I need 14
topic: upgrade Los Angeles slum
I attached the file outline so you can have ideas a bout the topic, please use references in the file outline for my work.
I also I attached the file SENIOR RUBRIC ( please follow the rubric)
I also attached the APA 7 student sample pdf (so your work should be look like that)
Please read and follow what I write above
Upgrade Los Angeles Slum
One of the most important issues addressed in this proposal is the difficulty that slum people who are living in areas with high poverty rates have in acquiring beneficial education. This problem can be alleviated by providing incentives to these students, such as a reduction in college tuition fees. These financial incentives go a great way toward guaranteeing that students from slums can afford higher education, hence lowering the number of college dropouts. This proposal is aimed at identifying the obstacles faced by slum residents in receiving a beneficial education, the obstacles introduced by urbanization that have had a negative impact on these residents, the consequences of lowering college tuition for slum residents students, the roles played by family and friends in improving the lives of slum residents students, and the obstacles faced by students living in poverty that increase their chances of dropping out of college. The study design that will be used to answer these questions will be experimental research design. Data will be collected through interviews and questionnaires, which will be used in assessing and resolving these concerns. In addition to outlining the difficulties experienced by slum resident students, this study will serve to persuade the appropriate authorities to ensure that necessary improvements are implemented in the slum areas therefore ensuring these communities are able to access beneficial education. This study is also significant in contributing knowledge to the field of education for slum residents.
• Beneficial education: Process of acquiring or imparting the most fundamental instructions, particularly in a school or university setting.
• College dropout: An individual who leaves college or university prior to the completion of their qualifications.
• College pricing: The fees that students must pay to attend classes at an institution.
• Incentives: Something that stimulates or encourages somebody to perform a particular action.
• Slum: Unofficial enclaves within cities that are characterized by substandard housing and deplorable living conditions.
• Urbanization: The rural to urban population migration.
· Most people living in the slums are high school and college dropouts who have failed to secure excellent working opportunities. Examining the slums one can identify that it has been populated by people whose chances to obtain excellent improvements have been dimmed (Bianchi et al., 2021). Slums are overpopulated and the living conditions are purely unhygienic for human survival. The slum population is growing because of the poor economic stability affecting the residents. Los Angeles is rapidly developing in the urban sector.
· However, the disparity between the economic systems means that the slum ratio will also rise. Necessary improvement measures should be taken on the slum residents. They have to be given equal and significant opportunities to improve their living conditions (Dupere et al., 2021). Moreover, the slum residents need an improvement as the primary way to have a stable economy in Los Angeles. The report examines how slum residents are affected and the improvement measures for their living conditions.
1. What are some of the challenges experienced by slum residents in receiving beneficial education?
2. What challenges have been introduced by urbanization that have negatively affected the slum residents?
3. How beneficial is reducing college pricing beneficial for the slum resident high school and college dropouts?
4. What are the roles played by family and friends in improving the slum resident lives?
5. Challenges faced by students living in poverty which increases their high school and college dropout levels?
· Challenges experienced by slum residents in obtaining beneficial education
· Slum residents are living under high poverty rates and cannot afford to pay for the needed education (Dynarski et al., 2021). Most of the schools attended by slum residents are under poor conditions since they lack necessary resources to enhance the education quality. Therefore, most slum residents are forced to drop out either in college or high school levels because the education cannot guarantee them excellent future opportunities.
· The Los Angeles government has focused on improving urban education and showing minimal efforts for slum resident education. Lack of incentives has further deteriorated education in the slum areas (Glaeser, 2020). Therefore, most of the children are born and raised in slums with no hope of eliminating poverty. Most residents barely have an education or have minimal resources to cater for the tuition charges. The school drop-out levels has become a culture to the slum residents.
· Challenges introduced by urbanization to the slum residents
· Urbanization was introduced to make significant improvements and changes on the livelihood. Urbanization has caused an increase in the economic rates (Silva-laya, 2020). The living rates have been increased and that has become a major problem to the slum residents. For instance, prices for essential items have been increased and most people have shifted from the urban areas to the rural levels. Only those with high education levels have skills needed in securing chances in the urbanized cities.
· Additionally, urbanization has forced overcrowding in the already poor conditions in the slum areas. Slum residents have limited opportunities and depend on menial jobs to cater for essentials like food and house rent (Bianchi et al., 2021). Most of the money obtained from the menial jobs cannot be enough to cater college and high school fees. Most of such students drop out to look for work opportunities that would help in sustainability. Without major improvements on the slum residents, school dropping out would transform into a norm where the learners adapt to live in poverty.
· Benefits of reducing college pricing on the slum resident students
· Students from the slum residents are already suffering from high poverty levels which has a negative impact on their education. The government should examine that student group and develop excellent mechanisms that would help in ensuring they have received beneficial education (Dupere et al., 2021). For instance, equality should be created between the low income and high income students. Most of the low income students miss chances to join excellent schools because of the biases during the allocation period.a low income student should be given equal opportunities to receive beneficial education that would help secure the future.
· Additionally, college fees should be reduced and a free education program should be introduced for the slum resident high school and college students (Dynarrski et al., 2021). That is an excellent mechanism because it is aimed at minimizing dropping out chances. The major objective is ensuring that learners have enough resources that would help them move past the poverty levels.
· Challenges faced by slum students that causes an increase in the college and high school dropout population
· The huge gap between the income classes levels contribute in discrimination of the low income students. For instance, most slum resident students are discriminated against because of their inability to access the necessary resources (Glaeser, 2020). Adding with the constant lack of fees lowers their self-esteem and the morale to read and develop a better future. For some reason, such students will drop out to look for menial jobs and support their needs.
· Additionally, high school and college places an individual under intense pressure to fit in with the current trends. A student from the slum residence feels pressured to stay updated with the social trends. Therefore, many of such students capitalize on the lack of resources for school and fulfilling the peer pressure to drop out. Some students might indulge in drugs and substance abuse but they will drop out and adapt to the poverty life they have been accustomed to (Silva-laya, 2020). It is quite unfortunate that the students have to undergo that type of pressure because of an inequality which can be solved by the Los Angeles government. More efforts are dedicated to introducing new trends that would further affect the slum resident people since they have no voice to communicate about their challenges or desire to witness life improvements.
