Every order is original, expert-done, and screened for AI — full report on request.See how it works

Assignment questions
PsychologyDiscussion postCounseling ethics

PCN 520 Week 1 DQ 1: Ranking Ethical Violations

Choosing five most serious violations is a ranking, and a ranking without a stated criterion is just a list of things you dislike. State the criterion first.

Editorial process

Last reviewed · August 16, 2026

01

Ranking is the assignment, and rankings need criteria

The instruction that decides this post is most serious. That is a comparative judgement, and it needs a criterion before it needs examples. Say what makes one violation worse than another and apply it consistently. Three criteria are defensible and they do not always agree: severity of harm to the client, irreversibility, and whether the violation exploits the power asymmetry that makes counselling work at all. Sexual contact with a client ranks first on all three, which is why every code treats it as categorical rather than as a matter of degree. Practising outside your competence ranks high on harm but lower on exploitation, and is far more common. Breaching confidentiality is often irreversible in a way that no remedy repairs, since the information cannot be recalled once it has moved. Financial exploitation belongs in the same conversation, since it fails the exploitation test outright even when the sums are small and the client never complains.

Then defend the five you chose, and the defence is the substance of the post. Where two of your criteria disagree, say so, because that is where the thinking shows. A boundary crossing that appears minor — accepting a gift, a dual role in a small community — may cause little immediate harm and still corrode the frame the therapy depends on, and whether that belongs in your top five is a real argument rather than a lookup. Group work adds its own hazards worth naming here, since this is a group counselling course: confidentiality is held by members who are not bound by the code, coercing participation in an exercise is easier to do than to notice, and screening someone into a group who should not be there exposes both them and everyone else. Anchor each selection to a provision of an actual code rather than to intuition.

Likely learning objectives

Inferred from the brief — check these against your own rubric.

  • 01
    State an explicit criterion before ranking ethical violations.
  • 02
    Apply competing criteria and acknowledge where they disagree.
  • 03
    Anchor a judgement to a provision of a professional code.
  • 04
    Identify hazards specific to group counselling.
Assignment instructionsQuoted verbatim

Read the full question

Review every instruction before using the planning guidance that follows.

PCN 520 Grand Canyon Week 1 Discussion 1 Latest July 2016 DQ 1 : Complete Self-Inventory of Ethical Behaviors. Complete Self-Inventory of Ethical Behaviors. Select the five behaviors that you consider to be the most serious violations of ethical practice. What are the reasons for your selection of these behaviors? Explain.
Course-wide instructions that accompany this question

