Book review The Shareholder Value Myth: How Putting Shareholders First Harms Investors, Corporations, and the Public by Lynn Stout Provide 1) a 900 word review of this book (word range 900-1,200) and 2) a 350 word reflection where you force yourself to relate the message of the book . As per the format of the review, I like the ones done by the folks of the WSJ. This is an example: http://forums.delphiforums.com/diversecity/messages?msg=17531.1264 or http://www.wsj.com/articles/book-review-how-adam-smith-can-change-your-life-by-russ-roberts-1413846808?KEYWORDS=book+reviews

Book review The Shareholder Value Myth: How Putting Shareholders First Harms Investors, Corporations, and the Public by Lynn Stout Provide 1) a 900 word review of this book (word range 900-1,200) and 2) a 350 word reflection where you force yourself to relate the message of the book . As per the format of the review, I like the ones done by the folks of the WSJ. This is an example: http://forums.delphiforums.com/diversecity/messages?msg=17531.1264 or http://www.wsj.com/articles/book-review-how-adam-smith-can-change-your-life-by-russ-roberts-1413846808?KEYWORDS=book+reviews

The Shareholder Value Myth: How Putting Shareholders First Harms Investors, … Read More...
Project Four: Revisiting English 1010 (Literacy, Language, and Culture: An Exploration of the African American Experience) The MultiMedia Reflective Portfolio Project Overview This project will provide us with the opportunity to use a combination of textual, digital, and oral tools to: 1) reflect on and display what we have learned about African American literacy, language, and culture; and 2) reflect on and display what we have learned about the process of composing a literacy narrative, informative summary, media analysis, and multimedia reflective portfolio project. Ultimately, this project will provide us with the opportunity to use multimedia tools and applications to reflect on and display our experience as knowledge users and knowledge makers in this course (specifically as it relates to the English 1010 Learning Outcomes). ___________________________________________________________________ Introduction/Rationale/Assignment Prompt: This reflective assignment, which is the last major assignment of the semester, consists of two parts: Part One Part One consists of a 2-3 page reflective essay in which you reflect on and display: (1) what you learned about African American literacy, language, and culture; and (2) what you learned about the process of composing a literacy narrative, informative summary, media analysis, and multimedia reflective portfolio project–specifically as the process relates to the Learning Outcomes (Reading, Writing, Reflection, and Technology Use). To do so, you must look back over the work you produced during the semester in order to locate and discuss your learning and accomplishments in these areas. While your discussion of achievements with respect to ENG 1010 Learning Outcomes is perhaps the most important goal in the Reflective Essay, the written expression of these achievements can be strengthened when it is integrated into a broader narrative that describes where you are coming from and who you are as a student. In this narrative, you may discuss, for example, how you learned and used various reading strategies in the course, or you may describe, for example, how your ability to use composition and course management technologies, like Word and Blackboard, increased. You may also address, as appropriate, how your culture, identity, or background shaped your experiences as a student in ENG 1010. You may wish to discuss, for example, some of the following issues. • Transition to college and the larger first-year experience • Negotiation of a new identity as college student (how you adjusted; how you handled it) • Membership in groups historically underrepresented in college • Language diversity • Managing life circumstances to be able to give enough time and energy to academic work In sum, the Reflective Essay should make claims about your learning and accomplishments with respect to the two areas identified above. Essentially, the reflective essay should demonstrate what you have learned and what you can do as a result of your work in ENG 1010. In this way, a successful Reflective Essay will inspire confidence that you are prepared to move forward into your next composition courses, beginning with ENG 1020, and into the larger academic discourse community. Part Two Part Two consists of an electronic multimedia portfolio containing 3-5 selected pieces of the work you produced this semester (essay topic proposals, reading responses, essay outlines, essay first or final drafts, in-class assignments, etc.) that you can use as evidence of your learning and accomplishments and to support the claims you made in your reflective essay. ___________________________________________________________________ English 1010 Learning Outcomes Reading ● Develop reading strategies to explain, paraphrase, and summarize college-level material. ● Analyze college-level material to identify evidence that supports broader claims. Writing ● Plan and compose a well-organized thesis-driven text that engages with college-level material and is supported by relevant and sufficient evidence. ● Develop a flexible revision process that incorporates feedback to rewrite multiple drafts of a text for clarity (e.g. argument, organization, support, and audience awareness). Reflection ● Use reflective writing to evaluate and revise writing processes and drafts ● Use reflective writing to assess and articulate skill development in relation to course learning outcomes. Technology Use ● Navigate institutional web-based interfaces, such as course websites, university email, and Blackboard Learn™, to find, access and submit course material. ● Use computer-based composition technologies, including word processing software (e.g. Microsoft Word, PowerPoint), to compose college-level texts. ● Use computer-based composition technologies to read and annotate course readings and texts authored by students (e.g. peer review). Your Final Draft Should: • meet the requirements as outlined in the “Introduction/Rationale/Assignment Prompt” section above. Points for This Project • First Draft: 20 Points • Final Draft: 130 Points • Oral Presentation: 30 Points Refer to the Course Schedule (Syllabus) for Assignment Due Dates. _______________________________________________________________ Evaluation: You will be evaluated based on content, organization, and mechanics.

Project Four: Revisiting English 1010 (Literacy, Language, and Culture: An Exploration of the African American Experience) The MultiMedia Reflective Portfolio Project Overview This project will provide us with the opportunity to use a combination of textual, digital, and oral tools to: 1) reflect on and display what we have learned about African American literacy, language, and culture; and 2) reflect on and display what we have learned about the process of composing a literacy narrative, informative summary, media analysis, and multimedia reflective portfolio project. Ultimately, this project will provide us with the opportunity to use multimedia tools and applications to reflect on and display our experience as knowledge users and knowledge makers in this course (specifically as it relates to the English 1010 Learning Outcomes). ___________________________________________________________________ Introduction/Rationale/Assignment Prompt: This reflective assignment, which is the last major assignment of the semester, consists of two parts: Part One Part One consists of a 2-3 page reflective essay in which you reflect on and display: (1) what you learned about African American literacy, language, and culture; and (2) what you learned about the process of composing a literacy narrative, informative summary, media analysis, and multimedia reflective portfolio project–specifically as the process relates to the Learning Outcomes (Reading, Writing, Reflection, and Technology Use). To do so, you must look back over the work you produced during the semester in order to locate and discuss your learning and accomplishments in these areas. While your discussion of achievements with respect to ENG 1010 Learning Outcomes is perhaps the most important goal in the Reflective Essay, the written expression of these achievements can be strengthened when it is integrated into a broader narrative that describes where you are coming from and who you are as a student. In this narrative, you may discuss, for example, how you learned and used various reading strategies in the course, or you may describe, for example, how your ability to use composition and course management technologies, like Word and Blackboard, increased. You may also address, as appropriate, how your culture, identity, or background shaped your experiences as a student in ENG 1010. You may wish to discuss, for example, some of the following issues. • Transition to college and the larger first-year experience • Negotiation of a new identity as college student (how you adjusted; how you handled it) • Membership in groups historically underrepresented in college • Language diversity • Managing life circumstances to be able to give enough time and energy to academic work In sum, the Reflective Essay should make claims about your learning and accomplishments with respect to the two areas identified above. Essentially, the reflective essay should demonstrate what you have learned and what you can do as a result of your work in ENG 1010. In this way, a successful Reflective Essay will inspire confidence that you are prepared to move forward into your next composition courses, beginning with ENG 1020, and into the larger academic discourse community. Part Two Part Two consists of an electronic multimedia portfolio containing 3-5 selected pieces of the work you produced this semester (essay topic proposals, reading responses, essay outlines, essay first or final drafts, in-class assignments, etc.) that you can use as evidence of your learning and accomplishments and to support the claims you made in your reflective essay. ___________________________________________________________________ English 1010 Learning Outcomes Reading ● Develop reading strategies to explain, paraphrase, and summarize college-level material. ● Analyze college-level material to identify evidence that supports broader claims. Writing ● Plan and compose a well-organized thesis-driven text that engages with college-level material and is supported by relevant and sufficient evidence. ● Develop a flexible revision process that incorporates feedback to rewrite multiple drafts of a text for clarity (e.g. argument, organization, support, and audience awareness). Reflection ● Use reflective writing to evaluate and revise writing processes and drafts ● Use reflective writing to assess and articulate skill development in relation to course learning outcomes. Technology Use ● Navigate institutional web-based interfaces, such as course websites, university email, and Blackboard Learn™, to find, access and submit course material. ● Use computer-based composition technologies, including word processing software (e.g. Microsoft Word, PowerPoint), to compose college-level texts. ● Use computer-based composition technologies to read and annotate course readings and texts authored by students (e.g. peer review). Your Final Draft Should: • meet the requirements as outlined in the “Introduction/Rationale/Assignment Prompt” section above. Points for This Project • First Draft: 20 Points • Final Draft: 130 Points • Oral Presentation: 30 Points Refer to the Course Schedule (Syllabus) for Assignment Due Dates. _______________________________________________________________ Evaluation: You will be evaluated based on content, organization, and mechanics.

