Description
Navigate to the My Next Move website in Topic Resources and take the O*NET Interest Profiler quiz (https://www.onetonline.org/.) The O*NET Interest Profiler quiz is based on Holland’s theory of career choice. Holland’s theory notes that the personality traits of an individual are consistent with career choice and career satisfaction. Write a paper (1,000-1,250 words) about your quiz results. Include the following in your paper and a heading for each requirement:
Document the names and scores of your Holland Code (Referred to online as the Interest Profiler Results)
Based on the results, list three different careers offered as potential matches for you (each should be at a different job zone/educational level)
Identify the education required, potential outlook of the career, theoretical salary, and other information connected to the career
Provide your opinion of how useful the website was, how easy it was to use, how well the site connected you to careers you would actually be interested in
Discuss when, why, and how you may use this site when providing career counseling with clients
Describe the difficulties that could be encountered if a chosen career did not include the characteristics of your Holland Code?
Discuss how mental wellness impacts career choice and how career choice impacts mental wellness
At least three references from the O*Net site.
Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. You are allowed to use first person as appropriate in this assignment.
This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
Unformatted Attachment Preview
1/22/24, 10:46 AM
O*NET Interest Profiler: Score Report at My Next Move
O*NET Interest Profiler: Score Report
Your interest results:
Realistic
Investigative
Artistic
Social
Enterprising
Conventional
37
34
33
38
37
31
R
I
A
S
E
C
Realistic
Your score: 37
People with Realistic interests like work that
includes practical, hands-on problems and
answers. Often people with Realistic interests do
not like careers that involve paperwork or working
closely with others.
They like:
Working with plants and animals
Real-world materials like wood, tools, and
machinery
Outside work
Investigative
Your score: 34
People with Investigative interests like work that
has to do with ideas and thinking rather than
physical activity or leading people.
They like:
Searching for facts
Figuring out problems
Artistic
Your score: 33
People with Artistic interests like work that deals
with the artistic side of things, such as acting,
music, art, and design.
They like:
Creativity in their work
Work that can be done without following a
set of rules
Social
Your score: 38
People with Social interests like working with
others to help them learn and grow. They like
working with people more than working with
objects, machines, or information.
https://www.mynextmove.org/explore/ip-print?t=i&z=0&i=373433383731
They like:
Teaching
Giving advice
Helping and being of service to people
1/2
1/22/24, 10:46 AM
O*NET Interest Profiler: Score Report at My Next Move
Enterprising
Your score: 37
People with Enterprising interests like work that
has to do with starting up and carrying out
business projects. These people like taking action
rather than thinking about things.
They like:
Persuading and leading people
Making decisions
Taking risks for profits
Conventional
Your score: 31
People with Conventional interests like work that
follows set procedures and routines. They prefer
working with information and paying attention to
details rather than working with ideas.
They like:
Working with clear rules
Following a strong leader
Special Notice: Proper Use of O*NET Interest Profiler Results
You should use your O*NET Interest Profiler results to explore the world of work and identify careers that may satisfy what
is important to you in a job-your interests. You will be able to look at the interests satisfied by careers and compare them to
your own interests. Talk to a vocational/employment counselor or teacher for more help on how to use your O*NET Interest
Profiler results.
Your O*NET Interest Profiler results should not be used for employment or hiring decisions. Employers, education
programs, or other job-related programs should not use your results as part of a screening process for jobs or training.
If you think that your O*NET Interest Profiler results are being used incorrectly, talk to your vocational/employment
counselor, teacher, or program administrator. You also can contact the National Center for O*NET Development for assistance
via email: O*NET Customer Service ([email protected])
https://www.mynextmove.org/explore/ip-print?t=i&z=0&i=373433383731
2/2
ONET Paper (Obj. 1.4 and 1.5) – Rubric
Collapse All
Names and Scores of the Holland Code
5 points
Criteria Description
Discuss and explain the names and scores of the Holland Code
5. Target
5 points
Paper provides a comprehensive discussion about the names and scores of the
Holland Code. Holland Codes are mentioned, explained, and scores are reported.
