter-stimulus Interval Target
Corsi Block Span
This task is a measure of visuospatial working memory (VSWM). The Corsi Blocks
apparatus consisted of nine small wooden blocks randomly arranged on a board. The blocks
were numbered, but the board was positioned so that the numbers could not be seen by the
child. The interviewer tapped a sequence of blocks at a rate of one per second, after which
child was first asked to repeat the sequence in the same (forward span) or reverse (backward
span) order. Within a trial, sequences began with two blocks and increased by one following a
successful reproduction. A trial was discontinued upon failure to correctly reproduce a
sequence. Two trials for forward span were administered first, then two trials for backward
span. The mean of the two forward span trials and the two backward span trials was calculated
for each child to give an average Corsi Block Span score.
PSYC30019 ASSIGNMENT INFORMATION 15
21st July 2023
Figure 5
Corsi Blocks apparatus
Results
[It is customary to report summary statistics for the entire group first, but for the sake of
simplicity these are not reported. Note, however, that there were no effects of gender or of
school, so those cannot be cited as “limitations”.]
Identifying Dot Enumeration Profiles
Latent class analysis (LCA) was conducted on dot enumeration performance (i.e.,
median RTs) on randomized dot arrays to identify meaningfully distinct subgroups of children
who share similar patterns of response signature. Latent class analysis is advantageous over
traditional modelling which needs to adhere by assumptions of normal distribution, linear
relationship, and homogeneity. Instead, latent class analysis is a person-centred, statistical
model-based approach to dealing with heterogeneity by identifying small groups of
homogeneous latent subgroups embedded in the overall data distribution via probability-based
classification. Goodness-of-fit statistics such as Bayesian information criteria is used to weigh
the fit of the cluster model (i.e., statistical criteria to assess the best solution – the number of
clusters).
PSYC30019 ASSIGNMENT INFORMATION 16
21st July 2023
We identified three distinct DE profiles and based on their response signatures, we
labelled them as: Slow (n = 35), Medium (n = 64), and Fast (n = 57). Median RTs for each DE
profile across all set sizes (1 – 9) on the randomized dot arrays are displayed in Table 1 and
Figure 6. One-way ANOVA found significant differences across all profiles for all set sizes (1 – 9);
F values and p values across the profiles, and between each profile, are reported in Table 2.
Table 1
Dot Enumeration Median RT as a Function of Profile Membership and Set Size for Randomized
Dot Arrays
Set Size Slow Medium Fast
1 1778 1694 1494
2 1846 1700 1531
3 2302 1857 1654
4 3195 2408 1860
5 4410 3567 2868
6 5412 4118 3299
7 5743 4830 3757
8 6435 5036 4122
9 7144 5744 4570
PSYC30019 ASSIGNMENT INFORMATION 17
21st July 2023
Figure 6
Median RT for DE profiles on randomized dot arrays as a function of set size (1 – 9)
Table 2
One-way ANOVA (Values and Probabilities) for Dot Enumeration Median RTs as a Function of
Profile Membership and Set Size for Randomized Dot Arrays
Set Size F p p S/M* p S/F* p M/F*
1 49.891 0.01 0.05 0.01 0.01
2 49.012 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01
3 57.872 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01
4 68.701 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01
5 121.867 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01
6 102.730 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01
7 105.983 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01
8 135.554 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01
9 91.145 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
DE Profiles on Randomized Dot Arrays
Slow Medium Fast
PSYC30019 ASSIGNMENT INFORMATION 18
21st July 2023
Note: * indicates contrasts between Slow and Medium (S/M), Slow and Fast (S/F), and Medium
and Fast (M/F) profiles.
DE Profiles, General Cognitive Factors and Math Ability
To investigate the associations between the DE profiles and the three general cognitive
abilities (VSWM, processing speed and non-verbal IQ) as well as math ability, we conducted a
series of one-way ANOVAs between the three profiles for each of the cognitive and math ability
tasks. Means and standard deviations for the three general cognitive tasks (Corsi, Basic RT, and
Raven’s) and for the acquired number competency task (single-digit addition accuracy) are
reported in Table 6. One-way ANOVA did not identify any significant differences across the
three profiles for any of the general cognitive tasks. As expected, there was a significant
difference across the profiles for single-digit addition accuracy. F values and p values across the
profiles, and between each profile are reported in Table 7.
