zilongwang/ReadingBank huggingface dataset:
focused on abuse and because of the sensitivity of this topic there were concerns about the 'vulnerability' of the co-researchers with intellectual disability. This is a real concern and steps need to be put in place to assure the safety of the co-researchers but not disempower them in the process. Conversely, not including people in research makes them more vulnerable because their perspectives are not heard. Ethics process can thus lead to further disempowerment for co-researchers. Measuring the inclusiveness of research Several authors provide criteria against to measure the inclusiveness of research. Kidd and Edwards identify steps for ensuring true co-production as: 1) Is co-production right for research and team? 2) How should team communicate? 3) Who will lead the different stages of the research? Dubois et al (2011) provide three questions to determine the extent of community engagement in research. These are adapted here: “[Are] individuals from the community … provided with a voice (e.g. one representative, a small group of gatekeepers, or a random sample)? Do community members have authority to advise on the research protocol or to make key decisions regarding the research protocol? Are community members elevated to the level of co-investigators? Do they share resources and play an investigative role in the conduct research? Do they participate in data interpretation and dissemination?” If the answer to all of questions is yes then the research could be fairly considered as inclusive in nature. However, these still cover a wide range of research. Conclusion: Essential issues to consider for academics embarking on inclusive research This review shows that, while the literature describes several models, there is no consistently-used model of inclusive research. Given this, and the differing needs of projects and co-researchers, the ad-hoc model based on the ethical principles of inclusive
involvement meant for the research, or how this involvement impacted on the (e.g. Karban, Paley, and Willcock (2013)). This has been highlighted elsewhere (Bigby & Frawley, 2010). One of the systematic reviews discussed this as a serious limitation of inclusive research studies (Jivraj, Sacrey, Newton, Nicholas, & Zwaigenbaum, 2014). Search terms coprod* co-prod* co-design* codesign* co-creat* cocreat* co-develop* codevelop* “participatory research”; “emancipatory research”; “inclusive research”; “partnership research”; “people led” (all previous as OR) AND “disab*” or “mental health” or “mental* ill*” Paper count at each stage of search Database Initial search result # After abstract review Duplicates removed Downloaded full text Final # Adjusted total (removal of advisory group only papers) Medline 407 106 75 73 33 Cochrane Reviews 145 2 2 2 2 Scopus 498 154 80 73 41 Cinahl 421 148 139 137 62 TOTAL 1471 410 296 285 138 123* Appendix B Resources arising from the ‘grey literature’.
Research Methods Vocabulary Module 4 hindsight bias critical thinking Module 5 theory hypothesis operational definition replication case study naturalistic observation survey sampling bias population random sample Module 6 correlation correlation coefficient scatterplot illusory correlation experiment experimental group control group random assignment double-blind procedure placebo effect independent variable confounding variable dependent variable validity Module 7 descriptive statistics mode mean median skewed distribution range standard deviation normal curve inferential statistics statistical significance Module 8 culture informed consent debriefing reliability standardization
ASE LA 2: Using Research in Writing Steve Schmidt, ABSPD, abspd.appstate.edu, schmidtsj@appstate.edu Workshop Focus Help college and career readiness students successfully tackle the writing demands of high school equivalency tests and Adult High School writing tasks Workshop Goals - Understand the writing demands of GED 2014 and AHS courses - Understand the scoring rubrics for GED 2014 - Learn techniques to help students prepare for argument based writing including quick writes, writing frames, graphic organizers, and models - Gain access to resources for helping students achieve writing success Workshop Schedule 8:30 - 9:45 Welcome! Groups: Overview of GED/AHS Writing Demands Writing Away Fear 9:45 – 10:00 Break 10:00 – 11:45 Understanding Prompts Jigsaw Learning: Rubrics Scoring Extended Responses Science Short Answers 11:45 – 12:45 Lunch 12:45 – 2:00 Writing About Reading Teaching with Rubrics Unpacking Prompts Think Alouds Writing Frames 2:00 – 2:15 2:15 – 3:45 Writing as a Process Modeling Writing Source Reliability Research: Danger of a Single Story 3:45 – 4:00 Resource Sharing Training Calendar Take Aways and Evaluation
The Thinking Behind the Writing: Webb’s Depth of Knowledge Level 3 English Language Arts Social Studies Science Requires students to go beyond text. Requires students to explain, generalize, and connect ideas. Involves inferencing, prediction, elaboration, and summary. Requires students to support positions using prior knowledge and to manipulate themes across the passages. Students develop compositions with multiple paragraphs. Examples: Determine effect of author’s purpose on text elements Summarize information from multiple sources Critically analyze literature Edit writing to produce logical progression Compose focused, organized, coherent, purposeful prose Explain, generalize, or connect ideas, using supporting evidence from a text/source Apply a concept in other contexts Make and support inferences about implied causes and effects Draw conclusions or form alternative conclusions Analyze how changes have affected people or places Use concepts to solve problems Analyze similarities and differences in issues or problems Propose and evaluate solutions Recognize and explain misconceptions related to concepts Interpret information from a complex graph (such as determining features of the graph or aggregating data in the graph) Use reasoning, planning, and evidence Explain thinking (beyond a simple explanation or only a word or two to respond) Justify a response Identify research questions and design investigations for a scientific problem Use concepts to solve problems/more than one possible answer Develop a scientific model for a complex situation Form conclusions from experimental or observational data Complete a multi-step problem that involves planning and reasoning Provide an explanation of a principle Justify a response when more than one answer is possible Cite evidence and develop a logical argument for concepts Conduct a designed investigation Research and explain a scientific concept