Important information for writing discussion questions and participation Hi Class, Please read through the following information on writing a Discussion question response and participation posts. Contact me if you have any questions. Important information on Writing a Discussion Question Your response needs to be a minimum of 150 words (not including your list of references) There needs to be at least TWO references with ONE being a peer reviewed professional journal article. Include in-text citations in your response Do not include quotes—instead summarize and paraphrase the information Follow APA-7th edition Points will be deducted if the above is not followed Participation –replies to your classmates or instructor A minimum of 6 responses per week, on at least 3 days of the week. Each response needs at least ONE reference with citations—best if it is a peer reviewed journal article Each response needs to be at least 75 words in length (does not include your list of references) Responses need to be substantive by bringing information to the discussion or further enhance the discussion. Responses of “I agree” or “great post” does not count for the word count. Follow APA 7th edition Points will be deducted if the above is not followed Remember to use and follow APA-7th edition for all weekly assignments, discussion questions, and participation points. Here are some helpful links Student paper example Citing Sources The Writing Center is a great resource Welcome to class Hello class and welcome to the class and I will be your instructor for this course. This is a -week course and requires a lot of time commitment, organization, and a high level of dedication. Please use the class syllabus to guide you through all the assignments required for the course. I have also attached the classroom policies to this announcement to know your expectations for this course. Please review this document carefully and ask me any questions if you do. You could email me at any time or send me a message via the “message” icon in halo if you need to contact me. I check my email regularly, so you should get a response within 24 hours. If you have not heard from me within 24 hours and need to contact me urgently, please send a follow up text to. I strongly encourage that you do not wait until the very last minute to complete your assignments. Your assignments in weeks 4 and 5 require early planning as you would need to present a teaching plan and interview a community health provider. I advise you look at the requirements for these assignments at the beginning of the course and plan accordingly. I have posted the YouTube link that explains all the class assignments in detail. It is required that you watch this 32-minute video as the assignments from week 3 through 5 require that you follow the instructions to the letter to succeed. Failure to complete these assignments according to instructions might lead to a zero. After watching the video, please schedule a one-on-one with me to discuss your topic for your project by the second week of class. Use this link to schedule a 15-minute session. Please, call me at the time of your appointment on my number. Please note that I will NOT call you. Please, be advised I do NOT accept any assignments by email. If you are having technical issues with uploading an assignment, contact the technical department and inform me of the issue. If you have any issues that would prevent you from getting your assignments to me by the deadline, please inform me to request a possible extension. Note that working fulltime or overtime is no excuse for late assignments. There is a 5%-point deduction for every day your assignment is late. This only applies to approved extensions. Late assignments will not be accepted. If you think you would be needing accommodations due to any reasons, please contact the appropriate department to request accommodations. Plagiarism is highly prohibited. Please ensure you are citing your sources correctly using APA 7th edition. All assignments including discussion posts should be formatted in APA with the appropriate spacing, font, margin, and indents. Any papers not well formatted would be returned back to you, hence, I advise you review APA formatting style. I have attached a sample paper in APA format and will also post sample discussion responses in subsequent announcements. Your initial discussion post should be a minimum of 200 words and response posts should be a minimum of 150 words. Be advised that I grade based on quality and not necessarily the number of words you post. A minimum of TWO references should be used for your initial post. For your response post, you do not need references as personal experiences would count as response posts. If you however cite anything from the literature for your response post, it is required that you cite your reference. You should include a minimum of THREE references for papers in this course. Please note that references should be no more than 5 years old except recommended as a resource for the class. Furthermore, for each discussion board question, you need ONE initial substantive response and TWO substantive responses to either your classmates or your instructor for a total of THREE responses. There are TWO discussion questions each week, hence, you need a total minimum of SIX discussion posts for each week. I usually post a discussion question each week. You could also respond to these as it would count towards your required SIX discussion posts for the week. I understand this is a lot of information to cover in 5 weeks, however, the Bible says in Philippians 4:13 that we can do all things through Christ that strengthens us. Even in times like this, we are encouraged by God’s word that we have that ability in us to succeed with His strength. I pray that each and every one of you receives strength for this course and life generally as we navigate through this pandemic that is shaking our world today. Relax and enjoy the course! PCN 520 Grand Canyon Week 1 Discussion 1 Latest July 2016 Grading Rubric Guidelines Performance Category 10 9 8 4 0 Scholarliness Demonstrates achievement of scholarly inquiry for professional and academic decisions. Provides relevant evidence of scholarly inquiry clearly stating how the evidence informed or changed professional or academic decisions Evaluates literature resources to develop a comprehensive analysis or synthesis. Uses valid, relevant, and reliable outside sources to contribute to the threaded discussion Provides relevant evidence of scholarly inquiry but does not clearly state how the evidence informed or changed professional or academic decisions. Evaluates information from source(s) to develop a coherent analysis or synthesis. Uses some valid, relevant, reliable outside sources to contribute to the threaded discussion. Discusses using scholarly inquiry but does not state how scholarly inquiry informed or changed professional or academic decisions. Information is taken from source(s) with some interpretation/evaluation, but not enough to develop a coherent analysis or synthesis. Little valid, relevant, or reliable outside sources are used to contribute to the threaded discussion. Demonstrates little or no understanding of the topic. Discusses using scholarly inquiry but does not state how scholarly inquiry informed or changed professional or academic decisions. Information is taken from source(s) without any interpretation/evaluation. The posting uses information that is not valid, relevant, or reliable No evidence of the use of scholarly inquiry to inform or change professional or academic decisions. Information is not valid, relevant, or reliable Performance Category 10 9 8 4 0 Application of Course Knowledge – Demonstrate the ability to analyze, synthesize, and/or apply principles and concepts learned in the course lesson and outside readings and relate them to real-life professional situations Posts make direct reference to concepts discussed in the lesson or drawn from relevant outside sources; Applies concepts to personal experience in the professional setting and or relevant application to real life. Posts make direct reference to concepts discussed in the lesson or drawn from relevant outside sources. Applies concepts to personal experience in their professional setting and or relevant application to real life Interactions with classmates are relevant to the discussion topic but do not make direct reference to lesson content Posts are generally on topic but do not build knowledge by incorporating concepts and principles from the lesson. Does not attempt to apply lesson concepts to personal experience in their professional setting and or relevant application to real life Does not demonstrate a solid understanding of the principles and concepts presented in the lesson Posts do not adequately address the question posed either by the discussion prompt or the instructor’s launch post. Posts are superficial and do not reflect an understanding of the lesson content Does not attempt to apply lesson concepts to personal experience in their professional setting and or relevant application to real life Posts are not related to the topics provided by the discussion prompt or by the instructor; attempts by the instructor to redirect the student are ignored No discussion of lesson concepts to personal experience in the professional setting and or relevant application to real life Performance Category 5 4 3 2 0 Interactive Dialogue Replies to each graded thread topic posted by the course instructor, by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT, of each week, and posts a minimum of two times in each graded thread, on separate days. (5 points possible per graded thread) Exceeds minimum post requirements Replies to each graded thread topic posted by the course instructor, by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT, of each week, and posts three or more times in each graded thread, over three separate days. Replies to a post posed by faculty and to a peer Summarizes what was learned from the lesson, readings, and other student posts for the week. Replies to each graded thread topic posted by the course instructor, by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT, of each week, and posts a minimum of two times in each graded thread, on separate days Replies to a question posed by a peer Summarizes what was learned from the lesson, readings, and other student posts for the week. Meets expectations of 2 posts on 2 different days. The main post is not made by the Wednesday deadline Does not reply to a question posed by a peer or faculty Has only one post for the week Discussion posts contain few, if any, new ideas or applications; often are a rehashing or summary of other students’ comments Does not post to the thread No connections are made to the topic Minus 1 Point Minus 2 Point Minus 3 Point Minus 4 Point Minus 5 Point Grammar, Syntax, APA Note: if there are only a few errors in these criteria, please note this for the student in as an area for improvement. If the student does not make the needed corrections in upcoming weeks, then points should be deducted. Points deducted for improper grammar, syntax and APA style of writing. The source of information is the APA Manual 6th Edition 2-3 errors in APA format. Written responses have 2-3 grammatical, spelling, and punctuation errors. Writing style is generally clear, focused, and facilitates communication. 4-5 errors in APA format. Writing responses have 4-5 grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors. Writing style is somewhat focused. 6-7 errors in APA format. Writing responses have 6-7 grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors. Writing style is slightly focused making discussion difficult to understand. 8-10 errors in APA format. Writing responses have 8-10 grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors. Writing style is not focused, making discussion difficult to understand. Post contains greater than 10 errors in APA format. Written responses have more than 10 grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors. Writing style does not facilitate communication. The student continues to make repeated mistakes in any of the above areas after written correction by the instructor 0 points lost -5 points lost Total Participation Requirements per discussion thread The student answers the threaded discussion question or topic on one day and posts a second response on another day. The student does not meet the minimum requirement of two postings on two different days Early Participation Requirement per discussion thread The student must provide a substantive answer to the graded discussion question(s) or topic(s), posted by the course instructor (not a response to a peer), by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT of each week. The student does not meet the requirement of a substantive response to the stated question or topic by Wednesday at 11:59 pm MT.