Table 6
Means and Standard Deviations for Corsi, Basic RT, Raven's, and Single-digit Addition Accuracy
as a Function of Profile Membership
Profiles
Slow Medium Fast
Task M SD M SD M SD
General Cognitive
Corsi1 3.90 0.51 3.85 0.58 4.06 0.63
Basic RT2 851.99 84.83 828.33 104.06 806.69 133.17
Ravens3 44.57 22.70 53.44 23.42 53.33 20.23
Acquired Number
SDA4 48.19 39.09 70.63 33.42 88.77 19.79
Note. 1Corsi Blocks Span score; 2RT in milliseconds; 3Raven’s Coloured Progressive Matrices
scaled percentile; 4Single-digit addition percentage correct.
PSYC30019 ASSIGNMENT INFORMATION 19
21st July 2023
Table 7
One-way ANOVA (Values and Probabilities) for Corsi, Basic RT, Raven's, and
Single-digit Addition Accuracy as a Function of Profile Membership
Task F p p S/M* p S/F* p M/F*
General Cognitive
Corsi1 2.0 .13 1.00 .60 .15
Basic RT2 1.80 .17 .95 .18 .87
Raven’s3 2.15 .12 .18 .20 1.00
Acquired Number
SDA4 19.09 .01 .01 .01 .01
Note: * indicates contrasts between Slow and Medium (S/M), Slow and Fast (S/F), and Medium
and Fast (M/F) profiles. 1Corsi Blocks Span score; 2RT in milliseconds; 3Raven’s Coloured
Progressive Matrices scaled percentile; 4Single-digit addition percentage correct
PSYC30019 ASSIGNMENT INFORMATION 20
21st July 2023
Marking criteria for Assignment Two
Marking
rubric
Restate
research aim,
hypotheses (do
not copy paste)
and briefly
state if they
are answered
by the results.
(10%)
Describe and
interpret the
response
pattern of each
of the profiles.
(20%)
Interpret and
discuss the
findings in
answering the
hypotheses.
(40%)
Discuss and
justify
limitations
and suggest
further
research.
(15%)
Conclusion
(5%)
Clarity of
writing and
adherence to
APA 7th style
including
Reference list
(10%)
H1 (80-
100)
Clear and
concise
restatement of
the research
aim and
hypotheses.
Concisely and
clearly state if
the hypotheses
are answered
by the results.
Presents a
succinct and
communicative
introduction to
the Discussion
section for the
reader.
Clear and
accurate
characterization
of each profiles’
response
patterns.
Appropriate and
supported/
justified
interpretation of
the implications
of the profiles’
ability to extract
numerical
information
(described in the
response
patterns).
Demonstrates
excellent
conceptual
understanding of
the study and its
results.
Clearly and
accurately
communicate
all findings
relevant to the
hypotheses.
Thoughtful
interpretation
of the
implications of
the findings.
Sophisticated
evaluation of
the existing
literature and
discussion of
how current
findings extend
previous
research.
Demonstrates
excellent
understanding
of the findings
and well-
integrated
discussion of
them.
Raises
noteworthy
limitations
relevant to
current study.
Clearly
support and
justify them.
Clearly state
how they can
be addressed
in future
studies (and
why they
might be
important).
Clear and
concise
summary of
key findings
and their
implications.
Demonstrates
precision in
writing,
excellent
communication
and language
skills.
Shows strong
ability to
structure a
well-organised
argument/flow
in the
Discussion
section of a lab
report.
Adheres to the
expectations of
scientific
writing, APA
style (including
in-text citations
and the
reference list).
PSYC30019 ASSIGNMENT INFORMATION 21
21st July 2023
Marking
rubric
Restate
research aim,
hypotheses (do
not copy paste)
and briefly
state if they
are answered
by the results.
(10%)
Describe and
interpret the
response
pattern of each
of the profiles.
(20%)
Interpret and
discuss the
findings in
answering the
hypotheses.
(40%)
Discuss and
justify
limitations
and suggest
further
research.
(15%)
Conclusion
(5%)
Clarity of
writing and
adherence to
APA 7th style
including
Reference list
(10%)
H2 (70-
79)
Adequately
restate the
research aim
and
hypotheses.
Adequately
state if the
hypotheses are
answered by
the results.
Presents a good
introduction to
the Discussion
section for the
reader.
Mostly clear and
accurate
characterization
of each profiles’
response
patterns.
Mostly
appropriate and
supported/
justified
interpretation of
the implications
of the profiles’
ability to extract
numerical
information
(described in the
response
patterns).
Demonstrates
good conceptual
understanding of
the study and its
results.
Mostly clear
and accurate
communication
of all findings
relevant to the
hypotheses.
Good
interpretation
of the
implications of
the findings.
Good
evaluation of
the existing
literature and
discussion of
how current
findings extend
previous
research.