Unsatisfactory Participants would benefit from more structure and guidance in the below elements (1-4 for each) Satisfactory Participants’ research has flaws and/or is restricted in innovative elements (5-6 for each criteria) Highly Satisfactory Participants engage successfully in open research within structured guidelines (7-10 for each criteria) Communicate & Apply Write, present and perform the processes, understandings and applications of the research, and respond to feedback, accounting for ethical, cultural, social and team (ECST) issues. Communicates without coherence Communicates clear or concise information Communicates utilising a highly coherent presentation with and concise information Represents peripherally ethical, social, cultural and inclusive dimensions. Represents ethical dimensions and/or or socio-cultural dimensions Strongly & explicitly represents ethical dimensions and/or socio-cultural dimensions Visual and spoken elements are not well integrated Visual and spoken elements are to some extent integrated Visual and spoken elements are highly integrated Unengaged audience, as shown by a lack of interaction. Mildly engaged audience, shown by level of interaction Highly engaged audience, shown by level of interaction One or more of the following detracts from audiences’ understanding: eye contact, hand movements, other body language and pace of delivery. Eye contact, hand movements, other body language and pace of delivery all are satisfactory, but some improvement needed for deepening audience comprehension Eye contact, hand movements, other body language and pace of delivery all combines to enable deeper audience comprehension Instructions and space for comments on good aspects and those that need improvement on the back. Instructions Individuals will have 6 minutes to present and pairs 9 minutes. There will be two minutes time between presentations for people to write feedback.
TIMELINE The timeline is intended for you to clearly outline the proposed time for all the different elements and activities of your research. The template below is a guide and it is acknowledged not all activities will apply to every project. Activities Period of time from April 2016 to April 2017 Location April-16 May-16 Jun-16 Jul-16 Aug-16 Sep-16 Oct-16 Nov-16 Dec-16 Jan-17 Feb-17 Mar-17 Apr Development of research/project proposal TNH Funding application Submit Ethics Application TNH Phase 1 TNH Phase 2 TNH Recruitment and Data collection TNH Data cleaning and Analysis TNH TNH Research Week Presentation/Abstract TNH External Conference Presentation External Publication TNH Project Closeout/Arching APPENDIX Include in this section relevant supplementary documents such as data collection forms, questionnaires, brochures/flyers etc.
CHECKLIST AND TIMeLINE Vancouver Coastal Health Research Challenge 2016 Before March 31st Review all documentation Guidelines Writing a research protocol Application form Reviewer Assessment Form Mentor Guidelines Send an email confirmation to Amber Hay indicating: that you will be participating in the next phase of the Challenge and Whether you have identified a suitable mentor for your team, or if you would like our help to find one. Between March 9th and May 16th (all of these activities are mandatory requirements) Connect with your mentor to discuss your research project and mutually decide on the roles and responsibilities of the mentor and mentee relationship. You will be contacted by a Librarian to arrange a consultation Please see the reverse for more information. Connect with our statistician to discuss your data collection/sample size and data management (if applicable) Masoud Yousefi Write and submit your application and proposal for review before May 16th, 2016 at 4pm (email or mail) After May 16th (funded teams only) Ethics applications must be completed and approved before funding can be allocated Workshop on completing an ethics application Either September 6th, 2016 11:30-13:00 OR October 5th, 2016 12:00-13:30 Information session on research administration and reimbursement (mandatory for one team member) September 14th, 2016 900-1200 Contact Information Hay, Research Education & Internal Awards Associate Vancouver Coastal Health Research Institute Jim Pattison Pavilion North, Vancouver, BC V5Z 1M9 604-875-4111 x 22656 Fax 604-875-5684 or
Accommodation Space issues DM reported that the plans for the Toddle Lab have been signed off and that the budget is now £10m. It will be the flagship building project for the BBK anniversary. DM noted that however it will not solve any space issues as there are more staff in the BMA building than were in 32 Torrington. Impact Report KD reported that the second impact masterclass on stakeholder engagement had been well attended. There will be another on in May on getting work publicised in the media. KD also said that she had been requested to organise some media training for academic staff. She reminded staff to alert their PhD students to the ‘3 minute thesis’ event. The next newsletter is out at the beginning of April. KD said that she will be working with ER, Business Development and Sarah Le on publicising research. She also reminded the committee of the public engagement awards which are funded by the new ISSF grant. KD said that she, DM and MO had met to look at where we are with case studies for the REF. Some already have impact but require collation of documentation; others have a lot of activity but might need a push towards creating impact. It is still not clear as to whether we will need institutional level case studies but this is seeming more unlikely given that they would need to be piloted. DM said that some departments are undertaking evaluations of local council interventions, and have been bidding for these, which are a good way of creating a case study. KD said she would look into this. Stern Review and REF DM reported that there were no updates yet as to the precise requirements for REF2020. The college has submitted its response to Stern and the consultation period ends on 17th March. Date of next meeting 15th June 2pm.