No expert has answered this question yet. You can browse … Read More...
HIST 303 Rebels and Renegades Comparative Paper – Conroy & Drakulic In a well-written analysis of about 3 pages, compare and contrast Conroy’s Belfast Diary or Drakulic’s How We Survived Communism and Even Laughed in response to the following question: It can be argued that in the midst of deprivation and hardship, people still exercise considerable agency—or the power to act within one’s particular socio-political context. In fact, living the ordinary can be considered an act of rebellion against an imposing power. That is, people use and experience their lives as resistance to oppression or war. This is sometimes referred to as the “politics of everyday life”. How does this concept of agency play out in these works? In your response, do not simply list examples, but analyze the examples by the authors in relation to the larger themes of the course. A successful assignment will (this is a checklist, so heed it well!!!): * have a solid introduction with an arguable thesis; * be well organized with coherent paragraphs relevant to the thesis; * have a concluding paragraph that concisely and accurately summarizes the paper; * adequately analyze the histories and their connections to each other; * use relevant evidence to substantiate claims; * be analytic, not descriptive; * properly cite and punctuate quotations and evidence; * be paginated; * have an interesting title relevant to the argument (e.g. “Comparative Paper” is unacceptable); * be well written, well edited and well documented. Author Specific Points that discuss everyday activities as resistance Relate to your other Reading (Williams, Hall, Hebdige, etc.) Conroy Drakulic Working Thesis: _____________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ****FORMATTING DIRECTIONS: This paper should be 3 – 4 pages (no more), typed, doublespaced, with one-inch margins and 12-point font. This assignment is worth 25% of your grade in this course. You must head your paper with your name and date and include your name and pages (x of x) in a header or footer of each page. At the end of your paper, you must skip four lines then sign with the following: “I attest that the work contained in this document is entirely my own and it numbers x pages.” *****

HIST 303 Rebels and Renegades Comparative Paper – Conroy & Drakulic In a well-written analysis of about 3 pages, compare and contrast Conroy’s Belfast Diary or Drakulic’s How We Survived Communism and Even Laughed in response to the following question: It can be argued that in the midst of deprivation and hardship, people still exercise considerable agency—or the power to act within one’s particular socio-political context. In fact, living the ordinary can be considered an act of rebellion against an imposing power. That is, people use and experience their lives as resistance to oppression or war. This is sometimes referred to as the “politics of everyday life”. How does this concept of agency play out in these works? In your response, do not simply list examples, but analyze the examples by the authors in relation to the larger themes of the course. A successful assignment will (this is a checklist, so heed it well!!!): * have a solid introduction with an arguable thesis; * be well organized with coherent paragraphs relevant to the thesis; * have a concluding paragraph that concisely and accurately summarizes the paper; * adequately analyze the histories and their connections to each other; * use relevant evidence to substantiate claims; * be analytic, not descriptive; * properly cite and punctuate quotations and evidence; * be paginated; * have an interesting title relevant to the argument (e.g. “Comparative Paper” is unacceptable); * be well written, well edited and well documented. Author Specific Points that discuss everyday activities as resistance Relate to your other Reading (Williams, Hall, Hebdige, etc.) Conroy Drakulic Working Thesis: _____________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ****FORMATTING DIRECTIONS: This paper should be 3 – 4 pages (no more), typed, doublespaced, with one-inch margins and 12-point font. This assignment is worth 25% of your grade in this course. You must head your paper with your name and date and include your name and pages (x of x) in a header or footer of each page. At the end of your paper, you must skip four lines then sign with the following: “I attest that the work contained in this document is entirely my own and it numbers x pages.” *****

Relative analysis of Conroy & Drakulic The Belfast Diary: War … Read More...
For this assignment, you will compose a letter designed to recruit students to join and support the agenda of one of three nonexistent student organizations that, were they to exist, would likely be very unpopular. The student organization for which you will be recruiting is determined by your last name: The first letter of your last name is… Your student organization assignment is… A – F The SETS Collective: SETS (Skip the Elevator, Take the Stairs) is dedicated to energy conservation on campus, particularly by eliminating elevator usage by pedestrians in any buildings on the UT-Austin campus. G – N O – Z Your recruiting letter must include eight (8) different persuasive strategies. Each strategy must be used in the service of encouraging students to join the organization and/or endorse its cause. In addition to your recruiting letter, you will also submit a commentary describing the different strategies you used in the recruiting letter. In this course, we utilize the TurnItIn tool. This service helps educators prevent plagiarism by detecting unoriginal content in student papers. In addition to acting as a plagiarism deterrent, it also has features designed to aid in educating students about plagiarism and importance of proper attribution of any borrowed content. For more information, please visit http://turnitin.com/. Below are a series of requirements for the paper assignment. Failure to satisfy these requirements will result in substantial point penalties. Also, failure to abide by the academic honesty policy described in the syllabus and maintained by the CMS department, the Moody College of Communication, and/or The University of Texas will result in a grade of F on the assignment and referral to the Dean of Students. Assignment Requirements • You must portray yourself as a recruiting officer (or Secretary of Recruitment) – not the President, VP, etc. – of the organization described in your letter. As a recruiting officer, you are not authorized to offer any rewards or bribes (gifts in the form of sports tickets, free meals, etc.) to people as an incentive to join the organization, nor are you allowed to make up fictional incentives (e.g., OBC students will enjoy an opportunity to participate in international conferences). Your letter should focus exclusively on the merits of joining the organization based on commitment to its cause. • Assume that organization has just been formed – i.e., do not portray it as having existed prior to the Spring of 2017. • You may also assume that there are currently only three members of the organization, the president, vice-president, and yourself (the Secretary of Recruitment). You CANNOT claim that there are “many members.” • You must use the following format for the recruiting letter AND the commentary: 12-point Times New Roman font, single-spaced (NOT double-spaced) on 8.5 X 11-inch white paper with 1-inch margins on all sides. • The recruiting letter must be no shorter than 2 nor longer than 3 pages; the commentary must be no longer than 2 pages. • Your recruiting letter must include only 8 (eight) DIFFERENT strategies discussed in the lectures and/or readings. You may use any principle/theory we have discussed EXCEPT for balance theory (which is too obvious) or deception (which isn’t persuasion per se). • Your commentary must identify the name OR what you did for of each strategy (e.g., Door In Face or Foot In The Door) used in your letter and describe the specific purpose(s) the strategy was used to achieve. At a minimum, your description of each strategy should consist of at least two complete sentences (16 sentences total). • Each strategy explanation in your commentary should be bulleted or numbered for easy identification • You may not lie under any circumstances. Lies include falsifications and/or distortions of the truth about the student organization (e.g., SURF is endorsed by the Fellowship of Christian Athletes). Also, you may not offer recruits bribes in any form (tickets, discounts, free food, cash, etc.) as an incentive for joining the organization. • Your completed assignment (recruiting letter + commentary) must be turned in on April 13th (a Thursday) at or before 9:30 a.m. Grading Rubric We will use the following rubric to evaluate and grade your letter + commentary. Assignment Component Possible Points Obtained Points Format, Spelling, Grammar, Coherence Are the letter and commentary written in the proper format? Do they consist of grammatical, coherent English sentences? Has the assignment been spell-checked? 4 Strategy 1 Example/Commentary Is the example an acceptable instance of the strategy? Is it different from the other strategies used? Is the strategy correctly identified and adequately explained in the commentary? 2 Strategy 2 Example/Commentary 2 Strategy 3 Example/Commentary 2 Strategy 4 Example/Commentary 2 Strategy 5 Example/Commentary 2 Strategy 6 Example/ Commentary 2 Strategy 7 Example/ Commentary 2 Strategy 8 Example/ Commentary 2 Lies/Deception/Bribes (-3 pts per instance) -3 (per instance) Total Score 20 Cannot use strategy of Balance Theory, Lie Write a persuasive essay and a commentary Commentary is about 8 strategies in letter • 8 bullets separate from the letter “foot-in-the-door” – “door-in-the-face” (rejection then retreat) o 1. Make a large (but reasonable) request to target  World you lend me $50? o 2. After request is rejected, make a smaller request  Well then, could you lend me $10? o Creating a “big” favor out of thin air! “low-balling” • An advantage is offered that induces a favorable purchase decision. Then, sometime after the decision has been made, but before the bargain is sealed, the original purchase buyer is deftly removed. 1.) Loss framing: Loss aversion 2.) Restriction: scarcity 3.) Positive self-feeling: Principle commitment 4.) Identification: Social Proof 5.) “Using Rhymes” is what you would write instead of Stroop effect: Fluency 6.) Virtual ownership: Endowment effect 7.) That’s not all: reciprocity 8.) Flattery: Likability 9.) Expertise strategy: Authority principle 10.) Inducing dissonance reduction: Norm of consistency 11.) Conformity concession: social proof 12.) Association similarity: Liking & Association principle Strategies – Use 8 (Cannot use Balance Theory or deception) Strategy Principle Sources/Notes Door in the Face Reciprocity 9/16 lecture Foot in the Door Consistency Norm 9/30 lecture That’s not all Reciprocity 9/16 lecture Flattery Likability Could someone give an example for Flattery?! I’m a little stuck… “Providing a statistic” Social Proof? why is this yellow? What principle is this? How did you use this as a strategy?? plz help AUTHORITY it depends how you use it ID-ing yourself as a student Likability <in cialdini chapter 5 they are talked about as 2 different things, so if you can argue it your way,Cialdini can support it what is the strategy for this? Perceptual Contrast What is this for? Low-Balling Might be considered lying. Soft-Sell Humor appeal did anyone use this?? Anyone??? What principle is this? Hard-sell ???????? Seek-and-Hide Fear Appeal ???? What principle does this fall under???? Pump and Dump social proof 10/9 lecture Bait-and-switch this kind of seems like deception, can we use it? Moral Appeal Commitment Rebecca’s Lecture 10/2 Voluntary instead of Mandatory Consistency Norm 9/30 lecture herd mentality social proof 10/14 lecture Loss framing Loss Aversion Endowment Effect this is a principle FYI Mere ownership Scarcity Dissonance Reduction Positive/negative self feelings Commitment to gain compliance Rebecca’s Lecture Principles Name STRATEGIES/Ideas Source/Notes Reciprocity That’s not all! Likability/Association Flattery, agreeing with said person, state similar social standings, “work with” them, show evidence of “good things” likeability/association ppt Consistency/Commitment Foot in the door, positive self-feelings, moral appeal, Social Proof/Conformity norm works when someone is uncertain about the right thing to do, and when the person they are watching is similar to them. Provide target with “evidence” that compliance is a common/frequent response among desired social group “we made other people happy, we’ll make you happy too” Priming the pump (tip jar example) Pump and dump (Scam, could be considered deception) Conformity and social proff ppt Authority Wearing a uniform, Titles, books, diplomas, awards, success, using a spokesperson, Scarcity/Supply and demand “Only a certain number of students allowed in” “only for college students” “Exclusive except to X” “Only a certain number of seats” Scarcity ppt Psychological Reactance Restricting access, censoring something, implying scarcity, Scarcity ppt Attractiveness Similarity Mentioning you are a student Perceptual Contrast Loss aversion gain or loss framing Scarcity ppt Balance Theory We aren’t allowed to use this Judgement Heuristic Price = product quality Use of long unfamilar words = intelligence fluency = trustworthinesss Fluency ppt Availability Heuristic Can you think of one example (out of ten) (for us) vs Can you think of then for the competitor - here’s our ten. Fluency ppt