Demonstrates
good
understanding
of the findings
and adequately
integrated
discussion of
them.
Raises
appropriate
limitations
relevant to
current study.
Demonstrates
adequate
support and
justification
for them.
Adequately
state how they
can be
addressed in
future studies.
Adequately
clear and
concise
summary of
key findings
and their
implications.
Demonstrates
good
communication
and language
skills.
Shows good
ability to
structure a
well-organised
argument/flow
in the
Discussion
section of a lab
report.
Mostly adheres
to the
expectations of
scientific
writing, APA
style (including
in-text citations
and the
reference list).
PSYC30019 ASSIGNMENT INFORMATION 22
21st July 2023
Marking
rubric
Restate
research aim,
hypotheses (do
not copy paste)
and briefly
state if they
are answered
by the results.
(10%)
Describe and
interpret the
response
pattern of each
of the profiles.
(20%)
Interpret and
discuss the
findings in
answering the
hypotheses.
(40%)
Discuss and
justify
limitations
and suggest
further
research.
(15%)
Conclusion
(5%)
Clarity of
writing and
adherence to
APA 7th style
including
Reference list
(10%)
H3 to
High
Pass
(58-69)
Satisfactorily
restate the
research aim
and
hypotheses.
Satisfactorily
state if the
hypotheses
were answered
by the results.
Presents an
acceptable
basic
introduction to
the Discussion
section for the
reader.
Satisfactory
attempt to
characterize
each profiles’
response
patterns.
Satisfactory
attempt for
appropriate and
supported/
justified
interpretation of
the implications
of the profiles’
ability to extract
numerical
information
(described in the
response
patterns).
Demonstrates
some conceptual
understanding of
the study and its
results.
Satisfactory
attempt to
communicate
all findings
relevant to the
hypotheses.
Satisfactory
interpretation
of the
implications of
the findings.
Satisfactory
evaluation of
the existing
literature and
discussion of
how current
findings extend
previous
research.
Demonstrates
some
understanding
of the findings
and some
integrated
discussion of
them.
Satisfactory
attempt to
raise some
acceptable
limitations
relevant to
current study;
support and
justify them;
and state how
they can be
addressed in
future studies.
Satisfactory
summary of
key findings
and their
implications.
Demonstrates
satisfactory
communication
and language
skills.
Shows
satisfactory
attempt to
structure an
argument/flow
in the
Discussion
section of a lab
report.
Adheres to
some
expectations of
scientific
writing, APA
style (including
in-text citations
and the
reference list).
PSYC30019 ASSIGNMENT INFORMATION 23
21st July 2023
Marking
rubric
Restate
research aim,
hypotheses (do
not copy paste)
and briefly
state if they
are answered
by the results.
(10%)
Describe and
interpret the
response
pattern of each
of the profiles.
(20%)
Interpret and
discuss the
findings in
answering the
hypotheses.
(40%)
Discuss and
justify
limitations
and suggest
further
research.
(15%)
Conclusion
(5%)
Clarity of
writing and
adherence to
APA 7th style
including
Reference list
(10%)
Low
Pass
(50-57)
Limited
attempt to
restate the
research aim
and/or
hypotheses.
Limited
attempt to
state if the
hypotheses
were answered
by the results.
Presents a basic
but insufficient
introduction to
the Discussion
section for the
reader.
Basic attempt to
characterize
each profiles’
response
patterns.
Basic attempt for
appropriate and
supported/
justified
interpretation of
the implications
of the profiles’
ability to extract
numerical
information
(described in the
response
patterns).
Demonstrates
basic conceptual
understanding of
the study and its
results.
Basic attempt
to
communicate
findings
relevant to the
hypotheses.
Basic attempt
for
interpretation
of the
implications of
the findings.
Basic
evaluation of
the existing
literature and
discussion on
how current
findings extend
previous
research.
Demonstrates
basic
understanding
of the findings
and poor
integrated
discussion of
them.
Basic attempt
to raise some
limitations
relevant to
current study;
support and
justify them;
and state how
they can be
addressed in
future studies.
But limitations
raised can be
irrelevant,
inappropriate
or incorrect;
support and
justification
can be
insufficient;
and little is
discussed
about
addressing the
limitations in
future studies.
Basic but
insufficient
summary of
key findings
and their
implications.
Demonstrates
limited skills
with
communication
and language
use.
Shows basic
attempt to
structure an
argument/flow
in the
Discussion
section of a lab
report.
Basic attempt
to adhere to
the
expectations of
scientific
writing, APA
style (including
in-text citations
and the
reference list).
