Discuss has that approach useful,appropriate, fulsome, valid? What would you change or do different?

In a veryreal way, you are the one leading this process. I will help you, but you are in charge here.Now, let me define some of these terms and phrases for you.1. “In conversation with your instructor…”: We will work together initially to identify theproblem you wish to address and identify potential methods and tools you might use toaddress the problem.2. “Identify”: This means you need to have an awareness of the world we are living in, anawareness of how trauma, traumatic events, and graced responses are present in thatworld, as well as how these responses might be mitigated, improved, or changed in someway.3. “A complex problem…” This definition is from the following website:https://topr.online.ucf.edu/pbl-problem-type/. “Complex problems are usually ill-defined,“divergent” problems. These problems are usually embedded in authentic contextualsituations and contain information both relevant and irrelevant to solving the givenproblem/s. Complex problems usually require several inter-linked, related steps to arrive ata solution.”A complex problem is not an “easy” problem. It may be a problem that is embedded in theinstitutional or corporate fabric of an organization, community, church, civic life, etc. Forinstance, a complex problem might be the persistence of a toxic work culture at anorganization, even following multiple leadership changes; the persistence of racism andsexism in the working environment; the lack of compassion for the common good in themidst of a deadly global pandemic.4. “related to the theme of the course”: The project needs to address trauma, grace, resilience,and/or human flourishing in a meaningful way.5. “develop an informed, practical response…”: Develop means you need to create it fromscratch, using the tools that are available to you. Informed means that you have thoughtabout the background to the project. In this course, this is done in the research paper that isassigned. Practical means that it needs to be useful and usable by others in such a way thatit makes a difference in addressing the identified problem.6. Assess: You will be engaged in the evaluation of your own work. When your project iscomplete, you need to ask: how did you approach the problem? Was that approach useful,appropriate, fulsome, valid? What would you change or do different? How would youevaluate the quality of your response? To help you with this, you might give some thought to “design thinking,” which is a method for lookingat problems and how one might go about solving them. Here is a brief video that offers a basicdescription of design thinking: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a7sEoEvT8l8. After you look at that,read this document, which gives you more ideas about the design process:https://www.evansville.edu/changemaker/downloads/Process%20Guide%20for%20Design%20Thinking.pdfPerhaps the most difficult issue you might face in this is making the “leap” from the conceptual ideasthat tend to shape theological ways of thinking that are rooted in the processes of Westernphilosophical investigations. As one of my professors said, “you need to get your head out of the cloudsand root this work to the earth.” Rooting to the earth rather than to the clouds, if you will, connects thethinking about God to the reality of lived experience in such a way that a “feedback loop” is created.Serene Jones shows how this is done in her book.Finally, with the six points above, you can begin to see the shape of a rubric for this project.How about a helpful example:A colleague was working in a college town adjacent to a large military base. A number of active dutyenlisted and veterans attended the college. As a veteran herself, she noticed that the soldiers, and oftentheir immediate families as well, were having difficulties beyond what a “typical” student mightexperience: depression, anger, domestic abuse, higher rates of suicide, and other markers of trauma.The active duty soldiers who had access to psychological services on base often would not use them forfear of being marked in some negative way as “not-ready” or deficient. This is a common and knownproblem. As she began talking with these folks, she noted that the active duty, veterans, and familiesmembers often felt like they SHOULD not access programs to help them because they were in theservice. Programs were for others. So, in addition to fearing getting a negative mark, there was acontinuation of the call to service in deciding to not access available therapeutic services. She begantesting some ideas to help out. Some worked, others didn’t. What worked was private, off-the-books,no-cost, no paper trail counseling sessions. Evaluating this program led to the growth of other programs:songwriting, storytelling, other methods of opening up the traumatic wound to seek healing. Theprogram she started is now serving over 1000 military related people each month.So, the problem was: active duty soldiers, veterans, and their families are experiencing trauma in a wayunlike the civilian population. A contributing factor was the reluctance to use provided services out offear and/or out of a sense of service. A decidedly “complex” problem.The project was: identify several possibilities to meet the therapeutic and non-therapeutic needs of thispopulation that addressed the trauma while honoring privacy and sense of duty. Try out thepossibilities, always in conversation with the people, never deciding what is best and then trying to forceit. Constantly evaluate and feedback.Notably, this is now a big project, but it started with one person identifying a traumatic marker in hercommunity and wanting/needing to do something to address it.