This database will contain specific information on patients seen within the mental health clinic at the VA. It will be available to query, with IRB permission, for feasibility of participation in certain studies as well as for new projects to be conducted by Dr. Smith and other researchers. The clinical data alone, or in combination with basic science parameters, will be used to study the epidemiology, pathogenesis, pathophysiology and classification of specific disease processes treated by the PI of this repository. Data Description and Source Data Type: Data collected will be identified and include protected health information (PHI). The following is a list of the specific fields in the database: Name SSN Address Date of Birth Age Sex Race Weight/Height Medical Record Number Physicians (i.e., urologist, pediatrician, referral physician, surgical team) Diagnoses/Dates/Codes Past Medical History/Family History Hospital Admissions/Dates/Units Hospitalized in Medications Allergies Lab Results X-Rays Symptoms/Scores Post-op Care/Treatment Current Research Patient – The data obtained for the research is necessary to conduct the research. Name, date of birth, and medical record number will be used to assist in ensuring the correct patient’s data is being collected. Address will be collected in case there is a need to contact a patient to verify data. Data Source: Data in the repository will be come from study visits as well as CPRS. Data will not be accepted in this data repository without a signed approved informed consent document and HIPAA authorization. Data Collection: The data fields specified will be collected via medical record review by an approved
Stanley Lieberson, “Small N’s and Big Conclusions: An Examination of the Reasoning in Comparative Studies Based on a Small Number of Cases,” Social Forces, Volume 70, Number 2 (December 1991), 307-320. Douglas, Dion, “Evidence and Inference in the Comparative Case Study,” Comparative Politics, 30, 2 (January 1998), pp. 127-145. Structured, Focused comparison: Alexander George and Andrew Bennett, “The Method of Structured, Focused Comparison,” in Alexander George and Andrew Bennett, Case Studies and Theory Development. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2004, pp. 67-73. Recommended: Andrew Bennett. 2008. “Process Tracing: A Bayesian Perspective.” Chapter 30 in, The Oxford Handbook of Political Methodology, M. Box-Steffensmeier, Henry E. Brady, and David Collier (eds.). Oxford University Press. Jeffrey M. Paige. 1999. "Conjunction, Comparison, and Conditional Theory in Macrosocial Inquiry." American Journal of Sociology. 105 (November): 781-800. [section on Kimeldorf and historically conditional theorizing, pp. 786-789 only] Ann Chih Lin. 1998. “Bridging Positivist and Interpretivist Approaches to Qualitative Methods.” Policy Studies Journal 26:162–80. [searching for mechanisms] Mario Small. 2009. "'How many cases do I need?' On science and the logic of case selection in research." Ethnography 10,1: 5-38 Peter Abell. 2001. “Causality and Low-Frequency Complex Events. The Role of Comparative Narratives.” Sociological Methods and Research. 30(1):57-80. Robin Stryker. 1996. “Beyond History Versus Theory: Strategic Narrative and Sociological Explanation.” Sociological Methods and Research. 24:304-352. Rebecca Jean Emigh. 1997. “The Power of Negative Thinking: The Use of Negative Case Methodology in the Development of Sociological Theory.” Theory and Society 26:649-84. [discusses the critique of 1980s comparative studies] Qualitative Comparative Analysis recommended: Charles The Comparative Method. Moving Beyond Qualitative and Quantitative Strategies (Berkeley, University of California Press, 1987), pp.1-102.
Participant 1 A 23 *Operational Planner Executive *Special constable *Call taking *Investigation 2 years Participant 2 B Male 57 *Operational Planner Executive *Police Officer *Inspector 35 years Participant 3 C Male 30 Health Admin *IT 4 years Participant 4 D 49 *Police Officer *Special constable *Domestic *Child support 23 years 3 months Participant 5 E 60 *Serious case review officer crime and intelligence *Cadet *Police officer *Safeguarding vulnerable child and adults *Detective constable *CDI *Detective sergeant as a chemist officer *Acting inspector * Chief inspector of professional standards 42 years Participant 6 F Male 62 resources manager *Police officer *Police Inspector 40 years Participant 7 G Male 41 *DC serious crime *Police officer Attachment with CDI *Tutor constable *Mainstream CID- Detective 13 years Participant 8 H 39 *Head of policy and strategy for police Crime *Grade one clark (temp in HR) *Local intelligence officer *Community investigator *Senior analyst Terrorist department- *Intelligence analyst *Crime Commissioner Performance and planner coordinator 13 years Participant 9 I 44 * Detective inspector Force Intelligence Bureau *Police Officer *CDI *Acting Sergeant CDI *Detective superintendent 24
TABLE 3 – Conference presentation or published paper Output type Title of output Author(s) . Name and date of conference URL to output 4 – Published book or book chapter Output type Title of book Author(s) Publisher and place of publication ISBN Date of publication URL to book TABLE 5 – for other significant research output (not listed above) Output type Details TABLE 6 – Significant output in arts or music areas Output type Title of output Contributor(s) Date and place of exhibition or performance URL to output and/or review