PSYC30019 ASSIGNMENT INFORMATION 24
21st July 2023
Marking
rubric
Restate
research aim,
hypotheses (do
not copy paste)
and briefly
state if they
are answered
by the results.
(10%)
Describe and
interpret the
response
pattern of each
of the profiles.
(20%)
Interpret and
discuss the
findings in
answering the
hypotheses.
(40%)
Discuss and
justify
limitations
and suggest
further
research.
(15%)
Conclusion
(5%)
Clarity of
writing and
adherence to
APA 7th style
including
Reference list
(10%)
Fail
(<50)
Did not or
incorrectly
restate the
research aim
and/or
hypotheses.
Did not or
incorrectly
state if the
hypotheses
were answered
by the results.
Missing the
basic
understanding
of a proper
introduction to
the Discussion
section of a lab
report.
Little or
incorrect
attempt to
characterize
each profiles’
response
patterns.
Little or
incorrect
attempt for
appropriate and
supported/
justified
interpretation of
the implications
of the profiles’
ability to extract
numerical
information
(described in the
response
patterns).
Demonstrates
little or poor
conceptual
understanding of
the study and its
results.
Poor attempt to
communicate
findings
relevant to the
hypotheses.
Little attempt
to interpret the
implications of
the findings.
Little evaluation
of the existing
literature and
discussion of
how current
findings extend
previous
research.
Missing basic
understanding
of the findings
and lacking
integrated
discussion of
them.
No or minimal
limitations
raised;
or, limitations
raised are
irrelevant or
incorrect.
No or
incorrect
support or
justification
for them.
Demonstrates
a lack of
understanding
of the current
study and the
requirements
of the
Discussion
section of a
lab report.
No or poor
attempt for
a summary
of key
findings and
their
implications.
Document poor
or no evidence
of basic skills
with
communication
and language
use.
Shows little
attempt to
structure an
argument/flow
in the
Discussion
section of a lab
report.
Not meeting
any of the
expectations of
scientific
writing, APA
style (including
in-text citations
and the
reference list).
Remember to:
 use evidence-based reasoning,
 present a coherent argument,
 write clearly, and
 observe APA style.
PSYC30019 ASSIGNMENT INFORMATION 25
21st July 2023
Guide points about Writing the Discussion section for this Laboratory Report
Length. The maximum word length for the Discussion is 1,000 words with +/-10% leeway.
Reports exceeding this length will be penalized. Please see the Student Manual online for more
details about these penalties if uncertain.
Late work. Reports that are submitted late without an extension will be penalized (see your
Student Manual for more details if uncertain).
Presentation. All reports should be typed in 12pt font, double spaced, margins of 2.5 cm. The
reports must be written in prose, and appropriately referenced and presented per the American
Psychological Association (APA) 7th edition Publication Manual. The word count should be
clearly stated on the title page of the report. Different disciplines and sub-disciplines within
Psychology have different requirements for lab report writing, so please note the conventions
specified for this subject, as given to you in the lab classes and written in this document. Please
proofread your work for spelling, grammar, and expression. One handy hint is to read aloud
your full report to yourself, and you will hear any problems with your grammar and
punctuation.
Writing guides
There are several very useful guides on how to write Psychology lab reports. Here is a selection:
Burton, L. J. (2002). An interactive approach to writing essays & research reports in psychology.
Milton, QLD: Wiley.
Findlay, B. (2014). How to write psychology research reports and essays (7th ed.). Frenchs
Forest, Australia: Pearson.
O’Shea, R. P., & McKenzie, W. A. (2013). Writing for psychology. South Melbourne, VIC: Cengage
Learning
Perrin, R. (2015). Pocket guide to APA style. Stamford, CT: Cengage Learning.
Other resources
 An online guide to APA Style: https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/section/2/10/
 Guide to referencing and referencing software:
http://library.unimelb.edu.au/reference-management
 Searching for articles using Unimelb discovery: http://unimelb.libguides.com/discovery
 The Unimelb academic skills website also has information on plagiarism and sources:
http://services.unimelb.edu.au/academicskills/undergrads/top_resources
PSYC30019 ASSIGNMENT INFORMATION 26
21st July 2023
Some common lab report FAQs:
What does the word count include?: The word count includes the discussion section of a lab
report (i.e., assignment 2) and in-text references. Reference list is not included.
Do I need to include the Introduction, Method or Result sections?: No, you can start from the
Discussion section but do not forget your reference list.
Is there a limit to how old articles can be?: No; as long as they are relevant and appropriate
but it is worth researching and considering if there is newer, more informative work done that
supports that same point/claim/argument.
