i need someone to rework on this assignment keenness on the c peel format should be ensured attached is my first draft
I need someone to rework on this assignment. Keenness on the C-PEEL format should be ensured. Attached is my first draft . No plagiarism and grammar errors and typos
Professor’s comments
The first paragraph of your Analysis 1 needs little time to edit for resubmission as body paragraphs in the essay, so you are done most of the essay too.
The second paragraph of your analysis is a bit tricky because unlike the first paragraph where you paraphrased the findings, in the second paragraph you did not paraphrase most of the findings. Copying quotations has left the meaning unclear.
To make it easier, I have marked only the first paragraph (so that the mark is not affected by the second paragraph. Also I have provided you with new findings for the second paragraph so that you can start afresh. You will resubmit both paragraphs as part of the essay.
***
Here is my feedback:
Paragraph 1
You have actually followed the C-PEEL paragraph structure and you have included the APA in-text citation. You have also paraphrased the claim and the findings really well.
Editing here is based a simple clue. Once it is fixed, the editing will be very easy. I expect the editing of this paragraph to take you about one hour.
I will refer to line numbers in the paragraph to facilitate editing.
The editing mostly involves deleting parts of the paragraph. I summarize them in the following:
- You actually begin with two different claims. I suggest you remove the claim about coaches sharing online and focus instead on the second claim: the one about coachees benefiting from prior experience with therapy or self-understanding.
- Once you have focused on the claim about coachees’ prior experience, you can now go ahead and remove any reference – mostly in the explanations – to the first claim:
- Delete the sentence that starts at line five and ends in line six.
- Delete the sentence that starts with “giving” and ends with “money-oriented process” in lines 9 to 12.
- Once you have deleted first sentence and the explanation lines above, go back and re-read the paragraph. Ensure that you are aware of the difference between a therapist (not our topic); a coach; and the coachee (the client).
- The first finding’s explanation can be edited to add a phrase: “So it is not the coachee who needs prior experience. It is the coach’s responsibility – as it is the therapist’s – to develop excellent interpersonal communication skills. Great coaches must have the skill and knowledge about life problems…” etc.
- In line 17 (explanation to Grant and O’Conner’s finding), you can simply add (again), “hence it is the coach’s job not to help the coachee’s find solutions” right after your sentence that ends with “solution”.
- Minor editing involves looking again at the places where you mention therapists/therapy (lines 4, 19); replacing “that” with “which” (line 8); and editing the sentence/finding paraphrase in lines 13-14 – my suggestion is to delete the beginning of the sentence so it become, “Solution-based approaches work quite better than the problem-based ones; solution-based coaching increase individuals’ understanding of coaching and participation”.
Paragraph 2
As I mentioned in the opening above, the main issue with this paragraph is quotation. When findings are quoted, the meaning is lost. In other words, paraphrasing offers the reader understanding; paraphrasing gives you the opportunity to convey your understanding of the findings. It is then easier to explain the finding’s relevance to the claim.
Instead of going back and editing the paragraph, I suggest you keep the same claim but start the paragraph afresh with the findings below.
Though I have quoted the findings (with the same sources you used), remember that your role is to paraphrase them.
Regarding the claim paraphrase, instead of Spinks and her client Maria, you may want to make the claim a general claim: Spinks claims that it is difficult who leads the session, the coach or the coachee (para. 24). You do not need the year of publication in Analysis 1 (or 2) for Spinks but you do need it for the four/five sources you research. I expect this second paragraph to take about an 40-60 minutes.
New Findings
- Artigliere and Baecher, 2016, 83. Here you have paraphrased and included embedded quotation, but the quotation marks make difficult to know where the quotation begins and ends. I would just correct that. “This is quotation”. “To add quotation within quotation, add ‘single quotation marks’ like this”. For this finding, your explanation is clear; I would add a new sentence explaining that “having non-evaluative training is the definition of coaching” just before your explanation. This finding thus supports the claim.
- Bradford, Rutherford, and Friend, 2017 – new page number – new findings. Try to (a)paraphrase the main ideas in the three quotations below and then (b) decide whether together they confirm or contradict Spinks’ claim that coaching (when coach and coachee have a close relationship) is effective.
- First quotation: “Coaching was considered in this study as the on-going direction and instructionprovided to a salesperson by a superior for the purpose of increasing their sales competence” (from page 143).
- Second quotation: “Our results identify internal mentoring as having a significant association with personal learning, whereas, external mentoring … did not” (also from page 143).
- Let me explain. This study defines coaching as “internal mentoring” and finds that internal mentoring is successful, i.e. coaching is successful.
- The question is whether this type of coaching/internal mentoring is informal (friendship as with Spinks claim) or formal (contrary to Spinks). The third quotation gives us the answer:
- Third quotation: “Additional findings from the study regarding mentoring confirm both informal and formal mentoring have positive effects on personal learning” (also from page 143).
- This finding seems to suggest that Spinks’ claim is not valid: whether the coach is friendly (informal) or formal (dominant) does not make a difference; both types of coaching are effective.
- Ianiro, Lehmann-Willenbrock, and Kauffeld, 2015, 450 – same page but different finding. The quotation below is clearer than the one you used. Paraphrasing it will be easier. This finding confirms Spinks’ claim about the role of friendliness, which allows the coach and the coachee to take turns in leading the coaching session.The finding below suggests Spinks’ claim is valid.
- Quotation – from page 450: “dominant coach behavior was followed by similarly dominant client behavior only when combined with friendliness“.
- Ianiro, Schermuly, and Kauffeld, 2013, 37 – same page but different findings. If you notice below, “interpersonal compatibility” can be considered the kind of “friendship” Spinks explains in her claim. So your next step is to paraphrase the key finding/idea – you can keep the keywords. The finding below also suggests Spinks’ claim is valid.
- Finding: “Interpersonal compatibility of coach and client seems to be beneficial to the client’s ratings of relationship quality and goal attainment. This finding indicates that not only the coach’s interpersonal behaviour in the first coaching session but also the fit of coach and client interpersonal behaviour is linked to ratings of coaching success four months later” (from page ).
Since three out of the four findings above confirm Spinks’ claim, your verdict – judgement pronounced – can be that indeed her claim is valid.
I hope this helps. Your mark is 11/15.
You are already done most of the essay.
- The summary you completed at the beginning of the semester becomes the introduct
ion to the essay. You just add your thesis as the last sentence of the introduction. - Analyses paragraphs (Analysis 1 and Analysis 2) become the four body paragraphs.
- You only have to add a conclusion (your personal advice on the topic of life coaching or how to achieve one’s goals) and the references page (Spinks’ and sources used in Analysis 1).