You will be informed whether your application has been successful by a formal letter along with Terms and Conditions of Award and Start Date Declaration form. 7. Terms and Conditions of Award 7.1 Payment of Grant Grants will be paid quarterly in arrears, on the receipt of an invoice from the Finance Officer. RCLCF is not liable as employer of any persons to whom support may have been given. Payment of invoices will not begin until a signed start date form has been received. Grant amounts agreed will not be increased or extended other than in exceptional circumstances and where funds are available. Applications should include in the application form expected cost of salary rises over the period of the grant. 7.2 Project Management 7.2.1 General must receive advance written notification of any changes to personnel. Any changes to the principal investigator must also be approved, in writing, by the researcher and any RCLCF must also approve any other changes to be made to the project itself. Full financial and performance monitoring of research grants will be undertaken by RCLCF. The Grant holders are expected to be actively engaged in their project and will remain responsible for conduct throughout. RCLCF requires to be given in writing the names, qualifications, career plans and tenure of all individuals working on the project. Failure to comply with any of the above may risk withdrawal of the grant from RCLCF and may require the submission of a new application. 7.2.2 Reports and Publications RCLCF will request a report on the progress of your grant at the end of each year. Failure to submit such a report will jeopardise the continuation of support by RCLCF. Final reports on all projects are also required and the final invoice will not be paid until this is received. The grant holder must notify RCLCF, in advance of publication, of the acceptance of their abstract or paper for publication or presentation so that we can prepare a press release when appropriate. Acknowledgement of the support of RCLCF is required in all publications relating to the research including abstracts submitted to scientific meetings. If you wish to use our logo on any publications or presentations please contact the RCLCF office for more information.
TABLE 1: WHERE TO ACCESS VITAL STATISTICS RECORDS Use the tables below to find what Vital Statistics records are: available online on ancestry.ca; available online on the Family Search website, available on microfilm, in the Archives of Ontario reading room and through interloan; at the Archives of Ontario, and closed for digitization held by the Office of the Registrar General (for contact information, go to page 2 of this research guide) Birth, marriage and death registrations and indexes Type of records Available on ancestry.ca Available on Family Search website Available in the Reading Room and through Interloan Held by the Office of the Registrar General Births 1869-1913 ca. 1830-1912 (registrations ca. 1830-1868 are online only) 1869-1917 1918-present Marriages District Registers ([ca. 1801-1857]) [ca. 1801-1857] [ca. 1801-1857] [ca. 1801-1857] 1938-present Marriages County Registers ([ca. 1858-1869]) [ca. 1858-1869] (transcriptions only, no image of the records) [ca. 1858-1869] [ca. 1858-1869] 1938-present Marriages (July 1, 1869 and after) 1869-1937 1869-1927 1869-1932 1938-present Deaths 1869-1947 1869-1937 1869-1942 1948-present Deaths of Ontarians overseas 1939-1947 1939-1947 1939-1947
MRC Complex Interventions Framework: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA): CREDIT VALUE 140 ECTS VALUE 67.5 PRE-REQUISITE MODULES None CO-REQUISITE MODULES D042 & D043 NQF LEVEL (FHEQ) AVAILABLE AS DISTANCE LEARNING YES / NO ORIGIN DATE LAST REVISION DATE July 2017 KEY WORDS SEARCH
SOIL SAMPLE INFORMATION SHEET Date:___________________________ BILL TO: ___________________________ COPY TO:____________________ County: ________________________ (name / company name) Address: _____________________ Address: ___________________________ ______________________ ___________________________ ______________________ ___________________________ Email: ______________________ ___________________________ Phone: ___________________________ Project Notes/PO #:_________________________ Lab # Sample I.D. # (ONLY 8 digits incl. spaces) Lb/A P ppm K ppm pH EC mmhos/cm OM % Lb/A Zn ppm Fe ppm Cu ppm Mn ppm Cl Lb/A MA CCE % CEC Meq/100g Ca ppm Mg ppm Na ppm TKN % SAR * Indicates inches unless otherwise specified MA= Mechanical Analysis via hydrometer method TKN= Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen SAR=Sodium Absorption Ratio (revised 8/8/12)
Type of Perpetrator Motivations Other causal factors can include: Example of hate crime Thrill Seeker Excitement; boredom; dislike of outgroup Peer pressure; alcohol; machismo; male/peer bonding A homophobic attack in a city centre by a of young men encouraging each other to escalate violence Defensive Protecting territory or geographical ‘turf’ of ingroup by ‘othering’ newer communities Perception of threat to ingroup’s socio-economic security; deprivation; anger; internalised shame Anti-immigrant or abuse directed towards individuals who are new to an area Retaliatory Seeking revenge for a (perceived) attack against ingroup Perception of threat/change to social and cultural Anti-Muslim or anti-Semitic attacks and criminal damage to Mosques or Synagogues following trigger events (for example, murder of Lee Paris Attacks) Mission view; desire for power Extremist/hate group links; influenced by masculinity; deprivation; anger; internalised shame Neo-Nazi organised racist violent attacks; organised marches involving physical or verbal attacks on Muslims Table 1.3: Types of hate crime perpetrators economic