A. The theoretical framework I have selected for the study is redistribution with growth as the primary way to improve the slum situation. Major actions should be taken to ensure that slums have been eliminated. The theoretical framework includes activities like housing programs (Bianchi et al., 2021). The slum residents need to be relocated in better housing and accommodation away from their immediate environment. Significant measures like reducing college fees should be incorporated because it is the best way in which college and high school dropout will be minimized. The selected framework is expected to offer long term solutions to the identified challenges. Various resources should be incorporated to ensure that the slum residence has been eliminated primarily purposely for life improvement and providing equal opportunities to securing high end job opportunities.
B. The theoretical framework is essential in the research since it governs the study development. The research will be based around ensuring that the theoretical framework has been addressed by every mentioned aspect (Dupere et al., 2021). Theoretical framework strives to develop a connection between all the variables presented by the research and indicates how both aspects will be closely related. The strategy used in selecting the theoretical framework is examining the background analysis and developing a proportionate concept.
C. The theoretical framework will be incorporated in the research through data collection where sample questions are developed to show specific variables that should be denoted from the provided data (Dynarski et al., 2021). Theoretical framework will be incorporated through development of survey questions and interviews. The major objective is to obtain an anticipated response.
· Los Angeles has the highest number of slum residents and most of them are high school and college dropouts. Poverty has been a system adopted by the slum residents because they have no opportunities working in their favor that would ensure their improvement.
· The best focus should be about ensuring that necessary improvements have been introduced in the slum regions.
· The improvement measures are beneficial because students will have chances at beneficial education and have necessary supporting resources.
· The main objective should be eliminating the slum regions to provide the people with better housing structures and living conditions.
1. The best research for the study is experimental design where the cause and effects of slum residence is examined. The participants living within the slums will be selected to help examine causes of the poverty levels. Comprehending the root problems will help in accumulating the data on why students drop from colleges and high schools (Glaeser, 2020). The variables would be examined on changes that would be experienced suppose the slum resident’s livelihood is improved. The major objective is to analyze whether school dropout would be a prominent factor. Experimental design ensures that enough data has been collected from the targeted population.
2. Participant recruitment is focused on selecting people from residing in the slums. They have a first hand in experiencing poverty and they have the best answers for the provided questions (Silva-laya, 2020). For instance, participants for the research will be high school and college dropouts residing in the slums. They should volunteer to provide the needed data for the research. The students will explain how residing in slums has affected their life opportunities in escaping poverty. They will state some of the improvements that should be done in the slums that would ensure they have improved living standards.
Data collection measures
The major data which should be collected is the challenges experienced by the slum residents. The questions should be centered on all the struggles faced and why most students are forced to drop out of schools where they reach the college levels. Their opinion should be included where they communicate about some of the improvements that should be done on the slum residences and extended to their education opportunities.
1. Interviews is the first data collection technique that should be used in retrieving data from the respondents (Bianchi et al., 2021). A question list would be developed in which they are questioned and their responses are recorded and would be used as the research data. That is an excellent mechanism because interviews develop an interaction and the respondents will open up about challenges experienced while living in the slums.
2. Questionnaires is another data collection measure that would be used in collecting information from the participants. Some of the participants like their information to be concealed. The questionnaire provides privacy for the respondents as they provide their experiences in living within the slums (Dupere et al., 2021). Questionnaire is effective because the students will have an expression platform and provide significant data more than it would have been given in a formal interview without their identities hidden.
1. How to analyze interview data
I will analyze the interview data through transcription and ensuring that I read through the transcription scripts to obtain meaningful data. I will ensure that I highlight the key information that will be translated and incorporated into the study. It means that I should use digital devices during the interview to ensure that all of the provided information has been recorded (Dynarski et al., 2021). The audio should be translated to a transcript which can be read to examine all the points. However, reading through the transcript can be quite time consuming especially if the interview was held for a long duration.
Additionally, I can analyze the interview information through developing codes that would identify key phrases for the essential data. For instance, the annotation will help in identifying reasons why slum residents drop out of the learning institutions (Glaeser, 2020). The codes will help develop an excellent pattern and it will be corrected later after the major key points have been examined. I will develop a segment in which I will categorize the data. That is an excellent strategy since it will facilitate separation of the key phrases from the bias in the recorded information.
2. Survey data from the questionnaire can be analyzed through transferring the information to the excel documents. Excel helps in segmenting the information to different parts. The major benefits of using excel documents is because of its easy interpretation of the information (Silva-laya, 2020). Findings should be used in ensuring that enough information has been deducted for the research. Survey data can be translated to numerical form and the necessary data speculations will be achieved. The major objective is to ensure that raw data has been translated to meaningful results which will be included in the research for accurate information.
Bianchi, D., Cavicchiolo, E., Lucidi, F., Manganelli, S., Girelli, L., Chirico, A.,
& Alivernini, F. (2021). School Dropout Intention and Self-esteem in Immigrant and Native Students Living in Poverty: The Protective Role of Peer Acceptance at School. School Mental Health, 13(2), 266-278. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12310-021-09410-4
Dupéré, V., Dion, E., Cantin, S., Archambault, I., & Lacourse, E. (2021). Social
contagion and high school dropout: The role of friends, romantic partners, and siblings. Journal of Educational Psychology, 113(3), 572-584. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000484
Dynarski, S., Libassi, C., Michelmore, K., & Owen, S. (2021). Closing the Gap: TheEffect of ReducingComplexity and Uncertainty in College Pricing on the Choices of Low- Income Students. American Economic Review, 111(6), 1721-1756. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20200451
Glaeser, E. (2020). Urbanization and Its Discontents. Eastern Economic Journal,
46(2), 191-218. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41302-020-00167-3
Silva-Laya, M., D’Angelo, N., García, E., Zúñiga, L., & Fernández, T. (2020).
Urban poverty and education. A systematic literature review. Educational Research Review, 29, 100280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2019.05.002
Spring 2022 Senior Seminar: CAS 490T Children & Adolescents At-Risk Senior Paper Rubric
Total Score: /100 pointsStudent Name:_____________________________
Cover Page has APA running head, page number, title, author name, school and department affiliation, author note1 2
12-15 double spaced times new roman 12pt font pages excluding cover page, abstract page, and references list. 1-
inch margins all around. Abstract and keywords are on their own page and follow APA.
