| Course | HW315 Models for Health and Wellness |
|---|---|
| Unit | Unit 10 |
| Paper type | Wellness model portfolio |
| Length | About 920 words, 6 pages double-spaced |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Purdue University Global |
| Program | BS in Health and Wellness |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for HW315 Unit 10
Five Model Cards, Each With a Win and a Miss: A Unit 10 Wellness Model Portfolio Built From a Term of Cases
[Student Name]
Purdue University Global
HW315: Models for Health and Wellness
Unit 10 Wellness Model Portfolio
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
The cases summarized are the composite clients from the writer's earlier units; every theory source cited is real.
Guide: Which Model for Which Question
Models answer different questions, and choosing one starts with the question being asked.
1. Will this person act on a health threat? Health Belief Model.
2. How ready is this person to change, and what kind of help fits that readiness? Transtheoretical Model.
3. What shapes this person's intention, and does control over the act get in the way? Theory of Planned Behavior.
4. Does this person believe they can do it, and how does the environment teach them? Social Cognitive Theory.
5. What need does the behavior serve, and is the motivation chosen or imposed? Self-Determination Theory.
Card 1: Health Belief Model
Constructs: how exposed and how threatened a person feels, what they think acting would gain and cost, what prompts them, and, added later, their confidence (Janz & Becker, 1984; Rosenstock, 1974).
Win: Marguerite, the bookkeeper who keeps mammograms current and has never had a colonoscopy (Unit 3). Her beliefs about the two cancers matched; only barriers differed, and the model predicted the split from that one construct.
Miss: my own flossing relapse (Unit 1). Nothing I believed about my gums changed when I stopped, so the model had nothing left to explain the stop with. The point of failure: the model has no account of routine.
Card 2: Transtheoretical Model
Constructs: stages from precontemplation to maintenance, decisional balance, self-efficacy and processes of change (Prochaska & Velicer, 1997).
Win: Tanya, the receptionist whose "maybe after the holidays" placed her in contemplation (Unit 4). The stage criteria turned a vague sentence into a clear reading, and decisional balance located her ambivalence.
Miss: Danielle, the server who takes her pill on workdays only (Unit 2). Stages describe a person, not a setting, and Danielle was not in a different stage on Sundays. The point of failure: no place for behavior that varies by context within one stage.
Card 3: Theory of Planned Behavior
Constructs: attitude, subjective norm, perceived behavioral control and intention (Ajzen, 1991).
Win: Danielle again (Unit 2). Actual control over taking the pill changed with the setting while her intention did not, and the theory allows exactly that.
Miss: Brianna, the home-care aide who stopped using the transfer belt (Unit 6). The theory captured her attitude at one moment but not the learning that produced it. The point of failure: it records the result of reinforcement only after the fact.
Card 4: Social Cognitive Theory
Constructs: reciprocal influence of person, behavior and environment; self-efficacy; outcome expectations; observational learning (Bandura, 2004). Self-efficacy draws on mastery, vicarious experience, persuasion and emotional states (Bandura, 1977).
Win: Harold, the widower who said he would cook if he knew how (Unit 7). Each of the four sources became a row of the plan, and the emotional row guided its sequence.
Miss: Nicole, the woman cutting back on weeknight wine (Unit 8). The theory's breadth could absorb her husband's evening glass as an environmental cue, but it did not direct me to map her network or to see that the same person could be her strongest support and strongest obstacle. The point of failure: precision. It explained everything and pointed to nothing in particular.
Card 5: Self-Determination Theory
Constructs: a continuum from controlled to autonomous motivation, and three basic needs, autonomy, competence and relatedness (Ryan & Deci, 2000).
Win: Marcus, the technician whose three gym memberships lapsed (Unit 9). The theory explained why controlled, guilt-driven exercise faded and pointed to an activity he chose.
Miss: Walt, the machinist afraid of chest pain on solitary walks (Unit 5). His needs for autonomy and relatedness mattered, but the decisive barrier was fear, and the theory has no construct that names it. The point of failure: it treats a frightened person as an unmotivated one.
No model won every case, and each failed at an identifiable point: belief models at routine, stage models at context, intention models at learning, broad models at precision and need models at fear.
Revised Application: Unit 1
The original Unit 1 post concluded that the Health Belief Model could not explain my relapse. That conclusion stands, but my explanation was thin. Revised, the post would add that habit research shows new behaviors take a median of about 66 days of repetition in a stable context to become automatic (Lally et al., 2010), so nine nights left the behavior fully dependent on deliberate choice. The trip did not break a habit; it removed the cue before a habit existed. That revision draws on Social Cognitive Theory's attention to environment, the model I would now pair with the Health Belief Model for this case.
Reflective Essay: How I Use Models Now
At the start of the term I chose models the way I chose a tool from a drawer, by familiarity. I now begin with the question. If I want to know whether a person will act on a threat, I start with health beliefs; if I want to know why the same person acts differently in two places, I look at control and environment. I also expect every model to fail somewhere, and I look for the failure point before I trust the fit.