Paper demonstrates an exceptional understanding of the topic.
4. Acceptable
4.35 points
Paper provides a thorough discussion about the names and scores of the Holland
Code. Holland Codes are mentioned and scores are reported. Paper demonstrates
understanding that extends beyond the surface the topic.
3. Approaching
3.95 points
Paper provides a basic discussion about the names and scores of the Holland Code.
Holland Codes are mentioned but scores are not reported. Paper demonstrates a
basic understanding of the topic.
2. Insufficient
3.7 points
Paper only vaguely or incompletely includes a discussion about the names and
scores of the Holland Code. Interest Profiler Results are mentioned but not
connected to Holland Codes. Paper demonstrates poor understanding of the topic.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Paper does not include the names and scores of the Holland Code. Paper does not
demonstrate understanding of the topic.
© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
Three Different Careers Offered as Potential Matches
10 points
Criteria Description
Discuss at least three different careers offered as potential matches
5. Target
10 points
Paper provides a comprehensive discussion about at least three different careers
offered as potential matches. Three or more careers are explored at three job
zone/educational levels. Paper demonstrates an exceptional understanding of the
topic.
4. Acceptable
8.7 points
Paper provides a thorough discussion about three different careers offered as
potential matches. Three careers are explored, but only at one to two jobs
zone/educational levels. Paper demonstrates understanding that extends beyond
the surface the topic.
3. Approaching
7.9 points
Paper provides a basic discussion about three different careers offered as potential
matches. Three careers are explored, but only at one job zone/educational level.
Paper demonstrates a basic understanding of the topic.
2. Insufficient
7.4 points
Paper only vaguely or incompletely includes a discussion about three different
careers offered as potential matches. Only one to two careers are explored. Paper
demonstrates poor understanding of the topic.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Paper does not include three different careers offered as potential matches. Paper
does not demonstrate understanding of the topic.
© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
Education Requirements, Career Outlook, and Theoretical Salary
10 points
Criteria Description
Discuss the educational requirements, career outlook, and theoretical salary of the
three careers offered as potential matches
5. Target
10 points
Paper provides a comprehensive discussion about educational requirements,
career outlook, and theoretical salary of the three careers offered as potential
matches. Three careers are discussed, all information requested is included, and
additional information is made available.Paper demonstrates an exceptional
understanding of the topic.
4. Acceptable
8.7 points
Paper provides a thorough discussion about educational requirements, career
outlook, and theoretical salary of the three careers offered as potential matches.
Three careers are discussed and all information requested is included. Paper
demonstrates understanding that extends beyond the surface the topic.
3. Approaching
7.9 points
Paper provides a basic discussion about educational requirements, career outlook,
and theoretical salary of the three careers offered as potential matches. One to two
careers are discussed, or discussion was missing some basic information.Paper
demonstrates a basic understanding of the topic.
2. Insufficient
7.4 points
Paper only vaguely or incompletely includes a discussion about educational
requirements, career outlook, and theoretical salary of the three careers offered as
potential matches. Only one career is discussed or multiple careers are discussed
inadequately.Paper demonstrates poor understanding of the topic.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Paper does not include a discussion about the educational requirements, career
outlook, and theoretical salary of the three careers offered as potential matches.
Paper does not demonstrate understanding of the topic.
© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
Usefulness of the Website
10 points
Criteria Description
Discuss the usefulness of the website and the potential ways the site could be
improved
5. Target
10 points
Paper provides a thorough discussion about the usefulness of the website.
Discussion is thorough and explains in detail what was useful providing specific
examples. Paper demonstrates understanding that extends beyond the surface the
topic. Paper provides a comprehensive discussion about the usefulness of the
website. Discussion is thorough, providing specific examples and includes potential
ways the site could be improved. Paper demonstrates an exceptional
understanding of the topic.
4. Acceptable
8.7 points
Paper provides a thorough discussion about the usefulness of the website.
Discussion is thorough and explains in detail what was useful providing specific
examples. Paper demonstrates understanding that extends beyond the surface the
topic.