For this assignment, you will compose a letter designed to recruit students to join and support the agenda of one of three nonexistent student organizations that, were they to exist, would likely be very unpopular. The student organization for which you will be recruiting is determined by your last name: The first letter of your last name is… Your student organization assignment is… A – F The SETS Collective: SETS (Skip the Elevator, Take the Stairs) is dedicated to energy conservation on campus, particularly by eliminating elevator usage by pedestrians in any buildings on the UT-Austin campus. G – N O – Z Your recruiting letter must include eight (8) different persuasive strategies. Each strategy must be used in the service of encouraging students to join the organization and/or endorse its cause. In addition to your recruiting letter, you will also submit a commentary describing the different strategies you used in the recruiting letter. In this course, we utilize the TurnItIn tool. This service helps educators prevent plagiarism by detecting unoriginal content in student papers. In addition to acting as a plagiarism deterrent, it also has features designed to aid in educating students about plagiarism and importance of proper attribution of any borrowed content. For more information, please visit http://turnitin.com/. Below are a series of requirements for the paper assignment. Failure to satisfy these requirements will result in substantial point penalties. Also, failure to abide by the academic honesty policy described in the syllabus and maintained by the CMS department, the Moody College of Communication, and/or The University of Texas will result in a grade of F on the assignment and referral to the Dean of Students. Assignment Requirements • You must portray yourself as a recruiting officer (or Secretary of Recruitment) – not the President, VP, etc. – of the organization described in your letter. As a recruiting officer, you are not authorized to offer any rewards or bribes (gifts in the form of sports tickets, free meals, etc.) to people as an incentive to join the organization, nor are you allowed to make up fictional incentives (e.g., OBC students will enjoy an opportunity to participate in international conferences). Your letter should focus exclusively on the merits of joining the organization based on commitment to its cause. • Assume that organization has just been formed – i.e., do not portray it as having existed prior to the Spring of 2017. • You may also assume that there are currently only three members of the organization, the president, vice-president, and yourself (the Secretary of Recruitment). You CANNOT claim that there are “many members.” • You must use the following format for the recruiting letter AND the commentary: 12-point Times New Roman font, single-spaced (NOT double-spaced) on 8.5 X 11-inch white paper with 1-inch margins on all sides. • The recruiting letter must be no shorter than 2 nor longer than 3 pages; the commentary must be no longer than 2 pages. • Your recruiting letter must include only 8 (eight) DIFFERENT strategies discussed in the lectures and/or readings. You may use any principle/theory we have discussed EXCEPT for balance theory (which is too obvious) or deception (which isn’t persuasion per se). • Your commentary must identify the name OR what you did for of each strategy (e.g., Door In Face or Foot In The Door) used in your letter and describe the specific purpose(s) the strategy was used to achieve. At a minimum, your description of each strategy should consist of at least two complete sentences (16 sentences total). • Each strategy explanation in your commentary should be bulleted or numbered for easy identification • You may not lie under any circumstances. Lies include falsifications and/or distortions of the truth about the student organization (e.g., SURF is endorsed by the Fellowship of Christian Athletes). Also, you may not offer recruits bribes in any form (tickets, discounts, free food, cash, etc.) as an incentive for joining the organization. • Your completed assignment (recruiting letter + commentary) must be turned in on April 13th (a Thursday) at or before 9:30 a.m. Grading Rubric We will use the following rubric to evaluate and grade your letter + commentary. Assignment Component Possible Points Obtained Points Format, Spelling, Grammar, Coherence Are the letter and commentary written in the proper format? Do they consist of grammatical, coherent English sentences? Has the assignment been spell-checked? 4 Strategy 1 Example/Commentary Is the example an acceptable instance of the strategy? Is it different from the other strategies used? Is the strategy correctly identified and adequately explained in the commentary? 2 Strategy 2 Example/Commentary 2 Strategy 3 Example/Commentary 2 Strategy 4 Example/Commentary 2 Strategy 5 Example/Commentary 2 Strategy 6 Example/ Commentary 2 Strategy 7 Example/ Commentary 2 Strategy 8 Example/ Commentary 2 Lies/Deception/Bribes (-3 pts per instance) -3 (per instance) Total Score 20 Cannot use strategy of Balance Theory, Lie Write a persuasive essay and a commentary Commentary is about 8 strategies in letter • 8 bullets separate from the letter “foot-in-the-door” – “door-in-the-face” (rejection then retreat) o 1. Make a large (but reasonable) request to target  World you lend me $50? o 2. After request is rejected, make a smaller request  Well then, could you lend me $10? o Creating a “big” favor out of thin air! “low-balling” • An advantage is offered that induces a favorable purchase decision. Then, sometime after the decision has been made, but before the bargain is sealed, the original purchase buyer is deftly removed. 1.) Loss framing: Loss aversion 2.) Restriction: scarcity 3.) Positive self-feeling: Principle commitment 4.) Identification: Social Proof 5.) “Using Rhymes” is what you would write instead of Stroop effect: Fluency 6.) Virtual ownership: Endowment effect 7.) That’s not all: reciprocity 8.) Flattery: Likability 9.) Expertise strategy: Authority principle 10.) Inducing dissonance reduction: Norm of consistency 11.) Conformity concession: social proof 12.) Association similarity: Liking & Association principle Strategies – Use 8 (Cannot use Balance Theory or deception) Strategy Principle Sources/Notes Door in the Face Reciprocity 9/16 lecture Foot in the Door Consistency Norm 9/30 lecture That’s not all Reciprocity 9/16 lecture Flattery Likability Could someone give an example for Flattery?! I’m a little stuck… “Providing a statistic” Social Proof? why is this yellow? What principle is this? How did you use this as a strategy?? plz help AUTHORITY it depends how you use it ID-ing yourself as a student Likability

checkyourstudy.com Whatsapp +919911743277
Explain the significant impact this career development experience has had and will continue to have on your life.

Explain the significant impact this career development experience has had and will continue to have on your life.