Can we introduce a new citation in the discussion?: Given that there are no citations
(intentionally) in the “Introduction” section, you can include any paper into the discussion.
Generally speaking, there is also no rule against this – the rule to note is that the Discussion
should link well with the Introduction. Keep in mind that the same principles apply to anything
in your report – is this information relevant, necessary and is the reason for its inclusion clear?
How much should I discuss X? Should I include X?: This depends entirely on your argument. Is
it important for the points that you are trying to make? Is it important enough to leave out
other details? Do you have justification for including it? How will you present it? Would leaving
it out leave the reader confused? All these factors should be included in your decision making.
How many limitations should I include?: Again, this depends on your discussion. Are there
multiple important limitations? Are the limitations relevant? Few but well-justified limitations
are better than many, ill-justified and unsupported limitations.
Should we justify why we X?: This depends if you think this is important. Would the reader
want to know why?
Where should we define concepts? Do I need to define X?: Usually the first time that you use
them. This depends on whether you think the reader will need a definition of X.
Can we abbreviate concepts?: Yes, if it is done according to APA guidelines; also consider if it
helps or hinders reading (abbreviating just to reduce word count may indicate you are not
writing concisely enough).
This assignment is quite short, how can I write a good discussion?: Writing concisely is an
important skill. You can learn how to do this through a good lab report writing guide
(referenced above). Additionally, you will need to decide on what information is necessary for
your report to be coherent.
PSYC30019 ASSIGNMENT INFORMATION 27
21st July 2023
Assignment Three – Neuropsychology report
The final assignment is a 1,500-word neuropsychological report on the behavioral, cognitive,
and social functioning of a 10-year-old child (Riley; see notes below). The aims of the
assessment exercise are to (1) introduce you to psychological assessment and questionnaire
techniques used with children and (2) improve your understanding of how to write a
neuropsychology report on the status of a child’s behavioral, cognitive, and social functioning.
Your neuropsychological report should be submitted in Week 12 of semester, on the day of your
lab class, before 8am. This part of the assessment is worth 33% of your semester mark for this
subject.
Your learning objectives:
 to understand the features and functions of a neuropsychology report
 to apply your knowledge of cognitive/social/developmental issues to a case-study
 to analyze Riley’s test results
 to evaluate what these test results mean against the normative data
 to generate a formulation for Riley based on these test results
 to create a neuropsychology report that features an assessment of Riley’s current
behavioral, cognitive, and social functioning and your formulation
There is an “Assignment Three” Forum on the Discussion Board where you should put all
questions which will be addressed in the Q&A session for this assignment (apart from personal
concerns, which should be emailed to the senior tutor).
The information that you need to complete the report comprises:
 Details of the child, who is the subject of your report;
 The child’s test scores;
 Normative scores for each task and questionnaire to enable you to complete your
formulation of the child; and
 A model neuropsychology report.
As outlined in the model report (see below), your report should contain information under the
following headings:
Background details: age, gender, grade level, significant medical, developmental and
psychosocial issues.
Presentation: qualitative features of child's performance during your session with them,
e.g., were they anxious, distractible, task orientated, tired, motivated or disinterested? This
information enables a psychologist to decide whether test results are valid and reliable.
Test results: include results from each of the tests administered. You should display
these in a table. This information should enable the reader to evaluate your interpretations of
the child's behavioral, cognitive, and social skills. Normative data should be provided to aid
your interpretation of your data in relation to age expectations.
PSYC30019 ASSIGNMENT INFORMATION 28
21st July 2023
Discussion of results and formulation: This is your opportunity to show your knowledge
of cognitive/social/developmental issues, as discussed in lectures. In this section you should
integrate the test data and your qualitative observations to provide a summary of your
understanding of the child's characteristics. In this section of your report, it is important to talk
about the skills you have assessed, and how the child compares to age norms, rather than
report results from individual tests. Please remember, as in real practice, your report will be
read by someone with limited neuropsychological knowledge (for example, parent or teacher),
so you should write simply and clearly. You must not cite papers, and you do not need a
reference list. Please do not “borrow” sentences or phrases from the model neuropsychological
report.
Notes made during the neuropsychological assessment
Riley’s history and background
Riley: 10 years of age, in Year 4 at Parkville Primary School, Melbourne. Riley was referred by a
school counsellor for a neuropsychological assessment.
Family history: Parents (Mr & Mrs S) and Ripley live together. Mother works full-time as a senior
consultant with a non-for-profit organization. Father is a successful freelance graphic designer.