3. Approaching
7.9 points
Paper provides a basic discussion about the usefulness of the website. Discussion
provides basic information indicating if the site is useful. Paper demonstrates a
basic understanding of the topic.
2. Insufficient
7.4 points
or incompletely includes a discussion about the usefulness of the website.
Discussion is vague and limited to how the site is liked or disliked. Paper
demonstrates poor understanding of the topic.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Paper does not include a discussion about the usefulness of the website. Paper
does not demonstrate understanding of the topic.
© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
When, Why, and How the Site Would be Used for Career Counseling
Criteria Description
Discuss when, why, and how the site would be used to provide career counseling
5. Target
15 points
Paper provides a comprehensive discussion about when, why, and how the site
would be used to provide career counseling. Discussion examines both appropriate
and inappropriate use of the website providing specific details and examples. Paper
demonstrates an exceptional understanding of the topic.
4. Acceptable
13.05 points
Paper provides a thorough discussion about when, why, and how the site would be
used to provide career counseling. Discussion thoroughly examines the uses of the
website providing specific details. Paper demonstrates understanding that extends
beyond the surface the topic.
3. Approaching
11.85 points
Paper provides a basic discussion about when, why, and how the site would be
used to provide career counseling. Discussion indicates some basic use of the
website in counseling. Paper demonstrates a basic understanding of the topic.
2. Insufficient
11.1 points
Paper only vaguely or incompletely includes a discussion about when, why, and how
the site would be used to provide career counseling. Discussion mentions whether
the site could be used without proving details. Paper demonstrates poor
understanding of the topic.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Paper does not include a discussion about when, why, and how the site would be
used to provide career counseling. Paper does not demonstrate understanding of
the topic.
© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
15 points
Chosen Career Difficulties
10 points
Criteria Description
Discuss the difficulties that would be encountered if a chosen career does not include
characteristics of your Holland Code
5. Target
10 points
Paper provides a comprehensive discussion about the difficulties that would be
encountered if a chosen career does not include characteristics of your Holland
Code. Discussion thoroughly examines the implications of not matching personality
types with jobs in the field of career counseling and provides scholarly research to
support explanation. Paper demonstrates an exceptional understanding of the
topic.
4. Acceptable
8.7 points
Paper provides a thorough discussion about the difficulties that would be
encountered if a chosen career does not include characteristics of your Holland
Code. Discussion thoroughly examines the implications of not matching personality
types with jobs in the field of career counseling. Paper demonstrates understanding
that extends beyond the surface the topic.
3. Approaching
7.9 points
Paper provides a basic Paper provides a basic discussion about the difficulties that
would be encountered if a chosen career does not include characteristics of your
Holland Code. Discussion indicates some basic connections to the field of career
counseling. Paper demonstrates a basic understanding of the topic.
2. Insufficient
7.4 points
Paper only vaguely or incompletely includes a discussion about the difficulties that
would be encountered if a chosen career does not include characteristics of your
Holland Code. Discussion is vague and does not make relevant connections to the
field career counseling. Paper demonstrates poor understanding of the topic.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Paper does not include a discussion about the difficulties that would be
encountered if a chosen career does not include characteristics of your Holland
Code. Paper does not demonstrate understanding of the topic.
© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
Mental Wellness and Career Choice
10 points
Criteria Description
Mental Wellness and Career Choice
5. Target
10 points
Paper provides a comprehensive discussion about how mental wellness impacts
career choice and how career choice impacts mental wellness. Discussion is
thorough, providing specific examples and includes potential ways the site could be
improved. Paper demonstrates an exceptional understanding of the topic.
4. Acceptable
8.7 points
Paper provides a thorough discussion about how mental wellness impacts career
choice and how career choice impacts mental wellness. Discussion is thorough and
explains in detail what was useful providing specific examples. Paper demonstrates
understanding that extends beyond the surface the topic.
3. Approaching
7.9 points
Paper provides a basic discussion about how mental wellness impacts career choice
and how career choice impacts mental wellness. Discussion provides basic
information indicating if the site is useful. Paper demonstrates a basic
understanding of the topic.