A list of “learning outcomes” for the topic is shown below. When the topic is complete you should review each learning outcome. You are expected to consult your teacher if you have any issues with the learning outcomes. State that a standard solution is a solution of known concentration Know how to weigh chemicals by the weighing by difference method. that a solution may be standardised by using a primary standard. State the properties required of a primary standard. Be able to name some primary standards. that sodium hydroxide is not a primary standard and state reasons why. the procedure required to prepare a standard solution. Be able to out simple uncertainty calculations and be aware of the uncertainties in laboratory equipment. State that a control experiment allows the validity of a technique to be evaluated and to be able to suggest chemicals which can be used as controls. State that volumetric analysis involves measuring volumes and the main technique is titration. Sate what a back titration is and state the reasons it may be necessary to carry out a back titration. State that gravimetric analysis involves weighing reactants and products. Be able to explain what is meant by heating to constant mass. State that colorimetry can be used to analyse the concentration of coloured solutions. State that when carrying out a colorimetric analysis the filter which provides maximum absorption for the test substance is always chosen
2012/13–2013/14 % very/fairly worried n Non-disabled people 35.8 13493 Vision (for example, blindness or partial sight) 49.7** 435 Hearing (for example, deafness or partial hearing) 48.2** 482 Mobility (for example, walking distances or climbing stairs) 45.3** 2109 Dexterity (for example, lifting and carrying objects, using a keyboard) 48.5** 829 Learning or understanding or concentrating 52.5** 227 Memory 52.8** 405 Mental health 55.7** 488 Stamina or breathing or fatigue 48.2** 1137 Socially or behaviourally (for example associated with autism, attention deficit disorder or Asperger's syndrome) 52.3* 51 condition or illness 46.9** 621 Any impairment 46.1** 3344 Source: British Crime Survey/Crime Survey for England and Wales. See data table S6.1. Notes: The reference group is ‘non-disabled people’. Significance testing compares each impairment type with the reference group, and is indicated as follows: * significant difference at 95% level; ** significant difference at 99% level. Figures indicate the proportion of adults who are very or fairly worried about being the victim of crime. Percentage findings (%) are weighted; bases (n) are unweighted. Analysis by ethnicity shows that, in most ethnic groups, disabled people were more likely than non-disabled people to be worried about being the victim of crime in the most recent three-year period (2011/12–2013/14). Specifically, this applied to people in the White ethnic group (44.4 per cent compared with 32.2 per cent), the Mixed group (74.3 per cent compared with 43.2 per cent) and the ‘Asian, Asian British or other’ group (73.6 per cent compared with 64.7 per cent); see Table 4.8.
disability which limits both daily activity as well as work tend to experience especially poor outcomes when it comes to employment and pay. The analysis also explored the intersectionality of disability and ethnicity. It found that ethnic minority disabled people tend to face the combined disadvantage of both ethnicity and disability. Disabled Bangladeshi and Pakistani men experience particularly large pay gaps. Where statistically significant pay gaps are identified, the same characteristics are a contributory factor across several groups: concentration in part-time jobs; lack of high-level qualifications; and over-representation in lower-paid occupations. We find that part-time work is the most important factor for most groups, followed by occupation and education. However, characteristics tend to explain only a limited part of the pay gap; in all of our analyses the data can only explain a maximum of roughly half of the pay gap, and in several groups it accounts for less than that. This means that other factors are at play, potentially including discrimination. 7.3 Implications As above, this report has identified three areas which are associated with pay gaps: part-time work; qualifications; and occupation. This section discusses these issues and suggests areas for further investigation. An important factor associated with disability pay gaps is part-time work. The analysis here is unable to identify the underlying reasons why disabled people work part-time. However, it is the case that part-time work, especially in the private sector, is paid less per hour than full-time work. Further research could look into the extent to which different groups of disabled people are limited to part-time work, and whether this is due to the amount of work they can do, their skill levels or the jobs which they are offered by employers (or a combination of these). Disabled people’s overall level of qualification is another factor. This could be because of barriers and reduced opportunities in education, particularly in the case of a disabled person who has had an impairment from an early age. On the other hand, it could also be linked with the fact that older people are more likely to be disabled and they generally have lower qualifications than younger people.
(0.025) (0.022) Year 2013 0.366* 0.424* (0.025) (0.022) Year 2014 0.347* 0.430* (0.025) (0.022) Intercept 2.511* 1.431* 2.377* 1.421* (0.004) (0.043) (0.003) (0.038) Adj_R2 0.008 0.475 0.003 0.502 Observations 29939 29939 30621 30621 Notes: This table presents coefficients of OLS regressions taking log pay as the dependent variable. (1) and (3) are for models including the disabled groups only, (2) and (4) are for models including a wide range of characteristics. Each coefficient can be interpreted as a percentage pay gap and standard errors for the coefficients are shown in parenthesis on the line below. + Statistically significant at 5%; * Statistically significant at 1%.