References
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179-211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191
Bandura, A. (2004). Health promotion by social cognitive means. Health Education & Behavior, 31(2), 143-164. https://doi.org/10.1177/1090198104263660
Janz, N. K., & Becker, M. H. (1984). The health belief model: A decade later. Health Education Quarterly, 11(1), 1-47. https://doi.org/10.1177/109019818401100101
Lally, P., van Jaarsveld, C. H. M., Potts, H. W. W., & Wardle, J. (2010). How are habits formed: Modelling habit formation in the real world. European Journal of Social Psychology, 40(6), 998-1009. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.674
Prochaska, J. O., & Velicer, W. F. (1997). The transtheoretical model of health behavior change. American Journal of Health Promotion, 12(1), 38-48. https://doi.org/10.4278/0890-1171-12.1.38
Rosenstock, I. M. (1974). Historical origins of the health belief model. Health Education Monographs, 2(4), 328-335. https://doi.org/10.1177/109019817400200403
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68-78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68
Reading the HW 315 Unit 10 instructions
The final portfolio asks students to compile what they learned about behavior change models into one organized document. Prompts commonly expect a guide or introduction, a section for each model with its constructs and sources, applications from earlier units, at least one revised assignment and a reflective essay. Organize by the question each model answers. For every model, show where it worked and where it failed, citing the case and the point of failure. Define constructs in the model's own terms with original sources. Revise one earlier application to show growth, and say what changed. Keep the reflective essay focused on how your use of models has changed. Do not add models the course did not cover. Eight to twelve pages is typical.
How the HW 315 Unit 10 example is put together
A guide lists five questions and the model suited to each. Five cards follow in the order the course introduced them, each with constructs and citations, a win drawn from an earlier unit's composite client and a miss with its failure point stated in a sentence. The Transtheoretical card, for example, wins on the receptionist's staging and misses on the server's split by setting. The highlighted sentence condenses the five failure points into one finding. A revised Unit 1 analysis adds that habits take a median of about 66 days to form, so the trip removed a cue before any habit existed. A short essay describes choosing a model by its question and looking for its failure first.
Where the points sit in the HW315 Unit 10 rubric
HW315 portfolio rubrics generally assess synthesis, accuracy, evidence of growth and organization. Synthesis is shown when the portfolio compares models and reaches a conclusion about when each is useful. Accuracy covers construct definitions and citations to original sources. Growth is judged through the revised assignment and the reflective essay, which should show a real change in reasoning. Organization earns points when the reader can find the right model for a question quickly. Inclusion of failure cases is often rewarded as evidence of critical thinking. APA formatting and clear writing complete the rubric. Portfolios that collect earlier papers without comparison, or that show only successes, tend to score lower.
HW315 Unit 10 help from the desk
Model portfolios are often assembled as folders of earlier assignments with a cover page, which misses the synthesis graders look for. Another weakness is listing only cases where each model worked, which suggests the models were never tested. Construct definitions are sometimes inconsistent across cards. The revised assignment is frequently a light edit rather than a real change in reasoning. Reflective essays tend to describe the course instead of the writer's own method. Models the course never used occasionally appear as filler. Once the earlier units are graded, send them along with the feedback you received, and a writer will draft model cards that pair each theory's best case with its clearest miss.
Get an HW315 Unit 10 example written to your instructions
The applications written this term, and the comments that came back on them, provide the raw material; add the portfolio instructions and rubric. Each model gets a card with a success, a failure and the point it broke, one application is rebuilt in depth, and the essay traces how your method changed. Delivery takes 24-48h; the first sample carries no fee. The paper above is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Purdue University Global document.
More HW315 papers and BS in Health and Wellness samples
- HW315 Unit 1: Model Test Post
- HW315 Unit 2: Model Comparison Paper
- HW315 Unit 3: Behavior Analysis
- HW315 Unit 4: Readiness Assessment
- HW315 Unit 5: Barrier Identification Exercise
- HW315 Unit 6: Seminar Reflection
- HW315 Unit 7: Motivational Strategy Plan
- HW315 Unit 8: Social Support Analysis
- HW315 Unit 9: Intervention Design
- HW310 Unit 10: Integrative Portfolio
- HD499 Unit 10: Capstone Document
- HD480 Unit 10: Communication Portfolio
- HD460 Unit 10: Program Evaluation Portfolio
HW315 Unit 10 questions, answered
Which models belong in the portfolio?
The ones the term actually covered, and ideally every one applied at least once. Bringing in a model the course never used tends to look like filler unless the prompt asks for it. If a model was introduced but never applied, a card can still include it, with a note that its failure case comes from the readings rather than the writer's own work.
Why include failure cases in a portfolio meant to show learning?
Because in this course, knowing where a model stops working is the learning. A card listing nothing but good fits implies the models were matched to cases rather than tested against them. Failure cases, with the exact point of breakdown identified, show the analytical judgment the criteria reward, and they make the reference genuinely useful later.
How long should the reflective essay be?
Whatever the prompt specifies; where it is open, two or three pages often suits a portfolio essay. Length matters less than focus. The strongest essays follow one thread, such as how the writer stopped forcing fits, and support it with specific moments from the term's work rather than surveying everything the course covered. An early sentence quoted and then rewritten makes the change visible.
Where can I find a free HW315 Unit 10 sample paper?
This page presents a complete Unit 10 wellness model portfolio with five model cards, a revised application, a reflective essay and APA references.
What failure point does the portfolio give each model?
Belief models fail at routine, stage models at context, intention models at learning, broad models at precision and need models at fear. Each failure is tied to a specific case from the term.