02

Turn the brief into deliverables

  1. 01
    Exactly five behaviours, as the prompt specifies.
  2. 02
    A stated ranking criterion, or set of criteria.
  3. 03
    A defence for each selection against that criterion.
  4. 04
    At least one case where the criteria conflict.
  5. 05
    Group-specific hazards addressed.
03

The five, the criterion, then the defence

01

What makes a violation serious

Establish criteria before ranking anything.

02

The categorical violations

Handle the ones every code treats as absolute.

03

The harder cases

Argue for selections where the criteria disagree.

04

Group-specific hazards

Name the risks that only arise in group format.

05

Anchoring to the code

Tie each selection to a provision.

04

Anchor the ranking in a code, not in instinct

Recommended databases

  • Your professional code of ethics
  • NCBI Bookshelf
  • PubMed Central
  • PsycINFO

Search sequence

  1. 1.
    Read the code's sections on boundaries, competence and confidentiality before ranking.
  2. 2.
    Search for disciplinary case summaries to see what regulators treat as most serious.
  3. 3.
    Look for literature on group confidentiality, which behaves differently.
  4. 4.
    Check whether your code has a separate group-work provision.
05

Reference shortlist

These are authoritative starting points, not a ready-made bibliography. A qualified reviewer must confirm that each source fits the assignment and supports the claim beside which it is cited.

Nothing here is cleared for citation until you have read it.

  1. 01

    Patient Confidentiality

    StatPearls, NCBI Bookshelf · 2023

    Confidentiality as a clinical and legal obligation, and where its limits sit.

  2. 02

    Group Therapy

    StatPearls, NCBI Bookshelf · 2023

    Group therapy's mechanisms and structure, which is what a leader is managing.

  3. 03

    Keys to great group therapy

    Monitor on Psychology, American Psychological Association · 2019

    Practitioner-facing account of what makes group work succeed, useful for the leader-skill sections.

  4. 04

    Research Ethics

    StatPearls, NCBI Bookshelf · 2023

    Professional obligations around competence and consent, in citable form.

  5. 05

    Medical ethics: four principles plus attention to scope

    BMJ (British Medical Journal) · 1994

    A principles framework for arguing which duty a violation breaches, and how badly.

06

Review before submission

Common mistakes

  • Listing five violations with no criterion for what makes them the most serious.
  • Choosing only the obvious categorical violations, so no judgement is demonstrated.
  • Relying on intuition rather than on a code provision.
  • Ignoring group-specific risks in a group counselling course.

Submission checklist

  • Is your criterion stated before your list?
  • Are there exactly five?
  • Does at least one selection involve a genuine judgement call?
  • Is each anchored to a code provision?

Use this guide to plan and review your own work. Follow your institution's rules and read our academic-integrity policy.

Written by

Aaron Bishop

MA, Education

assignment interpretation and research-methods coaching across disciplines

Aaron leads the EssayCrackers editorial desk. He works on how assignment briefs are read — what a rubric is actually asking for, and where students most often answer a different question than the one set.

Reviewed by

Dr. Nathan Cole

PhD, Rhetoric & Composition

Argumentation and thesis development

Nathan teaches first-year composition and directs a university writing center. He reviews EssayCrackers guides for argumentative soundness and citation accuracy.

Want feedback on your plan before you draft?

Get help interpreting the brief, checking your evidence strategy, and strengthening your outline while keeping the work your own.

Get assignment guidance
Start your order