Parent report:
 Poor sleeper as a baby
 Has always -
 been fearless
 had high activity levels
 had poor concentration
 needed constant attention - cannot be left to play unsupervised
 Does not seem to understand the consequences of actions
 Behaves best in structured environments
 Has a remarkable knowledge of makes and models of aeroplanes from vintage to present
day.
Medical history:
 No significant medical history
 Hospitalized two years ago due to being involved in a car accident – broken arm and bruising
 on face and head, brief loss of consciousness and concussion following the accident.
Teacher reports:
 Disruptive
 Difficulties sitting still
 Does not conform to classroom expectations.
 Bright, BUT
 some literacy difficulties
PSYC30019 ASSIGNMENT INFORMATION 29
21st July 2023
 does not complete task unless closely supervised by the teacher
 Social problems:
 has trouble picking up on the social cues of others around
 says offensive and socially inappropriate things to peers
 does not appear to notice the impact this has on peers
 affects relationships and friendships with others
Assessment
(Note: Riley has not been assessed previously.)
1. Interview with Mr & Mrs S and Riley
2. Interview with Riley’s teacher
3. Formal neuropsychological assessment of Riley
4. A questionnaire completed by Mrs S and Riley’s teacher.
Presentation
At the formal neuropsychological assessment, Riley was:
 cooperative and motivated to perform well
 polite, friendly and sociable
 able to sit still and complete most tasks
Toward the end became:
 distractible, inattentive and fidgety
 needed much support and redirection to remain on task
 most distractible on listening tasks.
Riley’s test results:
WISC-4
Verbal Comprehension Index 105
Perceptual Reasoning Index 113
Working Memory Index 92
Processing Speed Index 88
Full Scale IQ 101
Visual and Verbal Memory Measures
Design Memory Immediate Recall 12
Design Memory Delayed Recall 10
Verbal Learning Immediate Recall 7
Verbal Learning Delayed Recall 6
PSYC30019 ASSIGNMENT INFORMATION 30
21st July 2023
Attention and Executive Function Measures
Trail Making A time 8
Trail Making B time 5
Block Span Total Score 7
Contingency Naming Time 6
Contingency Naming Errors 5
Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function (BRIEF – Riley’s parents)
Inhibit 67
Shift 69
Emotional Control 53
Initiate 51
Working Memory 69
Plan/Organise 70
Org of materials 71
Monitor 72
Behavioural Regulation Index 67
Metacognition Index 70
Global Executive Composite 69
Negativity1 Acceptable
Inconsistency² Acceptable
Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function (BRIEF – Riley’s teacher)
Inhibit 75
Shift 66
Emotional Control 66
Initiate 49
Working Memory 72
Plan/Organise 77
Org of materials 70
Monitor 73
Behavioural Regulation Index 71
Metacognition Index 73
Global Executive Composite 72
Negativity Acceptable
Inconsistency Acceptable
1 “Negativity” and “Inconsistency” relate to the reliability of the person/s completing the
questionnaire. As both measures (parents, teacher) are acceptable, they do not require
inclusion or comment in your report. Indeed, as the report will most likely be read by Riley’s
parents and teacher, it would be inappropriate to include these scores.
PSYC30019 ASSIGNMENT INFORMATION 31
21st July 2023
Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (Riley’s mother)
Total Score 15
Emotional Symptoms Scale 1
Conduct Problems Scale 3
Hyperactivity Scale 8
Peer Problems Scale 3
Pro-social Scale 7
Normative data for all measures:
IQ and Classifications
Superior Above 120
High Average 110-119
Average 90-109
Low Average 80-89
Below Average 79
Standard Scores and Classifications (Memory, Attention, and Executive Function)
Superior 15 and above
High Average 13-14
Average 8-12
Low Average 6-7
Below Average 5 and below
BRIEF Scores and Classifications
Clinically Significant Above 65
Sub-clinical 55-64
Average Below 55
Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire Scores and Classifications
Normal Borderline Abnormal
Total Score 0-13 14-16 17-40
Emotional Symptoms Scale 0-3 4 5-10
Conduct Problems Scale 0-2 3 4-10
Hyperactivity Scale 0-5 6 7-10
Peer Problems Scale 0-2 3 4-10
Pro-social Scale 6-10 5 0-4
PSYC30019 ASSIGNMENT INFORMATION 32
21st July 2023
Notes:
Verbal Comprehension Index tests verbal skills
Perceptual Reasoning Index tests visual skills
Working Memory Index tests attention and working memory
Processing Speed Index tests attention and information processing speed
Full Scale IQ is the overall IQ estimate
Design Memory tests visual memory
Verbal Learning tests verbal memory
Trail Making A time tests general speed and selective attention
Trail Making B time tests general speed, switching attention
Block Span Total Score tests visual attention span
Contingency Naming Time tests cognitive flexibility, switching attention,
Contingency Naming Errors tests impulsivity
BRIEF Ratings of different aspects of executive function
Strengths & Difficulties Questionnaire Ratings of social functioning
PSYC30019 ASSIGNMENT INFORMATION 33
21st July 2023
Model Neuropsychology Report
RE: L.P.