Most corporate individuals instinctively comprehend the connection between well-designed creativities … Read More...
The Classic Five-Part Structure 1. Introduce the topic to be argued. Establish its importance. 2. Provide background information so readers will be able to follow your discussion. 3. State your claim (your argumentative thesis) and develop your argument by making a logical appeal. Support your claims with facts, opinions, and examples. If appropriate, mix an emotional appeal or an appeal to authority with your logical appeals. 4. Acknowledge counterarguments and treat them with respect. Rebut these arguments. Reject their evidence or their logic or concede some validity and modify your claim accordingly. Be flexible; you might split the counterarguments and rebut them one at a time at different locations in the paper, or you might begin the paper with a counterargument, rebut it, and then move on to your own claim. 5. Conclude by summarizing the main points of your argument. Then remind readers of what you want them to believe or do. Give them something to remember. The Problem-Solution Structure I. There is a serious problem. A. The problem exists and is growing. (Provide support for argument.) B. The problem is serious. (Provide support.) C. Current methods cannot cope with the problem. (Provide support.) II. There is a solution to the problem. (Your claim goes here.) A. The solution is practical. (Provide support.) B. The solution is desirable. (Provide support.) C. We can implement the solution. (Provide support.) D. Alternate solutions are not as strong as the proposed solution. (Review – and reject – competing solutions.) In both cases, you know before you begin writing whether you will use an inductive (analytic) or deductive (synthetic) arrangement for your argument. The decision to move inductively or deductively is about strategy. Induction moves from support to a claim. Deduction moves from a claim to support – to particular facts, opinions, and examples. This is the preferred form for most writing in the humanities. You can position your claim at the beginning, middle, or end of your presentation. In the problem/solution structure, the claim is made only after the writer introduces a problem. With the five-part structure, you have more flexibility in positioning your claim. One factor that can help determine placement is the likelihood of your audience agreeing with you. When your audience is likely to be neutral or supportive, making your claim early on will not alienate readers (synthetic presentation). When your audience is likely to disagree, placing your thesis at the end of your presentation allows you time to build a consensus, step by step, until you reach your conclusion (analytical presentation).

The Classic Five-Part Structure 1. Introduce the topic to be argued. Establish its importance. 2. Provide background information so readers will be able to follow your discussion. 3. State your claim (your argumentative thesis) and develop your argument by making a logical appeal. Support your claims with facts, opinions, and examples. If appropriate, mix an emotional appeal or an appeal to authority with your logical appeals. 4. Acknowledge counterarguments and treat them with respect. Rebut these arguments. Reject their evidence or their logic or concede some validity and modify your claim accordingly. Be flexible; you might split the counterarguments and rebut them one at a time at different locations in the paper, or you might begin the paper with a counterargument, rebut it, and then move on to your own claim. 5. Conclude by summarizing the main points of your argument. Then remind readers of what you want them to believe or do. Give them something to remember. The Problem-Solution Structure I. There is a serious problem. A. The problem exists and is growing. (Provide support for argument.) B. The problem is serious. (Provide support.) C. Current methods cannot cope with the problem. (Provide support.) II. There is a solution to the problem. (Your claim goes here.) A. The solution is practical. (Provide support.) B. The solution is desirable. (Provide support.) C. We can implement the solution. (Provide support.) D. Alternate solutions are not as strong as the proposed solution. (Review – and reject – competing solutions.) In both cases, you know before you begin writing whether you will use an inductive (analytic) or deductive (synthetic) arrangement for your argument. The decision to move inductively or deductively is about strategy. Induction moves from support to a claim. Deduction moves from a claim to support – to particular facts, opinions, and examples. This is the preferred form for most writing in the humanities. You can position your claim at the beginning, middle, or end of your presentation. In the problem/solution structure, the claim is made only after the writer introduces a problem. With the five-part structure, you have more flexibility in positioning your claim. One factor that can help determine placement is the likelihood of your audience agreeing with you. When your audience is likely to be neutral or supportive, making your claim early on will not alienate readers (synthetic presentation). When your audience is likely to disagree, placing your thesis at the end of your presentation allows you time to build a consensus, step by step, until you reach your conclusion (analytical presentation).

info@checkyourstudy.com
1 IN2009: Language Processors Coursework Part 3: The Interpreter Introduction This is the 3rd and final part of the coursework. In the second part of the coursework you created a parser for the Moopl grammar which, given a syntactically correct Moopl program as input, builds an AST representation of the program. In Part 3 you will develop an interpreter which executes Moopl programs by visiting their AST representations. For this part of the coursework we provide functional code (with limitations, see below) for parsing, building a symbol table, type checking and variable allocation. Marks This part of the coursework is worth 12 of the 30 coursework marks for the Language Processors module. This part of the coursework is marked out of 12. Submission deadline This part of the coursework should be handed in before 5pm on Sunday 9th April 2017. In line with school policy, late submissions will be awarded no marks. Return & Feedback Marks and feedback will be available as soon as possible, certainly on or before Wed 3rd May 2017. Plagiarism If you copy the work of others (either that of fellow students or of a third party), with or without their permission, you will score no marks and further disciplinary action will be taken against you. Group working You will be working in the same groups as for the previous parts of the coursework except where group changes have already been approved. Submission: Submit a zip archive (not a rar file) of all your source code (the src folder of your project). We do not want the other parts of your NetBeans project, only the source code. Note 1: Submissions which do not compile will get zero marks. Note 2: You must not change the names or types of any of the existing packages, classes or public methods. 2 Getting started Download either moopl-interp.zip or moopl-interp.tgz from Moodle and extract all files. Key contents to be aware of: • A fully implemented Moopl parser (also implements a parser for the interpreter command language; see below). • A partially implemented Moopl type checker. • Test harnesses for the type checker and interpreter. • A directory of a few example Moopl programs (see Testing below). • Folder interp containing prototype interpreter code. The type-checker is only partially implemented but a more complete implementation will be provided following Session 6. That version is still not fully complete because it doesn’t support inheritance. Part d) below asks you to remove this restriction. The VarAllocator visitor in the interp package uses a simple implementation which only works for methods in which all parameter and local variable names are different. Part e) below asks you to remove this restriction. The three parts below should be attempted in sequence. When you have completed one part you should make a back-up copy of the work and keep it safe, in case you break it in your attempt at the next part. Be sure to test old functionality as well as new (regression testing). We will not assess multiple versions so, if your attempt at part d) or e) breaks previously working code, you may gain a better mark by submitting the earlier version for assessment. c) [8 marks] The Basic Interpreter: complete the implementation of the Interpreter visitor in the interp package. d) [2 marks] Inheritance: extend the type-checker, variable allocator and interpreter to support inheritance. e) [2 marks] Variable Allocation: extend the variable allocator to fully support blockstructure and lexical scoping, removing the requirement that all parameter and local variable names are different. Aim to minimise the number of local variable slots allocated in a stack frame. Note: variable and parameter names declared at the same scope level are still required to be different from each other (a method cannot have two different parameters called x, for example) and this is enforced by the existing typechecking code. But variables declared in different blocks (even when nested) can have the same name. Exceptions Your interpreter will only ever be run on Moopl code which is type-correct (and free from uninitialised local variables). But it is still possible that the Moopl code contains logical errors which may cause runtime errors (such as null-reference or array-bound errors). Your interpreter should throw a MooplRunTimeException with an appropriate error message in these cases. The only kind of exception your interpreter should ever throw is a MooplRunTimeException. 3 Testing The examples folder does not contain a comprehensive test-suite. You need to invent and run your own tests. The document Moopl compared with Java gives a concise summary of how Moopl programs are supposed to behave. You can (and should) also compare the behaviour of your interpreter with that of the online tool: https://smcse.city.ac.uk/student/sj353/langproc/Moopl.html (Note: the online tool checks for uninitialised local variables. Your implementation is not expected to do this.) To test your work, run the top-level Interpret harness, providing the name of a Moopl source file as a command-line argument. When run on a type-correct Moopl source file, Interpret will pretty-print the Moopl program then display a command prompt (>) at which you can enter one of the following commands: :quit This will quit the interpreter. :call main() This will call the top-level proc main, interpreted in the context defined by the Moopl program. (Any top-level proc can be called this way). :eval Exp ; This will evaluate expression Exp, interpreted in the context defined by the Moopl program, and print the result. Note the required terminating semi-colon. Testing your Expression visitors To unit-test your Exp visit methods, run the top-level Interpret harness on a complete Moopl program (though it can be trivial) and use the :eval command. For example, to test your visit methods for the Boolean-literals (ExpTrue and ExpFalse), you would enter the commands > :eval true ; > :eval false ; which should output 1 and 0, respectively. For the most basic cases, the Moopl program is essentially irrelevant (a single top-level proc with empty body may be sufficient). For other cases you will need to write programs containing class definitions (in order, for example, to test object creation and method call). Testing your Statement visitors To unit-test your Stm visit methods, write very simple Moopl programs, each with a top-level proc main() containing just a few lines of code. Run the top-level Interpret harness on these simple programs and enter the command > :call main() You will find a few examples to get you started in the folder examples/unittests. As for the Exp tests, simple cases can be tested using Moopl programs with just a main proc but for the more complex tests you will need to write Moopl programs containing class definitions. 4 Grading criteria Solutions will be graded according to their functional correctness, and the elegance of their implementation. Below are criteria that guide the award of marks. 70 – 100 [1st class] Work that meets all the requirements in full, constructed and presented to a professional standard. Showing evidence of independent reading, thinking and analysis. 60 – 69 [2:1] Work that makes a good attempt to address the requirements, realising all to some extent and most well. Well-structured and well presented. 50 – 59 [2:2] Work that attempts to address requirements realising all to some extent and some well but perhaps also including irrelevant or underdeveloped material. Structure and presentation may not always be clear. 40 – 49 [3rd class] Work that attempts to address the requirements but only realises them to some extent and may not include important elements or be completely accurate. Structure and presentation may lack clarity. 0 – 39 [fail] Unsatisfactory work that does not adequately address the requirements. Structure and presentation may be confused or incoherent.