APPLICATION FORM FOR RESEARCH MEMBERSHIP OF COMMON ROOM family / surname first or given name(s) single / married / partner / divorced / widowed male / female nationality (incl. dual nationality): proposed start (mandatory field): end date (mandatory field; not to exceed 30/09/2019): permanent home address 1* permanent work address 2* tel. no. tel. no. oxford home address 3* oxford department address 4* tel. no. tel. no. Address for Correspondence (Circle One) 1* 2* 3* 4* e-mail address mobile: oxford university post (also state if permanent, temporary or visitor etc.) name of head of department or principal investigator who will be writing letter of support Please describe briefly the benefits you would bring to the College and gain from Membership of Common Room subject / research interests: University / Bodleian Card Number (bar code no.; mandatory field if you hold a university card) degrees university date obtained / accompanying to oxford? YES / NO accompanying children or other adults name: dob: gender: F / M relationship: name: dob: gender: F / M relationship: name: dob: gender: F / M relationship: I have received and read the Information and Rules of Membership, August 2017, and agree to abide by them. SIGNED: DATE:
Name: Target Grade: Class Teacher: Study Buddy’s Name: Assignment Title What you/your teacher/peer said you did well What your you/your teacher/peer said you needed to improve Your mark/out of Grade Over/on/ under target grade 1 / 2 / 3 / 4 /
Self-report methods Questionnaires What is a questionnaire? How do you design a good questionnaire? Interviews What is an interview? What is a structured interview? What is an unstructured interview? How do you design/plan a good interview? Other research methods and techniques Use page 120-121 to complete this final grid. Some has already been done for you. Method What it is Advantages Disadvantages Investigations When something is not an experiment, an interview, a questionnaire or case study. It is simply an investigation. Multi-method approach A combination of many techniques. For example the use of an observation followed up by an interview. Meta-analysis A research team may combine the results of many studies with similar aims/hypotheses. This can be used to see an overall trend in how the IV affects the DV.
Outline in the table below how situational variables can affect the DV. Order effects Time of day Temperature Situational Variables Extraneous variable How does it affect validity? How can it be overcome? Situational variables (anything to do with the environment of the experiment): time of day, temperature, noise levels etc Something about the situation of the experiment could act as an EV if it has an effect on the DV. For example, poor lighting could affect participants performance on a memory test Situational variables can be overcome by the use of standardised procedures which ensure that all participants are tested under the same conditions. Participants variables (anything to do with differences in the participants): age, gender, intelligence, skill, past experience, motivation, education etc. It may be that the differences between the participants cause the change in the DV. For example, one group may perform better on a memory test than another because they are younger, or more motivated. Participant variables can be completely removed by using a repeated measures design (the same participants are used in each condition). Matched pairs (participants in each group are matched) could also be used. Investigator effects: this refers to how the behaviour and language of the experimenter may influence the behaviour of the participants. The way in an experimenter asks a question might act as a cue for the participant. Also known as Leading questions from the experimenter may consciously or unconsciously alter how the participant responds. For example, the experimenter may provide verbal or non verbal encouragement when the participant behaves in a way which supports the hypothesis. Investigator effects can be overcome by using a double blind technique. This is when the person who carries out the research is not the person who designed it.
Row x column / total = expected frequency (E) Subtract expected from observed value, ignoring signs (O-E) Square previous (O-E)2 Divide previous value by expected value (O-E)2/E Cell A 10.5 2.25 Cell B 21x19/38= 10.5 2.25
Cell C 17x19/38= 8.5 2.25 Cell D 17x19/38= 8.5 2.25 Step 4: Add all the values in the final column to find ____________ the observed value
Other animals that you will include in the exhibit and why? How often and how you will feed the organism? What diseases or medical conditions will the organism need to be checked for? How will you get your organism to mate (what conditions would it need to mate) (Each Counts 5pts.): ______/35 Quality of Presentation: 5 10 15 20 25 Presenter had little to no idea what they were saying, made no eye contact and spoke fast and unclearly, and had less than the minimum amount of information required in the presentation as well as incorrect information Presenter read directly off slides that where confusing and unclear, made no eye contact, and had less than the minimum amount of information required in the presentation Presenter read directly off slides, made little eye contact, and provided little if any additional material to capture classes attention Presenter barely read directly off slides, made eye contact, and provided some additional material to capture classes attention Slides where used only as a supplement to presentation, Presenter made eye contact during all the presentation, and provided numerous additional materials to capture classes attention Paragraph for the Spectators ____/10 TOTAL