D.O.B.: 23/04/2002
AGE: 10 years 5 months
DATE SEEN: October 2013
SCHOOL & GRADE: XX Primary School, Year 5
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
(This section should include information on medical, developmental history, school progress,
family unit and other social information, comments on child's general behavior, areas of
strength, hobbies etc.)
L.P. was born following a normal pregnancy. Medical history is largely unremarkable, apart from
some recurrent ear infections and migraines, which no longer occur. L.P.'s motor and language
milestones were normal to advanced.
L.P. has experienced some difficulties throughout primary school, particularly in literacy areas.
L.P. has received extra help at school since Grade one including Reading Recovery in Grade 2.
Currently, L.P. receives help after school two evenings a week, and Mrs P. spends time each
night helping with specific homework tasks.
Despite educational difficulties, L.P. has adequate peer relations and enjoys art and sport. He is
an only child, and his parents separated five years ago. L.P. continues to see his father regularly
and has an amicable relationship with him.
ASSESSMENT
Presentation
(In this section, qualitative features of the child's presentation during the test sessions should be
described, including level of cooperation, motivation, attention etc.)
L.P. presented as a friendly, cooperative boy. He willingly participated in all test procedures
although he did not appear to enjoy the test environment. L.P. tended to set high standards for
himself throughout the evaluation and was able to develop intelligent strategies to aid his
performance in a number of areas.
Qualitatively, L.P. sometimes became overwhelmed and anxious, especially when he saw that a
task was tapping his weaker skills. L.P.'s ability to sustain attention was good throughout
assessment, and there was no evidence of distractibility or poor attentional skills in the one-to-
one environment.
Test Data (Scores for each test should be reported here, including the child’s raw scores and how
this relates to the normative data)
PSYC30019 ASSIGNMENT INFORMATION 34
21st July 2023
Results
(This section includes interpretation of the child's tests results. For interpretation of the tasks,
refer to normative data tables to determine the level of your child's performance with respect to
other children of the same age. Try and interpret your test results using the following headings if
possible)
(1) Attention skills (Using data from attentional measures, questionnaires, and qualitative
observations)
L.P.'s sustained attention is age appropriate, however, auditory selective attention is reduced
and he is able to maintain attention and listen for only short periods of time, before becoming
distractable and restless. This limited capacity will place L.P. at great risk within a classroom
environment where he will frequently miss or misinterpret information presented via
conversation or verbal instruction. (If you observe difficulties, try and identify some ideas for
overcoming/ compensating for them in both home and school environments).
To minimize these difficulties L.P. should be seated close to his teacher, who should attempt to
get his attention before giving instructions. Instructions and new information should be
provided in short sentences with pauses between sentences to allow for processing time.
Where these strategies are impractical, L.P. may be assisted by a peer who is efficient at
registering and following out instructions. L.P. will benefit from sitting close to such a student
and either seeking clarification from the student or watching and modelling his/her actions.
To his credit, L.P. has devised a number of strategies to help him to take in as much information
as possible, for instance, when asked to repeat a sentence, L.P. will be unable to repeat it
exactly, but can provide the gist of the sentence. Once L.P. has acquired new information, his
long-term memory and retention is age appropriate.
In contrast to these poor auditory selective attention skills, visual selective attention is better,
and L.P. is able to focus efficiently and to maintain attention well for visual material. In addition,
L.P. exhibits age appropriate skills for tasks tapping mental flexibility, the capacity to shift focus
of attention and to inhibit incorrect responses.
(2) Memory skills (Using data from memory tests, questionnaires, and qualitative observations)
L.P.'s memory abilities were advanced, and these represent an area of particular strength for L.P.
Tasks of acquisition and new learning were completed at advanced levels. (If you observe
difficulties, try and identify some ideas for overcoming/ compensating for them in both home
and school environments).
(3) Executive skills (Using data from executive tests, questionnaires, and qualitative
observations)
PSYC30019 ASSIGNMENT INFORMATION 35
21st July 2023
L.P.'s executive skills were consistently within the average range. Qualitatively, he was able to
plan and organize his performances and concept formation was age appropriate. (If you observe
difficulties, try and identify some ideas for overcoming/ compensating for them in both home
and school environments).