1 IN2009: Language Processors Coursework Part 3: The Interpreter Introduction This is the 3rd and final part of the coursework. In the second part of the coursework you created a parser for the Moopl grammar which, given a syntactically correct Moopl program as input, builds an AST representation of the program. In Part 3 you will develop an interpreter which executes Moopl programs by visiting their AST representations. For this part of the coursework we provide functional code (with limitations, see below) for parsing, building a symbol table, type checking and variable allocation. Marks This part of the coursework is worth 12 of the 30 coursework marks for the Language Processors module. This part of the coursework is marked out of 12. Submission deadline This part of the coursework should be handed in before 5pm on Sunday 9th April 2017. In line with school policy, late submissions will be awarded no marks. Return & Feedback Marks and feedback will be available as soon as possible, certainly on or before Wed 3rd May 2017. Plagiarism If you copy the work of others (either that of fellow students or of a third party), with or without their permission, you will score no marks and further disciplinary action will be taken against you. Group working You will be working in the same groups as for the previous parts of the coursework except where group changes have already been approved. Submission: Submit a zip archive (not a rar file) of all your source code (the src folder of your project). We do not want the other parts of your NetBeans project, only the source code. Note 1: Submissions which do not compile will get zero marks. Note 2: You must not change the names or types of any of the existing packages, classes or public methods. 2 Getting started Download either moopl-interp.zip or moopl-interp.tgz from Moodle and extract all files. Key contents to be aware of: • A fully implemented Moopl parser (also implements a parser for the interpreter command language; see below). • A partially implemented Moopl type checker. • Test harnesses for the type checker and interpreter. • A directory of a few example Moopl programs (see Testing below). • Folder interp containing prototype interpreter code. The type-checker is only partially implemented but a more complete implementation will be provided following Session 6. That version is still not fully complete because it doesn’t support inheritance. Part d) below asks you to remove this restriction. The VarAllocator visitor in the interp package uses a simple implementation which only works for methods in which all parameter and local variable names are different. Part e) below asks you to remove this restriction. The three parts below should be attempted in sequence. When you have completed one part you should make a back-up copy of the work and keep it safe, in case you break it in your attempt at the next part. Be sure to test old functionality as well as new (regression testing). We will not assess multiple versions so, if your attempt at part d) or e) breaks previously working code, you may gain a better mark by submitting the earlier version for assessment. c) [8 marks] The Basic Interpreter: complete the implementation of the Interpreter visitor in the interp package. d) [2 marks] Inheritance: extend the type-checker, variable allocator and interpreter to support inheritance. e) [2 marks] Variable Allocation: extend the variable allocator to fully support blockstructure and lexical scoping, removing the requirement that all parameter and local variable names are different. Aim to minimise the number of local variable slots allocated in a stack frame. Note: variable and parameter names declared at the same scope level are still required to be different from each other (a method cannot have two different parameters called x, for example) and this is enforced by the existing typechecking code. But variables declared in different blocks (even when nested) can have the same name. Exceptions Your interpreter will only ever be run on Moopl code which is type-correct (and free from uninitialised local variables). But it is still possible that the Moopl code contains logical errors which may cause runtime errors (such as null-reference or array-bound errors). Your interpreter should throw a MooplRunTimeException with an appropriate error message in these cases. The only kind of exception your interpreter should ever throw is a MooplRunTimeException. 3 Testing The examples folder does not contain a comprehensive test-suite. You need to invent and run your own tests. The document Moopl compared with Java gives a concise summary of how Moopl programs are supposed to behave. You can (and should) also compare the behaviour of your interpreter with that of the online tool: https://smcse.city.ac.uk/student/sj353/langproc/Moopl.html (Note: the online tool checks for uninitialised local variables. Your implementation is not expected to do this.) To test your work, run the top-level Interpret harness, providing the name of a Moopl source file as a command-line argument. When run on a type-correct Moopl source file, Interpret will pretty-print the Moopl program then display a command prompt (>) at which you can enter one of the following commands: :quit This will quit the interpreter. :call main() This will call the top-level proc main, interpreted in the context defined by the Moopl program. (Any top-level proc can be called this way). :eval Exp ; This will evaluate expression Exp, interpreted in the context defined by the Moopl program, and print the result. Note the required terminating semi-colon. Testing your Expression visitors To unit-test your Exp visit methods, run the top-level Interpret harness on a complete Moopl program (though it can be trivial) and use the :eval command. For example, to test your visit methods for the Boolean-literals (ExpTrue and ExpFalse), you would enter the commands > :eval true ; > :eval false ; which should output 1 and 0, respectively. For the most basic cases, the Moopl program is essentially irrelevant (a single top-level proc with empty body may be sufficient). For other cases you will need to write programs containing class definitions (in order, for example, to test object creation and method call). Testing your Statement visitors To unit-test your Stm visit methods, write very simple Moopl programs, each with a top-level proc main() containing just a few lines of code. Run the top-level Interpret harness on these simple programs and enter the command > :call main() You will find a few examples to get you started in the folder examples/unittests. As for the Exp tests, simple cases can be tested using Moopl programs with just a main proc but for the more complex tests you will need to write Moopl programs containing class definitions. 4 Grading criteria Solutions will be graded according to their functional correctness, and the elegance of their implementation. Below are criteria that guide the award of marks. 70 – 100 [1st class] Work that meets all the requirements in full, constructed and presented to a professional standard. Showing evidence of independent reading, thinking and analysis. 60 – 69 [2:1] Work that makes a good attempt to address the requirements, realising all to some extent and most well. Well-structured and well presented. 50 – 59 [2:2] Work that attempts to address requirements realising all to some extent and some well but perhaps also including irrelevant or underdeveloped material. Structure and presentation may not always be clear. 40 – 49 [3rd class] Work that attempts to address the requirements but only realises them to some extent and may not include important elements or be completely accurate. Structure and presentation may lack clarity. 0 – 39 [fail] Unsatisfactory work that does not adequately address the requirements. Structure and presentation may be confused or incoherent.

checkyourstudy.com Whatsapp +919911743277
ABC Corporation’s HRD department has a business meeting with the strategic planning committee to discuss succession planning. You have been asked to come up with a small-group discussion or activity related to career development. The entire meeting will focus on this topic and will begin with a presentation by the HRD Director, followed by a panel discussion, followed by this activity.

ABC Corporation’s HRD department has a business meeting with the strategic planning committee to discuss succession planning. You have been asked to come up with a small-group discussion or activity related to career development. The entire meeting will focus on this topic and will begin with a presentation by the HRD Director, followed by a panel discussion, followed by this activity.