All pages have APA running head + page numbers & If including footnotes, tables, figures,
appendices/supplemental material – follow APA formatting. All headings & subheadings are in APA formatting
1 2 3
Properly cites prior work using quotation marks, block quotes, paraphrasing, etc avoiding plagiarism1 2 3
Title + Abstract + Keywords
Title, abstract, & keywords offer key insights into what the paper is about.
Title goes beyond the general topics (e.g., teacher training) or outcomes (e.g., social-emotional learning) and gives
insight into the issue, relationships or cause-effect, and/or research question being asked and/or the method being
1 2 3
Abstract clearly describes the big picture problem statement, what the proposal RQ is, how the author plans to
address that RQ, and the potential implications/contributions of this proposal to the literature, practice, policy,
and/or society at large.
1 2 3 4 5
Keywords go beyond listing all the outcomes or independent variables and touch on research design and who this
proposal may be useful for/implications.
0 1 2
Introduction (1-2 pages inclusive of RQs)
Captivating intro sentences that clearly communicate the problem statement (use prior literature to support your
argument/the way you set-up your problem statement).
1 2 3 4
__/8 Clearly describe what gap your proposal is aiming to fill or how it will address the problem stated. It does not have
to a big creative innovative contribution but it should show an understanding of where the current body of
knowledge lies and using that add a new perspective or push things forward even slightly.
1 2 3 4
Research question(s) are clearly listed either within a paragraph, with bullet points, or numbered after the
Research questions are written as questions not as statements. If questions are related there is proper use of sub-
questions as opposed to a long list of individual questions. No more than 3 key/major RQs listed but each question
can have a sub-question if absolutely needed.
1 2 3
Research questions appropriately match the methods being used. For example, do not use a question asking about
A “causing, impacting, or having an effect” on B and then propose a qualitative research design. Use the resources
on canvas for how to form proper research questions.
1 2 3 4
Spring 2022 Senior Seminar: CAS 490T Children & Adolescents At-Risk Senior Paper Rubric
Background/Relevant Literature (3+ pages)
Organized in a cohesive manner with logical sequence of sub-headings/topics.1 2 3
Goes beyond summarizing prior studies and discusses how they relate to one another and how you as the author
are thinking of them as they relate to your study. Describes key seminal pieces in the literature informing the RQs
or proposed program. Remember, your job is to present all relevant knowledge not only what confirms your prior
biases or hypothesis.
1 2 3 4 5
Conceptual or Theoretical Framework (~2 paragraphs)
Effectively describes the chosen model, framework, or theory driving your research proposal. This includes
discussing who the key scholar behind the model, framework, or theory is…when the theory was originally
conceptualized and why. What data if any was used to generate said model, framework, or theory?
0 1 2 3 4
__/8 Effectively discusses why the chosen model, framework, or theory makes sense and is a good fit for your proposal.
In what ways does it inform the way you ask your RQs, the recruitment or data collection strategy, the analysis and
interpretation of findings, the measures or survey/interview questions being asked to participants, the kind of
dataset(s) you propose using.
0 1 2 3 4
Positionality Statement (1- 2 paragraphs)
Clearly connects your identity and experiences to the proposal by discussing concrete examples of how those
inform your approach and understanding of the issue and each aspect of the proposed study/program. For
example, If you are proposing to interview or survey immigrant students but you are not an immigrant student
yourself, will you collaborate with a peer/colleague who does have that experience and/or an expert in that area
and/or do member checks etc. Another example is, if you are using a city, county, state, or national dataset to
investigate issues within special education instruction or systems and you or a family member has experienced the
special education system first-hand how does that influence your understanding of potential findings (e.g., you
bring a nuanced perspective that others may not and you see areas where future surveys or data collection efforts
can improve on). Those are only examples but essentially how are you accounting for potential biases and blind
spots and/or how does your positionality shed a new light or meaningfully contribute to the work.
1 2 3 4 5
Enough detail is provided so that someone else can replicate your proposed research design and cite proper
references informing your research design decisions. Covers sites/location, target population and sample being
recruited. If using a dataset describe how that dataset was generated. Where and from who was data collected and
when. Who collected the data and cleaned it? Who is the dataset available to? Explains reasoning behind these
decisions. These pieces should be several paragraphs or subsections.
1 2 3 4 5
__/15 Describes data collection strategies and the measures. Will you use surveys, interviews, focus groups, or will you do
classrooms, community, teacher, child, or parent observations? Will data be collected in-person, over the phone,
online (what websites or software will be used – google forms, Qualtrics, survey monkey, etc). Will you not collect
your own data and instead use a dataset already available (e.g., NCES, IES, School District, City, County, State,
National datasets)? Or will it be a combination of data forms? Explain reasoning behind these decisions and offer
detail descriptions of the surveys, interviews, datasets etc. that you created for your proposal or are using for your
1 2 3 4 5
Spring 2022 Senior Seminar: CAS 490T Children & Adolescents At-Risk Senior Paper Rubric
proposal (if you did not develop the scales or measures being used than cite where you are getting them from). Are
you doing an intervention or implementing a pilot program and if so, how are you measuring its success? How are
you measuring all the variables/factors at play? Don’t just say cognitive development tell me what specific
construct/scale/measure you are using to operationalize cognitive development or academic progress or self-
esteem or any other outcome. These pieces should be several paragraphs or subsections.
Give a clear timeline of your recruitment, data collection, data cleaning, and analysis. If it is a longitudinal study,
what measures or data will be collected at every wave? How often will you do data collection (once a week, once a
month, every 3 months, every semester, every 6 months, every year, etc)?
1 2 3 4 5
Analytic Plan Strategy + Budget Justifications
Enough detail is provided so that someone else can replicate your proposed analysis. Describe how you are
cleaning and organizing the data. Where/what software are you using to store the data? Why?
1 2 3 4 5
Explain how you are going to analyze the data citing proper references that are informing your analytic plan. Use
the resources on canvas and the analytic sections of other papers related to your topic to help guide you. Don’t just
say you are doing a thematic analysis, a meta-analysis, or a regression analysis. Explain what those look like in more
detail (what steps are involved). These pieces should be several paragraphs or subsections.
3 4 5
Minimum of 12 scholarly sources cited. References are timely and relevant pieces.0 1
__/6 If they are in your references list, they must be cited at least once in your paper. References list and in-text citations
follow APA formatting.
1 2 3 4 5
Free of grammar and spelling errors.1 2 3
Smooth transitions used throughout. Sentence structure is simple and clear. Free of run on sentences or
convoluted sentences. Free of jargon language and is written in a clear easy to follow manner. Technical terms are
readily and clearly defined.