Name:______________________________ Organism:_________________________________ Material to be discussed: Name Common: Scientific: Description Size Weight Sexual dimorphism Developmental stages/life cycle Sexual vs. asexual Size at birth Important developmental stages Incubation/gestation period Period to sexual maturity Life expectancy Diet Food sources Method of food acquisition Possible predators Behavior Courtship behavior Social behavior Defense Migration Habitat Geographic location Ocean region (Benthic, pelagic ect) Ecological Niche Role in its ecosystem Trophic level Human Impact Status on endangered list Conservation/preservation efforts Impact on humans Quality of Presentation: 0 6 12 18 25 Presenter had little to no idea what they were saying, made no eye contact and fast and unclearly, and had less than the minimum amount of information required in the presentation as well as incorrect information Presenter read directly off poster that where confusing and unclear, made no eye contact, and had less than the minimum amount of information required in the presentation Presenter read directly off poster, made little eye contact, and provided little if any additional material to capture classes attention Presenter barely read directly off poster, made eye contact, and provided some additional material to capture classes attention Poster where used only as a supplement to presentation, Presenter made eye contact during all the presentation, and provided numerous additional materials to capture classes attention
Shelby Miyamoto-Kim Dr. Carlos Valverde Intercultural Literature 15 April 2016 Understanding Women’s Beauty Standards Along with Social Constructs The United States is known as the melting pot, a diverse country composed of immigrants from all over the world, but along with differences comes prejudice. Perhaps stemming from basic biological instinct, it is human nature to want to fit in and be one with the crowd, but with a society so diverse, change and separation proves inevitable. Most people would agree that holding the door open for others or letting a woman sit down before a man is common courtesy, but how did these notions come about? Social constructs are defined as “a social mechanism, phenomenon, or category created and developed by society; a perception of an individual, group, or idea that is ‘constructed’ through cultural or social practice” (Dictionary.com). It also must be true that, “...it would contravene no law of nature to try to get rid of it” (Boghossian). Not only do constructs avoid conflicting with visible facts, but they can blend into perceived fact after enough people support them. Despite beginning as fact-based inferences, they can quickly overgeneralize and prevent the expansion and diversification of society, especially concerning beauty standards for women. When discussed, social constructs are often considered in a negative light, yet views of acceptable social conduct gives communities the ability to have orderly public areas. Without laws, the country would erupt into total chaos, but the nation and states alone cannot micromanage each individual’s behavior every day. Therefore, social constructs strive to maintain a semblance of peace in the community. Give for example, athletics. If a player in a
rigorous methodological designs) met their aims. Evidence further indicates that awareness raising is possible across delivery methods, that is, online and and effects can be long-lasting. However, all UBT evaluations should measure and manage bias awareness and, ideally, measure the long-term effects of awareness raising on bias. This is because teaching participants about stereotypes has the potential for back-firing effects by making negative stereotypes more accessible. Further study of this effect is needed. Implicit bias The evidence for UBT changing short-term implicit bias is consistent. Implicit bias is likely to be reduced, but not eradicated, through UBT. Bias reduction strategies such as using counter-stereotypic exemplars and evaluative conditioning effectively reduce implicit bias. Mindfulness has also shown to be an effective strategy for reducing implicit bias and potentially discriminatory decision making. However, these strategies are not commonly used in short-term UBT and the observed effects so far are mostly restricted to academic lab experiments. However, where they have been used in long-term habit-breaking type interventions (Devine et al., 2012), they have had positive effects for implicit bias reduction. Implicit bias reduction can have effects across all participant groups but appears to be more effective for those with stronger implicit biases pre-intervention. Of the 11 studies which aimed to reduce implicit bias, eight were rated level four or five on the MSSM. There is strong evidence that implicit biases can be reduced eight weeks post-intervention when a sophisticated, habit-breaking design that is and includes awareness-raising and bias mitigation strategies is used. Given the link between implicit bias and prejudiced behaviour (Rooth, 2010), the findings for sophisticated UBT designs for reducing implicit biases in the long term are promising. Explicit bias Compared with implicit bias, the evidence suggests that UBT is less likely to be effective in changing explicit bias. This evidence is mostly based on measuring before-and-after changes in self-reported attitudes. As expected, due to the nature of explicit bias, change in explicit bias is unlikely to occur as a result of UBT. There are three main reasons why UBT interventions are unlikely to measure a change in explicit bias. People tend to believe that they do not hold explicit prejudiced attitudes.
PwC (2016) 2 Whatley (2018) 2 Leslie et al. (2017) 2 Sweetman (2017) 2 Google (2013) 3 Repelaer van Driel (2015) 4 Lai et al. (2014) 4 Lai et al. (2016) 4
Hausmann et al. (2014) 4 Devine et al. (2012) 4 Forscher et al. (2017) 4 Lueke and Gibson (2015) 5 Lueke and Gibson (2016) 5 Jackson et al. (2014) 5 Carnes et al. (2015) 5 Definition of sources Below are descriptions of the categories of sources used in this assessment. Academic interventions:
