Entry For the CELA Student Award

Entry For the CELA Student Award

Instructions/Descriptions

Entry For the CELA Student Award

[Order Now]

Requirements:

Title. The submission must include a relatively short and specific title that describes the nature of

the project. The title and the identification number must be the only information on the first page

of the submission narrative.

Purpose. The submission starts with an abstract statement that is no longer than 300 words.

Background. The submission includes a background section that focuses on the project context,

importance, and significance. This section also includes discussion of the relevant literature and

state of the knowledge in the field.

Methods/Design Process. The submission includes a description of the methods/design process

employed in creating the work.

Conclusions. The submission includes a conclusion about the findings and relevancy of the

design proposal.

The total submission narrative should not exceed 1,500 words

Images must be briefly captioned (40 words or less).

Note: The student needs to give due credit to the relevant contributions, include proper citations, and clear

required copyrights for any images used. By submitting an entry for The CELA Student Award, the

submitting student grants The CELA permission to use all graphics and images in anyways The CELA

deems necessary. Student winner may be contacted for higher resolution images of their work for use on

you need focus on it!

Your project presents a design proposal for a therapeutic garden for people on the spectrum. As you have interpreted it, Autism translates as “sensory sensitivity” and the degree of sensitivity for people living on the spectrum can vary significantly.

So can the sensory stimulus within garden environments.

Your project models a design response for a garden space of respite for sensory sensitive users. It does this by identifying traditional garden design principles and refining these based on your findings from secondary research (your literature review and case studies) and from two community engagement activities: one prior to approaching your design exploration and one in response to your design proposals.

The traditional garden design principles that serve as the basis for your exploration include:

Scale

Degree of enclosure

Use of color: red, yellow, orange, green, bule, purple

Views: near, middle, far

Texture

Soundscape

Light

Based on your initial project investigation, you would already have had some assumptions about each of these in terms of how they might produce a garden of respite for people living on the spectrum.

Then, after conducting your Literature Review (including case studies), you would have developed new ideas or new ways of thinking about these principles specifically related to sensory sensitivity/Autism/spectrum.

Next, you developed a suite of research instruments (one for each of the principles identified) and staged a community engagement to collect data from a generalized population for each principle.  This data gives you the opportunity to compare your current understanding based on the following: your initial assumptions (based on your previous understanding and training as a designer); your secondary research (literature review and case studies specific to the TYPE of therapeutic garden (a garden for people living on the spectrum/Autism/sensory sensitivities);and finally, input and feedback from a generalized population.  (You should mention that although your community engagement was intended to target a generalized population, you recognize the potential for bias given that these were individuals that attended a sales event at a community commercial nursery and that such an event attracts both people with gardening inclinations but also community members aware of special needs populations, including people living on the spectrum.

For this discussion, you should develop your written explanation clearly and concisely (edit thoroughly to focus the discussion and begin to explore graphic options for summarizing this data and communicating its value in the context of your design approach, application and outcomes.  Again, do not invest time developing icons, logos or infographics per se: rather, focus on making a clear comparison of: initial assumptions, assumptions refined based on secondary research and assumptions refined based on initial community engagement.  In addition to your written description, this could be graphically-constructed table.  You are encouraged to consider developing a few options and getting our feedback early next semester for elements or options that best communicate findings. In this section you will describe the final stages, approaches and methods for your project.

Final Stages of Investigation and Methods of Research

Keep this section as a separate section from the “Findings and Discussion” session as this will be refined and incorporated later into your Chapter 3 “Approaches and Methods” section.  But in the meantime, keep this description on the tail of your Findings and Discussion section because it serves an important role in setting out your next stages of the project, both for yourself, and for your committee member learning about your project for the first time.

Based on my understanding of your project and observations thus far, the next steps for youwould be:

[Order Now]

revisit and refine your final submission from last semester based on current understanding

incorporate the first stage of your research approach and findings (based on your work this semester)

undertake a detailed, iterative and exhaustive design exploration for a therapeutic garden at the Grow Hub testing ground site incorporating design principles and elements identified in your research addressing the unique preferences and therapeutic benefits for garden users living on the spectrum and seeking respite/cognitive restoration.

Engage in one further community engagement activity specifically with people familiar with the needs and preferences of people “on the spectrum” or with “sensory sensitivities.

Conduct a comparative analysis across four centers of understanding: initial assumptions, assumptions based on secondary research; assumptions based on generalized community input and assumptions based on targeted demographic

You should plan on completing these 5 steps before the last week of January, with review feedback – revisions from you peers and Committee.

Entry For the CELA Student Award

RUBRIC Excellent Quality 95-100%   Introduction 45-41 points The context and relevance of the issue, as well as a clear description of the study aim, are presented. The history of searches is discussed. Literature Support 91-84  points The context and relevance of the issue, as well as a clear description of the study aim, are presented. The history of searches is discussed. Methodology 58-53 points With titles for each slide as well as bulleted sections to group relevant information as required, the content is well-organized. Excellent use of typeface, color, images, effects, and so on to improve readability and presenting content. The minimum length criterion of 10 slides/pages is reached. Average Score 50-85% 40-38 points More depth/information is required for the context and importance, otherwise the study detail will be unclear. There is no search history information supplied. 83-76  points There is a review of important theoretical literature, however there is limited integration of research into problem-related ideas. The review is just partly focused and arranged. There is research that both supports and opposes. A summary of the material given is provided. The conclusion may or may not include a biblical integration. 52-49  points The content is somewhat ordered, but there is no discernible organization. The use of typeface, color, graphics, effects, and so on may sometimes distract from the presenting substance. It is possible that the length criteria will not be reached. Poor Quality 0-45% 37-1 points The context and/or importance are lacking. There is no search history information supplied. 75-1 points There has been an examination of relevant theoretical literature, but still no research concerning problem-related concepts has been synthesized. The review is just somewhat focused and organized. The provided overview of content does not include any supporting or opposing research. The conclusion has no scriptural references. 48-1 points There is no logical or apparent organizational structure. There is no discernible logical sequence. The use of typeface, color, graphics, effects, and so on often detracts from the presenting substance. It is possible that the length criteria will not be reached. Entry For the CELA Student Award Place the Order Here: https://standardwriter.com/orders/ordernow / https://standardwriter.com/

Entry For the CELA Student Award

PLACE THE ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET A PERFECT SCORE!!!