1 2 3 4
Spring 2022 Senior Seminar: CAS 490T Children & Adolescents At-Risk Senior Paper Rubric
Branching Paths: A Novel Teacher Evaluation Model for Faculty Development
James P. Bavis and Ahn G. Nu
Department of English, Purdue University
ENGL 101: First Year Writing
Dr. Richard Teeth
January 30, 2020
Commented [AF1]: At the top of the page you’ll see the
header, which does not include a running head for student
papers (a change from APA 6). Page numbers begin on the
first page and follow on every subsequent page without
interruption. No other information (e.g., authors’ last names)
Note: your instructor may ask for a running head or your last
name before the page number. You can look at the APA
professional sample paper for guidelines on these.
Commented [AF2]: The paper’s title should be centered,
bold, and written in title case. It should be three or four lines
below the top margin of the page. In this sample paper, we’ve
put four blank lines above the title.
Commented [AF3]: Authors’ names are written below the
title, with one double-spaced blank line between them.
Names should be written as follows:
First name, middle initial(s), last name.
Commented [AF4]: Authors’ affiliations follow
immediately after their names. For student papers, these
should usually be the department containing the course for
which the paper is being written.
Commented [AWC5]: Note that student papers in APA do
not require author notes, abstracts, or keywords, which
would normally fall at the bottom of the title page and on the
next page afterwards. Your instructor may ask for them
anyway — see the APA professional sample paper on our
site for guidelines for these.
Commented [AF6]: Follow authors’ affiliations with the
number and name of the course, the instructor’s name and
title, and the assignment’s due date.
Branching Paths: A Novel Teacher Evaluation Model for Faculty Development
According to Theall (2017), “Faculty evaluation and development cannot be considered
separately… evaluation without development is punitive, and development without evaluation is
guesswork” (p.91). As the practices that constitute modern programmatic faculty development
have evolved from their humble beginnings to become a commonplace feature of university life
(Lewis, 1996), a variety of tactics to evaluate the proficiency of teaching faculty for development
purposes have likewise become commonplace. These include measures as diverse as peer
observations, the development of teaching portfolios, and student evaluations.
One such measure, the student evaluation of teacher (SET), has been virtually ubiquitous
since at least the 1990s (Wilson, 1998). Though records of SET-like instruments can be traced to
work at Purdue University in the 1920s (Remmers & Brandenburg, 1927), most modern histories
of faculty development suggest that their rise to widespread popularity went hand-in-hand with
the birth of modern faculty development programs in the 1970s, when universities began to
adopt them in response to student protest movements criticizing mainstream university curricula
and approaches to instruction (Gaff & Simpson, 1994; Lewis, 1996; McKeachie, 1996). By the
mid-2000s, researchers had begun to characterize SETs in terms like “…the predominant measure
of university teacher performance […] worldwide” (Pounder, 2007, p. 178). Today, SETs play an
important role in teacher assessment and faculty development at most universities (Davis, 2009).
Recent SET research practically takes the presence of some form of this assessment on most
campuses as a given. Spooren et al. (2017), for instance, merely note that that SETs can be found
at “almost every institution of higher education throughout the world” (p. 130). Similarly,
Darwin (2012) refers to teacher evaluation as an established orthodoxy, labeling it a “venerated,”
“axiomatic” institutional practice (p. 733).
Commented [AF7]: The paper’s title is bolded and
centered above the first body paragraph. There should be no
Commented [AWC8]: Here, we’ve borrowed a quote from
an external source, so we need to provide the location of the
quote in the document (in this case, the page number) in the
Commented [AWC9]: By contrast, in this sentence, we’ve
merely paraphrased an idea from the external source. Thus,
no location or page number is required. You can cite a page
range if it will help your reader find the section of source
material you are referring to, but you don’t need to, and
sometimes it isn’t practical (too large of a page range, for
Commented [AWC10]: Spell out abbreviations the first
time you use them, except in cases where the abbreviations
are very well- known (e.g.,
Commented [AWC11]: For sources with two authors, use
an ampersand (&) between the authors’ names rather than the
Commented [AWC12]: When listing multiple citations in
the same parenthetical, list them alphabetically and separate
them with semicolons.
Moreover, SETs do not only help universities direct their faculty development efforts.
They have also come to occupy a place of considerable institutional importance for their role in
personnel considerations, informing important decisions like hiring, firing, tenure, and
promotion. Seldin (1993, as cited in Pounder, 2007) finds that 86% of higher educational
institutions use SETs as important factors in personnel decisions. A 1991 survey of department
chairs found 97% used student evaluations to assess teaching performance (US Department of
Education). Since the mid-late 1990s, a general trend towards comprehensive methods of teacher
evaluation that include multiple forms of assessment has been observed (Berk, 2005). However,
recent research suggests the usage of SETs in personnel decisions is still overwhelmingly
common, though hard percentages are hard to come by, perhaps owing to the multifaceted nature
of these decisions (Boring et al., 2017; Galbraith et al., 2012). In certain contexts, student
evaluations can also have ramifications beyond the level of individual instructors. Particularly as
public schools have experienced pressure in recent decades to adopt neoliberal, market-based
approaches to self-assessment and adopt a student-as-consumer mindset (Darwin, 2012;
Marginson, 2009), information from evaluations can even feature in department- or school-wide
funding decisions (see, for instance, the Obama Administration’s Race to the Top initiative,
which awarded grants to K-12 institutions that adopted value-added models for teacher
However, while SETs play a crucial role in faulty development and personnel decisions
for many education institutions, current approaches to SET administration are not as well-suited
to these purposes as they could be. This paper argues that a formative, empirical approach to
teacher evaluation developed in response to the demands of the local context is better-suited for
helping institutions improve their teachers. It proposes the Heavilon Evaluation of Teacher, or
Commented [AWC13]: Here, we’ve made an indirect or
secondary citation (i.e., we’ve cited a source that we found
cited in a different source). Use the phrase “as cited in” in the
parenthetical to indicate that the first-listed source was
referenced in the second-listed one.
Include an entry in the reference list only for the secondary
source (Pounder, in this case).
Commented [AWC14]: Here, we’ve cited a source that
has an institution as author rather than one named person.
The corresponding reference list entry would begin with “US
Department of Education.”