Before Land Redistribution (former owners) Cattle keepers Cultivators Total 1 GATSIBO 171 699 413 1112 2 KAYONZA 562 2768 540 3308 3 KIREHE 47 136 331 467 4 NYAGATARE 1217 5977 3752 9729 5 1997 9580 5036 14616 Source: Adopted from Land Commission Office in Rwanda 3 below shows the different categories of beneficiaries of land redistribution in Eastern Province. Table 3: The categories of land beneficiaries after land redistribution in Eastern Province of Rwanda S/no District Category of beneficiaries Total Former owners Squatters Landless Returnees Displaced 01 Gatsibo 297 291 355 126 43 1112 02 Kayonza 1186 522 1238 89 273 3308 03 Kirehe 37 14 225 184 7 467 04 Nyagatare 2251 3609 3366 319 184 9729 05 3771 4436 5184 718 507 14616 06 Percentage 25.8% 74.2% Source: Adopted from Land Commission Office in Rwanda The table above demonstrates that the former owners constitute 25.8% while new beneficiaries make up 74.2% of all beneficiaries. Prior to land redistribution, all former owners and squatters were livestock farmers. Family size and number of cows as determinants of farm size The allocation of land is according to the number of people in the family and the number of cows as well. Those with big families and cows received big pieces of land than those without cows because cows require bigger land for pasture. For the landless but with a small family and no cows, they receive between 1ha and 2ha of land. For those with big families but without cows, they receive between 3ha and 4ha of land. Those who are landless with a small family and with many cows receive between 5ha and 10ha of land. From 10ha to 25ha of land are given to farmers with big families and with many cows and had land bigger than 25ha before the redistribution. The redistribution process does not consider whether the land is productive or not
SUNDAY MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY SATURDAY April 8 9 CLASSROOM Effects Wheel Brainstorming topics, organizing thoughts, building an argument 10 CLASSROOM Introduction to Research Paper Calendar, Process, Grades, Outline 11 CLASSROOM Outline Review concept of the research paper, formatting the outline, etc. 12 English II EOC/STAAR 13 CLASSROOM T-notes and Works Cited Refresher on how to do T-notes and creating a working Works Cited 14 15 16 CLASSROOM Opposing Viewpoints Begin basic research 17 CLASSROOM T-Notes Background info (research and organize outline) 18 CLASSROOM Supporting Info #1 (research and organize outline) 19 CLASSROOM T-Notes Supporting Info #2 (research and organize outline) 20 CLASSROOM “You’re Nuts!”/ T-Notes Counter-Arg Info (research and organize outline) 21 22 23 COMP LAB Research All T-Notes 4/24 for FULL credit! Outline due 4/29 by 11:59 PM 24 COMP LAB Research Finalize all T-Notes 4/24 by 11:59 PM for FULL credit! 25 COMP LAB Outline Finalize w/ T-Notes 26 COMP LAB Outline Finalize w/ T-Notes 27 No School Wharton Co. Fair 28 29 Outline due by 11:59 PM 30 CLASSROOM Integrating Quotes Outline to Essay May 1 CLASSROOM Outline to Essay 2 CLASSROOM Outline to Rough Draft due 5/6 3 CLASSROOM Outline to Essay Rough Draft due 5/6 4 CLASSROOM Outline to Essay Rough Draft due 5/6 at 11:59 PM 5 6 Rough Draft at 11:59 PM 7 CLASSROOM Rough Draft due Revision Activity 8 CLASSROOM 2nd Draft Make corrections to rough draft to create 2nd draft 2ND Draft due 5/9 9 CLASSROOM 2nd Draft due Editing Activity 10 CLASSROOM Final Draft Make corrections to 2nd draft to create FINAL draft 11 CLASSROOM Final Draft Make changes to create FINAL draft FINAL DRAFT DUE by 5/13 at 11:59 PM **FINAL DRAFT IS DUE SUNDAY, MAY 13TH AT 11:59 PM for full credit. Any submission after that time is late and will accrue late points (10 pts per day).
Barbara: American Bibliographical Center – Clio Press, 1979. Halperin, David M. One Hundred Years of Homosexuality: And Other Essays on Greek Love. New York: Routledge, 1990. Jordan, Mark D. “Homosexuality, Luxuria, and Textual Abuse.” Constructing Medieval Sexuality. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1997. 24-39. Karras, Ruth M. Sexuality in Medieval Europe: Unto Others. London: Routledge, 2005. Kruger, Steven F. “Conversion and Medieval Sexual, Religious, and Racial Categories.” Constructing Medieval Sexuality. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1997.
Instructor Guide and Notes Sharing and discussing your Rubric with students is a good idea so that you can all come to a common understanding of what is expected for the assignment and how students’ work will be graded. Students should be able to visibly see a link to the Rubric at the beginning of the assignment in web-enhanced, hybrid, or fully online courses if a course management system is used (e.g., eCollege, Sakai, etc.). Rubrics make the process of grading more objective, consistent, and quicker (in the long run). Rubrics can also be used when reviewing any grade appeals. When grading: Pick three students’ papers at random and “practice” grading them using the Rubric so you get a better feel for it. Focus on the “Exemplary” mastery level (category) on each criterion before the other mastery levels (i.e., Accomplished, Developing, Beginning-Unsatisfactory) when evaluating and grading each student’s paper. The Exemplary mastery level articulates the highest learning outcome. If the rubric doesn’t do what you want, adjust it, as needed. For example, modify mastery descriptions to add “context” for your research paper assignment, if needed. However, be careful to maintain a similar “weighting” of criteria (i.e., “content” should be a significantly higher weighting than the “mechanics” of the assignment). Also, be aware that the “points” assigned for each mastery level have been mathematically calculated and proportioned as follows: overall, Exemplary is ~ 90-100%; Accomplished is ~80-89%; Developing is ~ 70-79%; and Beginning-Unsatisfactory is ~ 0-69%. This Rubric will work with both “percentage-based” grading systems and “points-based” grading systems. For percentage-based grading systems, it is important that the overall points add up to 100 points to work properly with the Gradebook in the course management system (e.g., eCollege, Sakai, etc.). It is recommended that instructors include a “model” of an “Exemplary” paper so students have a frame of reference before undertaking the assignment.