OCCUPATION DEVELOPMENT ACTION PLAN addresses our individual and occupation growth … Read More...
Read this article and answer this question in 2 pages : Answers should be from the below article only. What is the difference between “standards-based” and “standards-embedded” curriculum? what are the curricular implications of this difference? Article: In 2007, at the dawn of 21st century in education, it is impossible to talk about teaching, curriculum, schools, or education without discussing standards . standards-based v. standards-embedded curriculum We are in an age of accountability where our success as educators is determined by individual and group mastery of specific standards dem- onstrated by standardized test per- formance. Even before No Child Left Behind (NCLB), standards and measures were used to determine if schools and students were success- ful (McClure, 2005). But, NCLB has increased the pace, intensity, and high stakes of this trend. Gifted and talented students and their teach- ers are significantly impacted by these local or state proficiency stan- dards and grade-level assessments (VanTassel-Baska & Stambaugh, 2006). This article explores how to use these standards in the develop- ment of high-quality curriculum for gifted students. NCLB, High-Stakes State Testing, and Standards- Based Instruction There are a few potentially positive outcomes of this evolution to public accountability. All stakeholders have had to ask themselves, “Are students learning? If so, what are they learning and how do we know?” In cases where we have been allowed to thoughtfully evaluate curriculum and instruction, we have also asked, “What’s worth learning?” “When’s the best time to learn it?” and “Who needs to learn it?” Even though state achievement tests are only a single measure, citizens are now offered a yardstick, albeit a nar- row one, for comparing communities, schools, and in some cases, teachers. Some testing reports allow teachers to identify for parents what their chil- dren can do and what they can not do. Testing also has focused attention on the not-so-new observations that pov- erty, discrimination and prejudices, and language proficiency impacts learning. With enough ceiling (e.g., above-grade-level assessments), even gifted students’ actual achievement and readiness levels can be identi- fied and provide a starting point for appropriately differentiated instruc- tion (Tomlinson, 2001). Unfortunately, as a veteran teacher for more than three decades and as a teacher-educator, my recent observa- tions of and conversations with class- room and gifted teachers have usually revealed negative outcomes. For gifted children, their actual achievement level is often unrecognized by teachers because both the tests and the reporting of the results rarely reach above the student’s grade-level placement. Assessments also focus on a huge number of state stan- dards for a given school year that cre- ate “overload” (Tomlinson & McTighe, 2006) and have a devastating impact on the development and implementation of rich and relevant curriculum and instruction. In too many scenarios, I see teachers teach- ing directly to the test. And, in the worst cases, some teachers actually teach The Test. In those cases, The Test itself becomes the curriculum. Consistently I hear, “Oh, I used to teach a great unit on ________ but I can’t do it any- more because I have to teach the standards.” Or, “I have to teach my favorite units in April and May after testing.” If the outcomes can’t be boiled down to simple “I can . . .” state- ments that can be posted on a school’s walls, then teachers seem to omit poten- tially meaningful learning opportunities from the school year. In many cases, real education and learning are being trivial- ized. We seem to have lost sight of the more significant purpose of teaching and learning: individual growth and develop- ment. We also have surrendered much of the joy of learning, as the incidentals, the tangents, the “bird walks” are cut short or elimi- nated because teachers hear the con- stant ticking clock of the countdown to the state test and feel the pressure of the way-too-many standards that have to be covered in a mere 180 school days. The accountability movement has pushed us away from seeing the whole child: “Students are not machines, as the standards movement suggests; they are volatile, complicated, and paradoxical” (Cookson, 2001, p. 42). How does this impact gifted chil- dren? In many heterogeneous class- rooms, teachers have retreated to traditional subject delineations and traditional instruction in an effort to ensure direct standards-based instruc- tion even though “no solid basis exists in the research literature for the ways we currently develop, place, and align educational standards in school cur- ricula” (Zenger & Zenger, 2002, p. 212). Grade-level standards are often particularly inappropriate for the gifted and talented whose pace of learning, achievement levels, and depth of knowledge are significantly beyond their chronological peers. A broad-based, thematically rich, and challenging curriculum is the heart of education for the gifted. Virgil Ward, one of the earliest voices for a differen- tial education for the gifted, said, “It is insufficient to consider the curriculum for the gifted in terms of traditional subjects and instructional processes” (Ward, 1980, p. 5). VanTassel-Baska Standards-Based v. Standards-Embedded Curriculum gifted child today 45 Standards-Based v. Standards-Embedded Curriculum and Stambaugh (2006) described three dimensions of successful curriculum for gifted students: content mastery, pro- cess and product, and epistemological concept, “understanding and appre- ciating systems of knowledge rather than individual elements of those systems” (p. 9). Overemphasis on testing and grade-level standards limits all three and therefore limits learning for gifted students. Hirsch (2001) concluded that “broad gen- eral knowledge is the best entrée to deep knowledge” (p. 23) and that it is highly correlated with general ability to learn. He continued, “the best way to learn a subject is to learn its gen- eral principles and to study an ample number of diverse examples that illustrate those principles” (Hirsch, 2001, p. 23). Principle-based learn- ing applies to both gifted and general education children. In order to meet the needs of gifted and general education students, cur- riculum should be differentiated in ways that are relevant and engaging. Curriculum content, processes, and products should provide challenge, depth, and complexity, offering multiple opportunities for problem solving, creativity, and exploration. In specific content areas, the cur- riculum should reflect the elegance and sophistication unique to the discipline. Even with this expanded view of curriculum in mind, we still must find ways to address the current reality of state standards and assess- ments. Standards-Embedded Curriculum How can educators address this chal- lenge? As in most things, a change of perspective can be helpful. Standards- based curriculum as described above should be replaced with standards- embedded curriculum. Standards- embedded curriculum begins with broad questions and topics, either discipline specific or interdisciplinary. Once teachers have given thoughtful consideration to relevant, engaging, and important content and the con- nections that support meaning-making (Jensen, 1998), they next select stan- dards that are relevant to this content and to summative assessments. This process is supported by the backward planning advocated in Understanding by Design by Wiggins and McTighe (2005) and its predecessors, as well as current thinkers in other fields, such as Covey (Tomlinson & McTighe, 2006). It is a critical component of differenti- ating instruction for advanced learners (Tomlinson, 2001) and a significant factor in the Core Parallel in the Parallel Curriculum Model (Tomlinson et al., 2002). Teachers choose from standards in multiple disciplines at both above and below grade level depending on the needs of the students and the classroom or program structure. Preassessment data and the results of prior instruc- tion also inform this process of embed- ding appropriate standards. For gifted students, this formative assessment will result in “more advanced curricula available at younger ages, ensuring that all levels of the standards are traversed in the process” (VanTassel-Baska & Little, 2003, p. 3). Once the essential questions, key content, and relevant standards are selected and sequenced, they are embedded into a coherent unit design and instructional decisions (grouping, pacing, instructional methodology) can be made. For gifted students, this includes the identification of appropri- ate resources, often including advanced texts, mentors, and independent research, as appropriate to the child’s developmental level and interest. Applying Standards- Embedded Curriculum What does this look like in practice? In reading the possible class- room applications below, consider these three Ohio Academic Content Standards for third grade: 1. Math: “Read thermometers in both Fahrenheit and Celsius scales” (“Academic Content Standards: K–12 Mathematics,” n.d., p. 71). 2. Social Studies: “Compare some of the cultural practices and products of various groups of people who have lived in the local community including artistic expression, religion, language, and food. Compare the cultural practices and products of the local community with those of other communities in Ohio, the United States, and countries of the world” (Academic Content Standards: K–12 Social Studies, n.d., p. 122). 