Commented [AWC15]: Sources with three authors or
more are cited via the first-listed author’s name followed by
the Latin phrase “et al.” Note that the period comes after “al,”
rather than “et.”
HET, a new teacher assessment instrument that can strengthen current approaches to faculty
development by making them more responsive to teachers’ local contexts. It also proposes a pilot
study that will clarify the differences between this new instrument and the Introductory
Composition at Purdue (ICaP) SET, a more traditional instrument used for similar purposes. The
results of this study will direct future efforts to refine the proposed instrument. Methods section,
which follows, will propose a pilot study that compares the results of the proposed instrument to
the results of a traditional SET (and will also provide necessary background information on both
of these evaluations). The paper will conclude with a discussion of how the results of the pilot
study will inform future iterations of the proposed instrument and, more broadly, how
universities should argue for local development of assessments.
Effective Teaching: A Contextual Construct
The validity of the instrument this paper proposes is contingent on the idea that it is
possible to systematically measure a teacher’s ability to teach. Indeed, the same could be said for
virtually all teacher evaluations. Yet despite the exceeding commonness of SETs and the faculty
development programs that depend on their input, there is little scholarly consensus on precisely
what constitutes “good” or “effective” teaching. It would be impossible to review the entire
history of the debate surrounding teaching effectiveness, owing to its sheer scope—such a
summary might need to begin with, for instance, Cicero and Quintilian. However, a cursory
overview of important recent developments (particularly those revealed in meta-analyses of
empirical studies of teaching) can help situate the instrument this paper proposes in relevant
Commented [AF16]: Common paper sections (literature
review, methods, results, discussion) typically use Level 1
headings, like this one does. Level 1 headings are centered,
bolded, and use title case. Text begins after them as a new
Commented [AF17]: This is a Level 2 heading: left
aligned, bolded, title case. Text begins as a new paragraph
after this kind of heading.
One core assumption that undergirds many of these conversations is the notion that good
teaching has effects that can be observed in terms of student achievement. A meta-analysis of
167 empirical studies that investigated the effects of various teaching factors on student
achievement (Kyriakides et al., 2013) supported the effectiveness of a set of teaching factors that
the authors group together under the label of the “dynamic model” of teaching. Seven of the
eight factors (Orientation, Structuring, Modeling, Questioning, Assessment, Time Management,
and Classroom as Learning Environment) corresponded to moderate average effect sizes (of
between 0.34–0.41 standard deviations) in measures of student achievement. The eighth factor,
Application (defined as seatwork and small-group tasks oriented toward practice of course
concepts), corresponded to only a small yet still significant effect size of 0.18. The lack of any
single decisive factor in the meta-analysis supports the idea that effective teaching is likely a
multivariate construct. However, the authors also note the context-dependent nature of effective
teaching. Application, the least-important teaching factor overall, proved more important in
studies examining young students (p. 148). Modeling, by contrast, was especially important for
A different meta-analysis that argues for the importance of factors like clarity and setting
challenging goals (Hattie, 2009) nevertheless also finds that the effect sizes of various teaching
factors can be highly context-dependent. For example, effect sizes for homework range from
0.15 (a small effect) to 0.64 (a moderately large effect) based on the level of education examined.
Similar ranges are observed for differences in academic subject (e.g., math vs. English) and
student ability level. As Snook et al. (2009) note in their critical response to Hattie, while it is
Commented [AF18]: This is an example of a Level 3
heading: left aligned, bolded and italicized, and using title
case. Text starts as a new paragraph after this. Most papers
only use these three levels of headings; a fourth and fifth
level are listed on the OWL in the event that you need them.
Many student papers, however, don’t need more than a title
and possibly Level 1 headings if they are short. If you’re not
sure about how you should use headings in your paper, you
can talk with your teacher about it and get advice for your
Commented [AWC19]: When presenting decimal
fractions, put a zero in front of the decimal if the quantity is
something that can exceed one (like the number of standard
deviations here). Do not put a zero if the quantity cannot
exceed one (e.g., if the number is a proportion).
possible to produce a figure for the average effect size of a particular teaching factor, such
averages obscure the importance of context.
A final meta-analysis (Seidel & Shavelson, 2007) found generally small average effect
sizes for most teaching factors—organization and academic domain- specific learning activities
showed the biggest cognitive effects (0.33 and 0.25, respectively). Here, again, however,
effectiveness varied considerably due to contextual factors like domain of study and level of
education in ways that average effect sizes do not indicate.
These pieces of evidence suggest that there are multiple teaching factors that produce
measurable gains in student achievement and that the relative importance of individual factors
can be highly dependent on contextual factors like student identity. This is in line with a well-
documented phenomenon in educational research that complicates attempts to measure teaching
effectiveness purely in terms of student achievement. This is that “the largest source of variation
in student learning is attributable to differences in what students bring to school – their abilities
and attitudes, and family and community” (McKenzie et al., 2005, p. 2). Student achievement
varies greatly due to non-teacher factors like socio-economic status and home life (Snook et al.,
2009). This means that, even to the extent that it is possible to observe the effectiveness of
certain teaching behaviors in terms of student achievement, it is difficult to set generalizable
benchmarks or standards for student achievement. Thus is it also difficult to make true apples-to-
apples comparisons about teaching effectiveness between different educational contexts: due to
vast differences between different kinds of students, a notion of what constitutes highly effective
teaching in one context may not in another. This difficulty has featured in criticism of certain
meta-analyses that have purported to make generalizable claims about what teaching factors
produce the biggest effects (Hattie, 2009). A variety of other commentators have also made
similar claims about the importance of contextual factors in teaching effectiveness for decades
(see, e.g., Bloom et al., 1956; Cashin, 1990; Theall, 2017).
The studies described above mainly measure teaching effectiveness in terms of academic
achievement. It should certainly be noted that these quantifiable measures are not generally
regarded as the only outcomes of effective teaching worth pursuing. Qualitative outcomes like
increased affinity for learning and greater sense of self-efficacy are also important learning goals.
Here, also, local context plays a large role.
SETs: Imperfect Measures of Teaching
As noted in this paper’s introduction, SETs are commonly used to assess teaching
performance and inform faculty development efforts. Typically, these take the form of an end-of-
term summative evaluation comprised of multiple-choice questions (MCQs) that allow students
to rate statements about their teachers on Likert scales. These are often accompanied with short-
answer responses which may or may not be optional.