2. Insufficient
7.4 points
Paper only vaguely or incompletely includes a discussion about how mental
wellness impacts career choice and how career choice impacts mental wellness.
Discussion is vague and limited to how the site is liked or disliked. Paper
demonstrates poor understanding of the topic.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Paper does not include a discussion about how mental wellness impacts career
choice and how career choice impacts mental wellness. Paper does not
demonstrate understanding of the topic.
© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
Thesis, Position, or Purpose
7 points
Criteria Description
Communicates reason for writing and demonstrates awareness of audience.
5. Target
7 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is persuasively developed throughout and skillfully
directed to a specific audience.
4. Acceptable
6.09 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is clearly communicated throughout and clearly
directed to a specific audience.
3. Approaching
5.53 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is adequately developed. An awareness of the
appropriate audience is demonstrated.
2. Insufficient
5.18 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is discernable in most aspects but is occasionally
weak or unclear. There is limited awareness of the appropriate audience.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is not discernible. No awareness of the appropriate
audience is evident.
© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
Development, Structure, and Conclusion
8 points
Criteria Description
Advances position or purpose throughout writing; conclusion aligns to and evolves
from development.
5. Target
8 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is coherently and cohesively advanced throughout.
The progression of ideas is coherent and unified. A convincing and unambiguous
conclusion aligns to the development of the purpose.
4. Acceptable
6.96 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is logically advanced throughout. The progression
of ideas is coherent and unified. A clear and plausible conclusion aligns to the
development of the purpose.
3. Approaching
6.32 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is advanced in most aspects. Ideas clearly build on
each other. Conclusion aligns to the development of the purpose.
2. Insufficient
5.92 points
Limited advancement of thesis, position, or purpose is discernable. There are
inconsistencies in organization or the relationship of ideas. Conclusion is simplistic
and not fully aligned to the development of the purpose.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
No advancement of the thesis, position, or purpose is evident. Connections
between paragraphs are missing or inappropriate. No conclusion is offered.
© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
Evidence
5 points
Criteria Description
Selects and integrates evidence to support and advance position/purpose; considers
other perspectives.
5. Target
5 points
Comprehensive and compelling evidence is included. Multiple other perspectives
are integrated effectively.
4. Acceptable
4.35 points
Specific and appropriate evidence is included. Other perspectives are integrated.
3. Approaching
3.95 points
Relevant evidence that includes other perspectives is used.
2. Insufficient
3.7 points
Evidence is used but is insufficient or of limited relevance. Simplistic explanation or
integration of other perspectives is present.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Evidence to support the thesis, position, or purpose is absent. The writing relies
entirely on the perspective of the writer.
© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
Mechanics of Writing
5 points
Criteria Description
Includes spelling, capitalization, punctuation, grammar, language use, sentence
structure, etc.
5. Target
5 points
No mechanical errors are present. Skilled control of language choice and sentence
structure are used throughout.
4. Acceptable
4.35 points
Few mechanical errors are present. Suitable language choice and sentence
structure are used.
3. Approaching
3.95 points
Occasional mechanical errors are present. Language choice is generally
appropriate. Varied sentence structure is attempted.
2. Insufficient
3.7 points
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors are present. Inconsistencies in language
choice or sentence structure are recurrent.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Errors in grammar or syntax are pervasive and impede meaning. Incorrect language
choice or sentence structure errors are found throughout.
© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
Format/Documentation
5 points
Criteria Description
Uses appropriate style, such as APA, MLA, etc., for college, subject, and level;
documents sources using citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc.,
appropriate to assignment and discipline.
5. Target
5 points
No errors in formatting or documentation are present. Selectivity in the use of
direct quotations and synthesis of sources is demonstrated.
4. Acceptable
4.35 points
Appropriate format and documentation are used with only minor errors.
3. Approaching
3.95 points
Appropriate format and documentation are used, although there are some obvious
errors.
2. Insufficient
3.7 points
Appropriate format is attempted, but some elements are missing. Frequent errors
in documentation of sources are evident.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Appropriate format is not used. No documentation of sources is provided.
Total 100 points
© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
