Chapter 6 Learning Goals

Comments Off on Chapter 6 Learning Goals

Chapter 6 Learning Goals

Description

 

 

Chapter 6 Review

Chapter 6 Learning Goals (keep the following questions in mind as you read chapter two)

Give examples of how question-wording can change the results of a survey or poll.
Describe the different ways questions can be worded: open-ended, forced-choice, and using rating scales.
Explain how to increase the construct validity of questions by wording them carefully and by avoiding leading questions, double-barreled questions, and double negatives.
Explain how question order can change the meaning (and validity) of a question.
Explain ways to increase the construct validity of questions by preventing respondent shortcuts (such as yea-saying), biases (such as trying to look good), or simple inability to report.
Describe how observational techniques for measurement are different from survey techniques.
Explain ways to improve the construct validity of observations by reducing observer bias, observer effects, and target reactivity.

Directions

DO NOT PLAGIARIZE!

Use the chapter reviews to help guide you through the reading. As you read, stop to paraphrase the definition of each of the following key terms.

After you are done reading, answer the five review questions below.

Feel free to type your information in the Word document and upload it.

Make sure to rename it and save it to a flash drive, hard drive, or Google documents, so you do not lose the information.

Survey
Poll
Open-ended questions
Forced-choice question
Likert Scale
Semantic Differential Format
Leading Question
Double-Barreled Question
Negatively Worded Question
Response Set
Acquiescence
Fence Sitting
Socially Desirable Responding
Faking Good
Faking Bad
Observation Research
Observer Bias
Observer Effect
Masked Design
Reactivity
Unobtrusive Observation

Review Questions

Describe some of the pitfalls in question writing for surveys.
Consider the various survey question formats: open-ended, forced choice, Likert, and semantic differential. For each of the following research, topics write a question in each format, keeping in mind some of the pitfalls in question writing.

A study that measures attitudes about women serving in combat roles in the military.
A customer service survey asking people about their satisfaction with their most recent shopping experience.
A poll that asks people which political party they have supported in the past.

How does a researcher collect data when conducting observational research?
What is a coding system? What are some important considerations when developing a coding system?

Grid View

 
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor

Main Posting
45 (45%) – 50 (50%)

Answers all parts of the discussion question(s) expectations with reflective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.

 

Supported by at least three current, credible sources.

 

Written clearly and concisely with no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

40 (40%) – 44 (44%)

Responds to the discussion question(s) and is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

 

At least 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth.

 

Supported by at least three credible sources.

 

Written clearly and concisely with one or no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

35 (35%) – 39 (39%)

Responds to some of the discussion question(s).

 

One or two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed.

 

Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.

 

Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

 

Post is cited with two credible sources.

 

Written somewhat concisely; may contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors.

 

Contains some APA formatting errors.

0 (0%) – 34 (34%)

Does not respond to the discussion question(s) adequately.

 

Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria.

 

Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.

 

Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

 

Contains only one or no credible sources.

 

Not written clearly or concisely.

 

Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors.

 

Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style.

Main Post: Timeliness
10 (10%) – 10 (10%)

Posts main post by day 3.

0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
0 (0%) – 0 (0%)

Does not post by day 3.

First Response
17 (17%) – 18 (18%)

Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.

 

Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.

 

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.

 

Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.

 

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

 

Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.

 

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

15 (15%) – 16 (16%)

Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.

 

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

 

Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.

 

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.

 

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

13 (13%) – 14 (14%)

Response is on topic and may have some depth.

 

Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.

 

Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.

 

Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.

0 (0%) – 12 (12%)

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.

 

Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.

 

Responses to faculty questions are missing.

 

No credible sources are cited.

Second Response
16 (16%) – 17 (17%)

Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.

 

Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.

 

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.

 

Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.

 

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

 

Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.

 

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

14 (14%) – 15 (15%)

Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.

 

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

 

Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.

 

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.

 

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

12 (12%) – 13 (13%)

Response is on topic and may have some depth.

 

Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.

 

Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.

 

Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.

0 (0%) – 11 (11%)

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.

 

Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.

 

Responses to faculty questions are missing.

 

No credible sources are cited.

Participation
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days.

0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
0 (0%) – 0 (0%)

Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days.

Total Points: 100
 

 

Get 30% off your orders today

X
WeCreativez WhatsApp Support
Our customer support team is here to answer your questions. Ask us anything!