SETs serve important institutional purposes. While commentators have noted that there
are crucial aspects of instruction that students are not equipped to judge (Benton & Young,
2018), SETs nevertheless give students a rare institutional voice. They represent an opportunity
to offer anonymous feedback on their teaching experience and potentially address what they
deem to be their teacher’s successes or failures. Students are also uniquely positioned to offer
meaningful feedback on an instructors’ teaching because they typically have much more
extensive firsthand experience of it than any other educational stakeholder. Even peer observers
only witness a small fraction of the instructional sessions during a given semester. Students with
Commented [AWC20]: To list a few sources as examples
of a larger body of work, you can use the word “see” in the
parenthetical, as we’ve done here.
perfect attendance, by contrast, witness all of them. Thus, in a certain sense, a student can
theoretically assess a teacher’s ability more authoritatively than even peer mentors can.
While historical attempts to validate SETs have produced mixed results, some studies
have demonstrated their promise. Howard (1985), for instance, finds that SET are significantly
more predictive of teaching effectiveness than self-report, peer, and trained-observer
assessments. A review of several decades of literature on teaching evaluations (Watchel, 1998)
found that a majority of researchers believe SETs to be generally valid and reliable, despite
occasional misgivings. This review notes that even scholars who support SETs frequently argue
that they alone cannot direct efforts to improve teaching and that multiple avenues of feedback
are necessary (L’hommedieu et al., 1990; Seldin, 1993).
Finally, SETs also serve purposes secondary to the ostensible goal of improving
instruction that nonetheless matter. They can be used to bolster faculty CVs and assign
departmental awards, for instance. SETs can also provide valuable information unrelated to
teaching. It would be hard to argue that it not is useful for a teacher to learn, for example, that a
student finds the class unbearably boring, or that a student finds the teacher’s personality so
unpleasant as to hinder her learning. In short, there is real value in understanding students’
affective experience of a particular class, even in cases when that value does not necessarily lend
itself to firm conclusions about the teacher’s professional abilities.
However, a wealth of scholarly research has demonstrated that SETs are prone to fail in
certain contexts. A common criticism is that SETs can frequently be confounded by factors
external to the teaching construct. The best introduction to the research that serves as the basis
for this claim is probably Neath (1996), who performs something of a meta-analysis by
presenting these external confounds in the form of twenty sarcastic suggestions to teaching
faculty. Among these are the instructions to “grade leniently,” “administer ratings before tests”
(p. 1365), and “not teach required courses” (#11) (p. 1367). Most of Neath’s advice reflects an
overriding observation that teaching evaluations tend to document students’ affective feelings
toward a class, rather than their teachers’ abilities, even when the evaluations explicitly ask
students to judge the latter.
Beyond Neath, much of the available research paints a similar picture. For example, a
study of over 30,000 economics students concluded that “the poorer the student considered his
teacher to be [on an SET], the more economics he understood” (Attiyeh & Lumsden, 1972). A
1998 meta-analysis argued that “there is no evidence that the use of teacher ratings improves
learning in the long run” (Armstrong, 1998, p. 1223). A 2010 National Bureau of Economic
Research study found that high SET scores for a course’s instructor correlated with “high
contemporaneous course achievement,” but “low follow-on achievement” (in other words, the
students would tend to do well in the course, but poor in future courses in the same field of study.
Others observing this effect have suggested SETs reward a pandering, “soft-ball” teaching style
in the initial course (Carrell & West, 2010). More recent research suggests that course topic can
have a significant effect on SET scores as well: teachers of “quantitative courses” (i.e., math-
focused classes) tend to receive lower evaluations from students than their humanities peers (Uttl
& Smibert, 2017).
Several modern SET studies have also demonstrated bias on the basis of gender
(Anderson & Miller, 1997; Basow, 1995), physical appearance/sexiness (Ambady & Rosenthal,
1993), and other identity markers that do not affect teaching quality. Gender, in particular, has
attracted significant attention. One recent study examined two online classes: one in which
instructors identified themselves to students as male, and another in which they identified as
Commented [AWC21]: This citation presents quotations
from different locations in the original source. Each
quotation is followed by the corresponding page number.
female (regardless of the instructor’s actual gender) (Macnell et al., 2015). The classes were
identical in structure and content, and the instructors’ true identities were concealed from
students. The study found that students rated the male identity higher on average. However, a
few studies have demonstrated the reverse of the gender bias mentioned above (that is, women
received higher scores) (Bachen et al., 1999) while others have registered no gender bias one
way or another (Centra & Gaubatz, 2000).
The goal of presenting these criticisms is not necessarily to diminish the institutional
importance of SETs. Of course, insofar as institutions value the instruction of their students, it is
important that those students have some say in the content and character of that instruction.
Rather, the goal here is simply to demonstrate that using SETs for faculty development
purposes—much less for personnel decisions—can present problems. It is also to make the case
that, despite the abundance of literature on SETs, there is still plenty of room for scholarly
attempts to make these instruments more useful.
Empirical Scales and Locally-Relevant Evaluation
One way to ensure that teaching assessments are more responsive to the demands of
teachers’ local contexts is to develop those assessments locally, ideally via a process that
involves the input of a variety of local stakeholders. Here, writing assessment literature offers a
promising path forward: empirical scale development, the process of structuring and calibrating
instruments in response to local input and data (e.g., in the context of writing assessment, student
writing samples and performance information). This practice contrasts, for instance, with
deductive approaches to scale development that attempt to represent predetermined theoretical
constructs so that results can be generalized.
Supporters of the empirical process argue that empirical scales have several advantages.
They are frequently posited as potential solutions to well-documented reliability and validity
issues that can occur with theoretical or intuitive scale development (Brindley, 1998; Turner &
Upshur, 1995, 2002). Empirical scales can also help researchers avoid issues caused by
subjective or vaguely-worded standards in other kinds of scales (Brindley, 1998) because they
require buy-in from local stakeholders who must agree on these standards based on their
understanding of the local context. Fulcher et al. (2011) note the following, for instance:
Measurement-driven scales suffer from descriptional inadequacy. They are not sensitive
to the communicative context or the interactional complexities of language use. The level
of abstraction is too great, creating a gulf between the score and its meaning. Only with a
richer description of contextually based performance, can we strengthen the meaning of
the score, and hence the validity of score-based inferences. (pp. 8–9)
There is also some evidence that the branching structure of the EBB scale specifically can
allow for more reliable and valid assessments, even if it is typically easier to calibrate and use
conventional scales (Hirai & Koizumi, 2013). Finally, scholars have also argued that theory-
based approaches to scale development do not always result in instruments that realistically
capture ordinary classroom situations (Knoch, 2007, 2009).