3. Life Science: “Observe and explore how fossils provide evidence about animals that lived long ago and the nature of the environment at that time” (Academic Content Standards: K–12 Science, n.d., p. 57). When students are fortunate to have a teacher who is dedicated to helping all of them make good use of their time, the gifted may have a preassessment opportunity where they can demonstrate their familiarity with the content and potential mastery of a standard at their grade level. Students who pass may get to read by them- selves for the brief period while the rest of the class works on the single outcome. Sometimes more experienced teachers will create opportunities for gifted and advanced students Standards-Based v. Standards-Embedded Curriculum to work on a standard in the same domain or strand at the next higher grade level (i.e., accelerate through the standards). For example, a stu- dent might be able to work on a Life Science standard for fourth grade that progresses to other communities such as ecosystems. These above-grade-level standards can provide rich material for differentiation, advanced problem solving, and more in-depth curriculum integration. In another classroom scenario, a teacher may focus on the math stan- dard above, identifying the standard number on his lesson plan. He creates or collects paper thermometers, some showing measurement in Celsius and some in Fahrenheit. He also has some real thermometers. He demonstrates thermometer use with boiling water and with freezing water and reads the different temperatures. Students complete a worksheet that has them read thermometers in Celsius and Fahrenheit. The more advanced students may learn how to convert between the two scales. Students then practice with several questions on the topic that are similar in structure and content to those that have been on past proficiency tests. They are coached in how to answer them so that the stan- dard, instruction, formative assess- ment, and summative assessment are all aligned. Then, each student writes a statement that says, “I can read a thermometer using either Celsius or Fahrenheit scales.” Both of these examples describe a standards-based environment, where the starting point is the standard. Direct instruction to that standard is followed by an observable student behavior that demonstrates specific mastery of that single standard. The standard becomes both the start- ing point and the ending point of the curriculum. Education, rather than opening up a student’s mind, becomes a series of closed links in a chain. Whereas the above lessons may be differentiated to some extent, they have no context; they may relate only to the next standard on the list, such as, “Telling time to the nearest minute and finding elapsed time using a cal- endar or a clock.” How would a “standards-embed- ded” model of curriculum design be different? It would begin with the development of an essential ques- tion such as, “Who or what lived here before me? How were they different from me? How were they the same? How do we know?” These questions might be more relevant to our con- temporary highly mobile students. It would involve place and time. Using this intriguing line of inquiry, students might work on the social studies stan- dard as part of the study of their home- town, their school, or even their house or apartment. Because where people live and what they do is influenced by the weather, students could look into weather patterns of their area and learn how to measure temperature using a Fahrenheit scale so they could see if it is similar now to what it was a century ago. Skipping ahead to consideration of the social studies standard, students could then choose another country, preferably one that uses Celsius, and do the same investigation of fossils, communities, and the like. Students could complete a weather comparison, looking at the temperature in Celsius as people in other parts of the world, such as those in Canada, do. Thus, learning is contextualized and connected, dem- onstrating both depth and complexity. This approach takes a lot more work and time. It is a sophisticated integrated view of curriculum devel- opment and involves in-depth knowl- edge of the content areas, as well as an understanding of the scope and sequence of the standards in each dis- cipline. Teachers who develop vital single-discipline units, as well as inter- disciplinary teaching units, begin with a central topic surrounded by subtopics and connections to other areas. Then they connect important terms, facts, or concepts to the subtopics. Next, the skilled teacher/curriculum devel- oper embeds relevant, multileveled standards and objectives appropriate to a given student or group of stu- dents into the unit. Finally, teachers select the instructional strategies and develop student assessments. These assessments include, but are not lim- ited to, the types of questions asked on standardized and state assessments. Comparing Standards- Based and Standards- Embedded Curriculum Design Following is an articulation of the differences between standards-based and standards-embedded curriculum design. (See Figure 1.) 1. The starting point. Standards- based curriculum begins with the grade-level standard and the underlying assumption that every student needs to master that stan- dard at that moment in time. In standards-embedded curriculum, the multifaceted essential ques- tion and students’ needs are the starting points. 2. Preassessment. In standards- based curriculum and teaching, if a preassessment is provided, it cov- ers a single standard or two. In a standards-embedded curriculum, preassessment includes a broader range of grade-level and advanced standards, as well as students’ knowledge of surrounding content such as background experiences with the subject, relevant skills (such as reading and writing), and continued on page ?? even learning style or interests. gifted child today 47 Standards-Based v. Standards-Embedded Curriculum Standards Based Standards Embedded Starting Points The grade-level standard. Whole class’ general skill level Essential questions and content relevant to individual students and groups. Preassessment Targeted to a single grade-level standard. Short-cycle assessments. Background knowledge. Multiple grade-level standards from multiple areas connected by the theme of the unit. Includes annual learning style and interest inventories. Acceleration/ Enrichment To next grade-level standard in the same strand. To above-grade-level standards, as well as into broader thematically connected content. Language Arts Divided into individual skills. Reading and writing skills often separated from real-world relevant contexts. The language arts are embedded in all units and themes and connected to differentiated processes and products across all content areas. Instruction Lesson planning begins with the standard as the objective. Sequential direct instruction progresses through the standards in each content area separately. Strategies are selected to introduce, practice, and demonstrate mastery of all grade-level standards in all content areas in one school year. Lesson planning begins with essential questions, topics, and significant themes. Integrated instruction is designed around connections among content areas and embeds all relevant standards. Assessment Format modeled after the state test. Variety of assessments including questions similar to the state test format. Teacher Role Monitor of standards mastery. Time manager. Facilitator of instructional design and student engagement with learning, as well as assessor of achievement. Student Self- Esteem “I can . . .” statements. Star Charts. Passing “the test.” Completed projects/products. Making personal connections to learning and the theme/topic. Figure 1. Standards based v. standards-embedded instruction and gifted students. and the potential political outcry of “stepping on the toes” of the next grade’s teacher. Few classroom teachers have been provided with the in-depth professional develop- ment and understanding of curric- ulum compacting that would allow them to implement this effectively. In standards-embedded curricu- lum, enrichment and extensions of learning are more possible and more interesting because ideas, top- ics, and questions lend themselves more easily to depth and complex- ity than isolated skills. 4. Language arts. In standards- based classrooms, the language arts have been redivided into sepa- rate skills, with reading separated from writing, and writing sepa- rated from grammar. To many concrete thinkers, whole-language approaches seem antithetical to teaching “to the standards.” In a standards-embedded classroom, integrated language arts skills (reading, writing, listening, speak- ing, presenting, and even pho- nics) are embedded into the study of every unit. Especially for the gifted, the communication and language arts are essential, regard- less of domain-specific talents (Ward, 1980) and should be com- ponents of all curriculum because they are the underpinnings of scholarship in all areas. 5. Instruction. A standards-based classroom lends itself to direct instruction and sequential pro- gression from one standard to the next. A standards-embedded class- room requires a variety of more open-ended instructional strate- gies and materials that extend and diversify learning rather than focus it narrowly. Creativity and differ- entiation in instruction and stu- dent performance are supported more effectively in a standards- embedded approach. 6. Assessment. A standards-based classroom uses targeted assess- ments focused on the structure and content of questions on the externally imposed standardized test (i.e., proficiency tests). A stan- dards-embedded classroom lends itself to greater use of authentic assessment and differentiated 3. Acceleration/Enrichment. In a standards-based curriculum, the narrow definition of the learning outcome (a test item) often makes acceleration or curriculum compact- ing the only path for differentiating instruction for gifted, talented, and/ or advanced learners. This rarely happens, however, because of lack of materials, knowledge, o