(4) You may consider other aspects of performance should be mentioned under separate
subheadings, especially if you have observed problems.
FORMULATION
(This final section should summarize your previous interpretations, and emphasize any areas of
particular strength and weakness. It should also provide a brief diagnostic statement, for
example, "this child has no cognitive difficulties" or " this child experiences specific problems in
sustaining attention, with other cognitive and attentional abilities intact".)
In summary, L.P. is a ten-year-old boy who presents with a history of school learning difficulties.
Neuropsychological evaluation indicates that L.P.'s cognitive abilities are advanced for his age,
with average executive skills. Visual attention, mental flexibility, and response inhibition are
each age appropriate.
L.P.'s problems sustaining attention for auditory information suggest that he will be at risk
within the classroom environment where he will have difficulty listening to auditory-verbal
information and instructions. To minimize these problems, visual presentation may be helpful.
Additionally, L.P. will benefit from, repetition of auditory-verbal material, and from having long
activities broken down into shorter components, with frequent breaks.
PSYC30019 ASSIGNMENT INFORMATION 36
21st July 2023
Marking criteria for Assignment Three
Marking rubric Description of
child’s
background and
presentation
(5%)
Analysis and
display of test
results (20%)
Evaluation and
discussion of
test results
(45%)
Generation of a
formulation
(25%)
Clarity of writing
(5%)
H1 (80-100) Describes the
child’s
background and
presentation
during the
session clearly.
The results of
the tests
administered
are clearly
displayed for
the reader.
Normative data
is provided.
Analysis of the
data is correct.
Display is in APA
7th format.
Demonstrates
evidence of
thoughtfully
and skilfully
evaluating the
test results. The
results are
discussed
appropriately.
The formulation
is appropriate
based on the
data from the
session.
Demonstrates
excellent
editing,
grammar, and
language skill.
Sentences are
well
constructed. The
writing is
appropriate,
accessible,
articulate, and
succinct.
H2 (70-79) Mostly
describes the
child’s
background and
presentation
during the
session clearly.
The results of
the tests
administered
are displayed
for the reader.
Normative data
might be
provided
clearly. Analysis
of the data is
mostly correct.
Display may not
be in APA 7th
format.
Demonstrates a
good ability to
evaluate the
test results. The
results are
discussed
somewhat
appropriately.
The formulation
is mostly
appropriate
based on the
data from the
session.
Demonstrates
good editing,
grammar, and
language skill.
Sentences are
mostly well
constructed. The
writing is mostly
appropriate,
accessible,
articulate, and
succinct.
H3 to High Pass
(58-69)
Describes the
child’s
background and
presentation
during the
session but is
not very clear.
The results of
the tests may
not be clearly
displayed.
Normative data
might be
provided.
Analysis of the
data might not
be entirely
correct. Display
may not be in
APA 7th format.
Demonstrates a
basic ability to
evaluate and
discuss the test
results.
Shows some
attempt to
generate a
formulation
based on the
data from the
session.
Demonstrates
satisfactory
editing,
grammar, and
language skills.
Language use
and writing style
are mostly
appropriate for a
neuropsychology
report. Some
sentences are
well
constructed.
PSYC30019 ASSIGNMENT INFORMATION 37
21st July 2023

Marking rubric Description of
child’s
background and
presentation
(5%)
Analysis and
display of test
results (20%)
Evaluation and
discussion of
test results
(45%)
Generation of a
formulation
(25%)
Clarity of writing
(5%)
Low Pass (50-
57)
Presents a
description of
the child’s
background and
presentation in
a basic way.
Some of the
results of the
tests are clearly
displayed. Some
normative data
are provided.
Analysis of the
data might not
be correct.
Display may not
be in APA 7th
format.
Demonstrates
some attempt
to evaluate and
discuss the test
results.
Demonstrates a
basic ability to
generate a
formulation
based on the
data from the
session.
Demonstrates
some basic skill
with editing,
grammar, and
language use.
Shows a
satisfactory
attempt to use
language and
write in a way
that is
acceptable for a
neuropsychology
report.
Fail (<50) Description of
the child’s
background and
presentation is
absent.
The results of
the tests are
not clearly
displayed.
Normative data
are not
provided.
Analysis of the
data is
incorrect.
Display may not
be in APA 7th
format.
Demonstrates
no attempt to
evaluate and
discuss the test
results.
Demonstration
of a basic ability
to generate a
formulation
based on the
data from the
session is
absent.
Document
shows no
evidence of
basic editing,
grammar, and
language skills.
Writing is
inappropriate
for a
neuropsychology
report.