[Original paragraph removed for brevity.]
Materials and Methods
This section proposes a pilot study that will compare the ICaP SET to the Heavilon
Evaluation of Teacher (HET), an instrument designed to combat the statistical ceiling effect
described above. In this section, the format and composition of the HET is described, with
Commented [AF22]: Quotations longer than 40 words
should be formatted as block quotations. Indent the entire
passage half an inch and present the passage without
quotation marks. Any relevant page numbers should follow
the concluding punctuation mark. If the author and/or date
are not referenced in the text, as they are here, place them in
the parenthetical that follows the quotation along with the
Commented [AWC23]: When citing multiple sources
from the same author(s), simply list the author(s), then list
the years of the sources separated by commas.
special attention paid to its branching scale design. Following this, the procedure for the study is
outlined, and planned interpretations of the data are discussed.
The Purdue ICaP SET
The SET employed by Introductory Composition at Purdue (ICaP) program as of January
2019 serves as an example of many of the prevailing trends in current SET administration.
[Original two paragraphs removed for brevity.]
The remainder of the MCQs (thirty in total) are chosen from a list of 646 possible
questions provided by the Purdue Instructor Course Evaluation Service (PICES) by department
administrators. Each of these PICES questions requires students to respond to a statement about
the course on a five-point Likert scale. Likert scales are simple scales used to indicate degrees of
agreement. In the case of the ICaP SET, students must indicate whether they strongly agree,
agree, disagree, strongly disagree, or are undecided. These thirty Likert scale questions assess a
wide variety of the course and instructor’s qualities. Examples include “My instructor seems
well-prepared for class,” “This course helps me analyze my own and other students’ writing,”
and “When I have a question or comment I know it will be respected,” for example.
[Original paragraph removed for brevity.]
Insofar as it is distributed digitally, it is composed of MCQs (plus a few short-answer
responses), and it is intended as end-of-term summative assessment, the ICaP SET embodies he
current prevailing trends in university-level SET administration. In this pilot study, it serves as a
stand-in for current SET administration practices (as generally conceived).
Like the ICaP SET, the HET uses student responses to questions to produce a score that
purports to represent their teacher’s pedagogical ability. It has a similar number of items (28, as
Commented [AWC24]: Italicize the anchors of scales or
responses to scale-like questions, rather than presenting them
in quotation marks. Do not italicize numbers if the scale
responses are numbered.
opposed to the ICaP SET’s 34). However, despite these superficial similarities, the instrument’s
structure and content differ substantially from the ICaP SET’s.
The most notable differences are the construction of the items on the text and the way
that responses to these items determine the teacher’s final score. Items on the HET do not use the
typical Likert scale, but instead prompt students to respond to a question with a simple “yes/no”
binary choice. By answering “yes” and “no” to these questions, student responders navigate a
branching “tree” map of possibilities whose endpoints correspond to points on a 33- point ordinal
The items on the HET are grouped into six suites according to their relevance to six
different aspects of the teaching construct (described below). The suites of questions correspond
to directional nodes on the scale—branching paths where an instructor can move either “up” or
“down” based on the student’s responses. If a student awards a set number of “yes” responses to
questions in a given suite (signifying a positive perception of the instructor’s teaching), the
instructor moves up on the scale. If a student does not award enough “yes” responses, the
instructor moves down. Thus, after the student has answered all of the questions, the instructor’s
“end position” on the branching tree of possibilities corresponds to a point on the 33-point scale.
A visualization of this structure is presented in Figure 1.
Illustration of HET’s Branching Structure
Note. Each node in this diagram corresponds to a suite of HET/ICALT items, rather than to a
The questions on the HET derive from the International Comparative Analysis of
Learning and Teaching (ICALT), an instrument that measures observable teaching behaviors for
Commented [AF25]: Tables and figures are numbered
sequentially (i.e., 1, 2,
3 …). They are identified via a second-level heading (flush-
left, bold, and title case) followed by an italic title that
briefly describes the content of the table or figure.
Commented [AF26]: Table and figure notes are preceded
by the label “Note.” written in italics. General notes that
apply to the entire table should come before specific notes
(indicated with superscripted lowercase letters that
correspond to specific locations in the figure or table). For
more information on tables and figures, see our resource on
Table notes are optional.
the purpose of international pedagogical research within the European Union. The most recent
version of the ICALT contains 32 items across six topic domains that correspond to six broad
teaching skills. For each item, students rate a statement about the teacher on a four-point Likert
scale. The main advantage of using ICALT items in the HET is that they have been
independently tested for reliability and validity numerous times over 17 years of development
(see, e.g., Van de Grift, 2007). Thus, their results lend themselves to meaningful comparisons
between teachers (as well as providing administrators a reasonable level of confidence in their
ability to model the teaching construct itself). The six “suites” of questions on the HET, which
correspond to the six topic domains on the ICALT, are presented in Table 1.
HET Question Suites
Suite Description No. of items
Whether the teacher is able to maintain positive,
nonthreatening relationships with students (and
to foster these sorts of relationships among
Whether the teacher is able to maintain an orderly,
Clear instruction Whether the teacher is able to explain class topics
comprehensibly, set clear goals, and connect
assignments and outcomes in helpful ways.
Whether the teacher uses strategies that motivate
students to think about the class’s topics.
Learning strategies Whether teachers take explicit steps to teach
students how to learn (as opposed to merely
providing students informational content).
Differentiation Whether teachers can successfully adjust their
behavior to meet the diverse needs of individual
Note. Item numbers are derived from original ICALT item suites.