Read this article and answer this question in 2 pages : Answers should be from the below article only. What is the difference between “standards-based” and “standards-embedded” curriculum? what are the curricular implications of this difference? Article: In 2007, at the dawn of 21st century in education, it is impossible to talk about teaching, curriculum, schools, or education without discussing standards . standards-based v. standards-embedded curriculum We are in an age of accountability where our success as educators is determined by individual and group mastery of specific standards dem- onstrated by standardized test per- formance. Even before No Child Left Behind (NCLB), standards and measures were used to determine if schools and students were success- ful (McClure, 2005). But, NCLB has increased the pace, intensity, and high stakes of this trend. Gifted and talented students and their teach- ers are significantly impacted by these local or state proficiency stan- dards and grade-level assessments (VanTassel-Baska & Stambaugh, 2006). This article explores how to use these standards in the develop- ment of high-quality curriculum for gifted students. NCLB, High-Stakes State Testing, and Standards- Based Instruction There are a few potentially positive outcomes of this evolution to public accountability. All stakeholders have had to ask themselves, “Are students learning? If so, what are they learning and how do we know?” In cases where we have been allowed to thoughtfully evaluate curriculum and instruction, we have also asked, “What’s worth learning?” “When’s the best time to learn it?” and “Who needs to learn it?” Even though state achievement tests are only a single measure, citizens are now offered a yardstick, albeit a nar- row one, for comparing communities, schools, and in some cases, teachers. Some testing reports allow teachers to identify for parents what their chil- dren can do and what they can not do. Testing also has focused attention on the not-so-new observations that pov- erty, discrimination and prejudices, and language proficiency impacts learning. With enough ceiling (e.g., above-grade-level assessments), even gifted students’ actual achievement and readiness levels can be identi- fied and provide a starting point for appropriately differentiated instruc- tion (Tomlinson, 2001). Unfortunately, as a veteran teacher for more than three decades and as a teacher-educator, my recent observa- tions of and conversations with class- room and gifted teachers have usually revealed negative outcomes. For gifted children, their actual achievement level is often unrecognized by teachers because both the tests and the reporting of the results rarely reach above the student’s grade-level placement. Assessments also focus on a huge number of state stan- dards for a given school year that cre- ate “overload” (Tomlinson & McTighe, 2006) and have a devastating impact on the development and implementation of rich and relevant curriculum and instruction. In too many scenarios, I see teachers teach- ing directly to the test. And, in the worst cases, some teachers actually teach The Test. In those cases, The Test itself becomes the curriculum. Consistently I hear, “Oh, I used to teach a great unit on ________ but I can’t do it any- more because I have to teach the standards.” Or, “I have to teach my favorite units in April and May after testing.” If the outcomes can’t be boiled down to simple “I can . . .” state- ments that can be posted on a school’s walls, then teachers seem to omit poten- tially meaningful learning opportunities from the school year. In many cases, real education and learning are being trivial- ized. We seem to have lost sight of the more significant purpose of teaching and learning: individual growth and develop- ment. We also have surrendered much of the joy of learning, as the incidentals, the tangents, the “bird walks” are cut short or elimi- nated because teachers hear the con- stant ticking clock of the countdown to the state test and feel the pressure of the way-too-many standards that have to be covered in a mere 180 school days. The accountability movement has pushed us away from seeing the whole child: “Students are not machines, as the standards movement suggests; they are volatile, complicated, and paradoxical” (Cookson, 2001, p. 42). How does this impact gifted chil- dren? In many heterogeneous class- rooms, teachers have retreated to traditional subject delineations and traditional instruction in an effort to ensure direct standards-based instruc- tion even though “no solid basis exists in the research literature for the ways we currently develop, place, and align educational standards in school cur- ricula” (Zenger & Zenger, 2002, p. 212). Grade-level standards are often particularly inappropriate for the gifted and talented whose pace of learning, achievement levels, and depth of knowledge are significantly beyond their chronological peers. A broad-based, thematically rich, and challenging curriculum is the heart of education for the gifted. Virgil Ward, one of the earliest voices for a differen- tial education for the gifted, said, “It is insufficient to consider the curriculum for the gifted in terms of traditional subjects and instructional processes” (Ward, 1980, p. 5). VanTassel-Baska Standards-Based v. Standards-Embedded Curriculum gifted child today 45 Standards-Based v. Standards-Embedded Curriculum and Stambaugh (2006) described three dimensions of successful curriculum for gifted students: content mastery, pro- cess and product, and epistemological concept, “understanding and appre- ciating systems of knowledge rather than individual elements of those systems” (p. 9). Overemphasis on testing and grade-level standards limits all three and therefore limits learning for gifted students. Hirsch (2001) concluded that “broad gen- eral knowledge is the best entrée to deep knowledge” (p. 23) and that it is highly correlated with general ability to learn. He continued, “the best way to learn a subject is to learn its gen- eral principles and to study an ample number of diverse examples that illustrate those principles” (Hirsch, 2001, p. 23). Principle-based learn- ing applies to both gifted and general education children. In order to meet the needs of gifted and general education students, cur- riculum should be differentiated in ways that are relevant and engaging. Curriculum content, processes, and products should provide challenge, depth, and complexity, offering multiple opportunities for problem solving, creativity, and exploration. In specific content areas, the cur- riculum should reflect the elegance and sophistication unique to the discipline. Even with this expanded view of curriculum in mind, we still must find ways to address the current reality of state standards and assess- ments. Standards-Embedded Curriculum How can educators address this chal- lenge? As in most things, a change of perspective can be helpful. Standards- based curriculum as described above should be replaced with standards- embedded curriculum. Standards- embedded curriculum begins with broad questions and topics, either discipline specific or interdisciplinary. Once teachers have given thoughtful consideration to relevant, engaging, and important content and the con- nections that support meaning-making (Jensen, 1998), they next select stan- dards that are relevant to this content and to summative assessments. This process is supported by the backward planning advocated in Understanding by Design by Wiggins and McTighe (2005) and its predecessors, as well as current thinkers in other fields, such as Covey (Tomlinson & McTighe, 2006). It is a critical component of differenti- ating instruction for advanced learners (Tomlinson, 2001) and a significant factor in the Core Parallel in the Parallel Curriculum Model (Tomlinson et al., 2002). Teachers choose from standards in multiple disciplines at both above and below grade level depending on the needs of the students and the classroom or program structure. Preassessment data and the results of prior instruc- tion also inform this process of embed- ding appropriate standards. For gifted students, this formative assessment will result in “more advanced curricula available at younger ages, ensuring that all levels of the standards are traversed in the process” (VanTassel-Baska & Little, 2003, p. 3). Once the essential questions, key content, and relevant standards are selected and sequenced, they are embedded into a coherent unit design and instructional decisions (grouping, pacing, instructional methodology) can be made. For gifted students, this includes the identification of appropri- ate resources, often including advanced texts, mentors, and independent research, as appropriate to the child’s developmental level and interest. Applying Standards- Embedded Curriculum What does this look like in practice? In reading the possible class- room applications below, consider these three Ohio Academic Content Standards for third grade: 1. Math: “Read thermometers in both Fahrenheit and Celsius scales” (“Academic Content Standards: K–12 Mathematics,” n.d., p. 71). 2. Social Studies: “Compare some of the cultural practices and products of various groups of people who have lived in the local community including artistic expression, religion, language, and food. Compare the cultural practices and products of the local community with those of other communities in Ohio, the United States, and countries of the world” (Academic Content Standards: K–12 Social Studies, n.d., p. 122). 3. Life Science: “Observe and explore how fossils provide evidence about animals that lived long ago and the nature of the environment at that time” (Academic Content Standards: K–12 Science, n.d., p. 57). When students are fortunate to have a teacher who is dedicated to helping all of them make good use of their time, the gifted may have a preassessment opportunity where they can demonstrate their familiarity with the content and potential mastery of a standard at their grade level. Students who pass may get to read by them- selves for the brief period while the rest of the class works on the single outcome. Sometimes more experienced teachers will create opportunities for gifted and advanced students Standards-Based v. Standards-Embedded Curriculum to work on a standard in the same domain or strand at the next higher grade level (i.e., accelerate through the standards). For example, a stu- dent might be able to work on a Life Science standard for fourth grade that progresses to other communities such as ecosystems. These above-grade-level standards can provide rich material for differentiation, advanced problem solving, and more in-depth curriculum integration. In another classroom scenario, a teacher may focus on the math stan- dard above, identifying the standard number on his lesson plan. He creates or collects paper thermometers, some showing measurement in Celsius and some in Fahrenheit. He also has some real thermometers. He demonstrates thermometer use with boiling water and with freezing water and reads the different temperatures. Students complete a worksheet that has them read thermometers in Celsius and Fahrenheit. The more advanced students may learn how to convert between the two scales. Students then practice with several questions on the topic that are similar in structure and content to those that have been on past proficiency tests. They are coached in how to answer them so that the stan- dard, instruction, formative assess- ment, and summative assessment are all aligned. Then, each student writes a statement that says, “I can read a thermometer using either Celsius or Fahrenheit scales.” Both of these examples describe a standards-based environment, where the starting point is the standard. Direct instruction to that standard is followed by an observable student behavior that demonstrates specific mastery of that single standard. The standard becomes both the start- ing point and the ending point of the curriculum. Education, rather than opening up a student’s mind, becomes a series of closed links in a chain. Whereas the above lessons may be differentiated to some extent, they have no context; they may relate only to the next standard on the list, such as, “Telling time to the nearest minute and finding elapsed time using a cal- endar or a clock.” How would a “standards-embed- ded” model of curriculum design be different? It would begin with the development of an essential ques- tion such as, “Who or what lived here before me? How were they different from me? How were they the same? How do we know?” These questions might be more relevant to our con- temporary highly mobile students. It would involve place and time. Using this intriguing line of inquiry, students might work on the social studies stan- dard as part of the study of their home- town, their school, or even their house or apartment. Because where people live and what they do is influenced by the weather, students could look into weather patterns of their area and learn how to measure temperature using a Fahrenheit scale so they could see if it is similar now to what it was a century ago. Skipping ahead to consideration of the social studies standard, students could then choose another country, preferably one that uses Celsius, and do the same investigation of fossils, communities, and the like. Students could complete a weather comparison, looking at the temperature in Celsius as people in other parts of the world, such as those in Canada, do. Thus, learning is contextualized and connected, dem- onstrating both depth and complexity. This approach takes a lot more work and time. It is a sophisticated integrated view of curriculum devel- opment and involves in-depth knowl- edge of the content areas, as well as an understanding of the scope and sequence of the standards in each dis- cipline. Teachers who develop vital single-discipline units, as well as inter- disciplinary teaching units, begin with a central topic surrounded by subtopics and connections to other areas. Then they connect important terms, facts, or concepts to the subtopics. Next, the skilled teacher/curriculum devel- oper embeds relevant, multileveled standards and objectives appropriate to a given student or group of stu- dents into the unit. Finally, teachers select the instructional strategies and develop student assessments. These assessments include, but are not lim- ited to, the types of questions asked on standardized and state assessments. Comparing Standards- Based and Standards- Embedded Curriculum Design Following is an articulation of the differences between standards-based and standards-embedded curriculum design. (See Figure 1.) 1. The starting point. Standards- based curriculum begins with the grade-level standard and the underlying assumption that every student needs to master that stan- dard at that moment in time. In standards-embedded curriculum, the multifaceted essential ques- tion and students’ needs are the starting points. 2. Preassessment. In standards- based curriculum and teaching, if a preassessment is provided, it cov- ers a single standard or two. In a standards-embedded curriculum, preassessment includes a broader range of grade-level and advanced standards, as well as students’ knowledge of surrounding content such as background experiences with the subject, relevant skills (such as reading and writing), and continued on page ?? even learning style or interests. gifted child today 47 Standards-Based v. Standards-Embedded Curriculum Standards Based Standards Embedded Starting Points The grade-level standard. Whole class’ general skill level Essential questions and content relevant to individual students and groups. Preassessment Targeted to a single grade-level standard. Short-cycle assessments. Background knowledge. Multiple grade-level standards from multiple areas connected by the theme of the unit. Includes annual learning style and interest inventories. Acceleration/ Enrichment To next grade-level standard in the same strand. To above-grade-level standards, as well as into broader thematically connected content. Language Arts Divided into individual skills. Reading and writing skills often separated from real-world relevant contexts. The language arts are embedded in all units and themes and connected to differentiated processes and products across all content areas. Instruction Lesson planning begins with the standard as the objective. Sequential direct instruction progresses through the standards in each content area separately. Strategies are selected to introduce, practice, and demonstrate mastery of all grade-level standards in all content areas in one school year. Lesson planning begins with essential questions, topics, and significant themes. Integrated instruction is designed around connections among content areas and embeds all relevant standards. Assessment Format modeled after the state test. Variety of assessments including questions similar to the state test format. Teacher Role Monitor of standards mastery. Time manager. Facilitator of instructional design and student engagement with learning, as well as assessor of achievement. Student Self- Esteem “I can . . .” statements. Star Charts. Passing “the test.” Completed projects/products. Making personal connections to learning and the theme/topic. Figure 1. Standards based v. standards-embedded instruction and gifted students. and the potential political outcry of “stepping on the toes” of the next grade’s teacher. Few classroom teachers have been provided with the in-depth professional develop- ment and understanding of curric- ulum compacting that would allow them to implement this effectively. In standards-embedded curricu- lum, enrichment and extensions of learning are more possible and more interesting because ideas, top- ics, and questions lend themselves more easily to depth and complex- ity than isolated skills. 4. Language arts. In standards- based classrooms, the language arts have been redivided into sepa- rate skills, with reading separated from writing, and writing sepa- rated from grammar. To many concrete thinkers, whole-language approaches seem antithetical to teaching “to the standards.” In a standards-embedded classroom, integrated language arts skills (reading, writing, listening, speak- ing, presenting, and even pho- nics) are embedded into the study of every unit. Especially for the gifted, the communication and language arts are essential, regard- less of domain-specific talents (Ward, 1980) and should be com- ponents of all curriculum because they are the underpinnings of scholarship in all areas. 5. Instruction. A standards-based classroom lends itself to direct instruction and sequential pro- gression from one standard to the next. A standards-embedded class- room requires a variety of more open-ended instructional strate- gies and materials that extend and diversify learning rather than focus it narrowly. Creativity and differ- entiation in instruction and stu- dent performance are supported more effectively in a standards- embedded approach. 6. Assessment. A standards-based classroom uses targeted assess- ments focused on the structure and content of questions on the externally imposed standardized test (i.e., proficiency tests). A stan- dards-embedded classroom lends itself to greater use of authentic assessment and differentiated 3. Acceleration/Enrichment. In a standards-based curriculum, the narrow definition of the learning outcome (a test item) often makes acceleration or curriculum compact- ing the only path for differentiating instruction for gifted, talented, and/ or advanced learners. This rarely happens, however, because of lack of materials, knowledge, o

Standard based Curriculum In standard based curriculum, the initial point … Read More...