Commented [AF27]: Tables are formatted similarly to
figures. They are titled and numbered in the same way, and
table-following notes are presented the same way as figure-
following notes. Use separate sequential numbers for tables
and figures. For instance, this table is presented as Table 1
rather than as Table 2, despite the fact that Figure 1 precedes
APA 7 prioritizes clean, easy-to-read tables with the least
possible use of borders. Tables should not include shading
unless shading in cells is necessary to convey meaning (and
in this case, the meaning should be indicated in the note
below the table). You can find more information about
formatting tables on the OWL in our Tables & Figures
Note that if a table is long enough that it cannot fit onto a
single page, you should replicate the heading row (the top
row indicating what information can be found in each
column) on the second page for ease of use. If a table is this
large, you may want to split the table into two tables if
appropriate or put it in an appendix rather than in the body of
The items on the HET are modified from the ICALT items only insofar as they are
phrased as binary choices, rather than as invitations to rate the teacher. Usually, this means the
addition of the word “does” and a question mark at the end of the sentence. For example, the
second safe learning climate item on the ICALT is presented as “The teacher maintains a relaxed
atmosphere.” On the HET, this item is rephrased as, “Does the teacher maintain a relaxed
atmosphere?” See Appendix for additional sample items.
As will be discussed below, the ordering of item suits plays a decisive role in the
teacher’s final score because the branching scale rates earlier suites more powerfully. So too does
the “sensitivity” of each suite of items (i.e., the number of positive responses required to progress
upward at each branching node). This means that it is important for local stakeholders to
participate in the development of the scale. In other words, these stakeholders must be involved
in decisions about how to order the item suites and adjust the sensitivity of each node. This is
described in more detail below.
Once the scale has been developed, the assessment has been administered, and the
teacher’s endpoint score has been obtained, the student rater is prompted to offer any textual
feedback that they feel summarizes the course experience, good or bad. Like the short response
items in the ICaP SET, this item is optional. The short-response item is as follows:
• What would you say about this instructor, good or bad, to another student considering
taking this course?
The final four items are demographic questions. For these, students indicate their grade level,
their expected grade for the course, their school/college (e.g., College of Liberal Arts, School of
Agriculture, etc.), and whether they are taking the course as an elective or as a degree
Commented [AF28]: In addition to presenting figures and
tables in the text, you may also present them in appendices at
the end of the document.
You may also use appendices to present material that would
be distracting or tedious in the body of the paper. In either
case, you can use simple in-text references to direct readers
to the appendices. If you have multiple appendices, you
would reference in the text “Appendix A,” “Appendix B,”
and so on. This paper only has one appendix, so it is simply
Commented [AF29]: For the sake of brevity, the rest of
the body of the paper has been omitted.
Ambady, N., & Rosenthal, R. (1993). Half a minute: Predicting teacher evaluations from thin
slices of nonverbal behavior and physical attractiveness. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 64(3), 431–441. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3522.214.171.1241
American Association of University Professors. (n.d.). Background facts on contingent faculty
American Association of University Professors. (2018, October 11). Data snapshot: Contingent
faculty in US higher ed. AAUP Updates. https://www.aaup.org/news/data-snapshot-
Anderson, K., & Miller, E. D. (1997). Gender and student evaluations of teaching. PS: Political
Science and Politics, 30(2), 216–219. https://doi.org/10.2307/420499
Armstrong, J. S. (1998). Are student ratings of instruction useful? American Psychologist,
53(11), 1223–1224. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.53.11.1223
Attiyeh, R., & Lumsden, K. G. (1972). Some modern myths in teaching economics: The U.K.
experience. American Economic Review, 62(1), 429–443.
Bachen, C. M., McLoughlin, M. M., & Garcia, S. S. (1999). Assessing the role of gender in
college students’ evaluations of faculty. Communication Education, 48(3), 193–210.
Basow, S. A. (1995). Student evaluations of college professors: When gender matters. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 87(4), 656–665. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-06126.96.36.1996
Becker, W. (2000). Teaching economics in the 21st century. Journal of Economic Perspectives,
14(1), 109–120. http://dx.doi.org/10.1257/jep.14.1.109
Commented [AF30]: Start the references list on a new
page. The word “References” (or “Reference,” if there is only
one source), should appear bolded and centered at the top of
the page. Reference entries should follow in alphabetical
order. There should be a reference entry for every source
cited in the text.
All citation entries should be double-spaced. After the first
line of each entry, every following line should be indented a
half inch (this is called a “hanging indent”). Most word
processors do this automatically via a formatting menu; do
not use tabs for a hanging indent unless your program
absolutely will not create a hanging indent for you.
Commented [AWC31]: Source with two authors.
Field Code Changed
Commented [AWC32]: Source with organizational
Field Code Changed
Field Code Changed
Field Code Changed
Field Code Changed
Commented [AWC33]: Note that sources in online
academic publications like scholarly journals now require
DOIs or stable URLs if they are available.
Field Code Changed
Benton, S., & Young, S. (2018). Best practices in the evaluation of teaching. Idea paper, 69.
Berk, R. A. (2005). Survey of 12 strategies to measure teaching effectiveness. International
Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 17(1), 48–62.
Bloom, B. S., Englehart, M. D., Furst, E. J., Hill, W. H., & Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy
of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Addison-Wesley
Carrell, S., & West, J. (2010). Does professor quality matter? Evidence from random assignment
of students to professors. Journal of Political Economy, 118(3), 409–432.
Cashin, W. E. (1990). Students do rate different academic fields differently. In M. Theall & J. L.
Franklin (Eds.), Student ratings of instruction: Issues for improving practice (pp. 113–
Centra, J., & Gaubatz, N. (2000). Is there gender bias in student evaluations of teaching? The
Journal of Higher Education, 71(1), 17–33.
Davis, B. G. (2009). Tools for teaching (2nd ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Denton, D. (2013). Responding to edTPA: Transforming practice or applying shortcuts?
AILACTE Journal, 10(1), 19–36.
[For the sake of brevity, the rest of the references have been omitted.]
Commented [AWC34]: Example of a book in print.
Commented [AWC35]: Chapter in an edited collection.
Field Code Changed
Commented [AWC36]: Academic article for which a DOI
Sample ICALT Items Rephrased for HET
Suite Sample ICALT item HET phrasing
The teacher promotes mutual
Does the teacher promote
The teacher uses learning time
Does the teacher use learning
Clear instruction The teacher gives feedback to
Does the teacher give feedback
The teacher provides interactive
instruction and activities.
Does the teacher provide
interactive instruction and
Learning strategies The teacher uses multiple
Does the teacher use multiple
Differentiation The teacher adapts the
instruction to the relevant
differences between pupils.
Does the teacher adapt the
instruction to the relevant
differences between pupils?
Commented [AF37]: Appendices begin after the
references list. The word “Appendix” should appear at the
top of the page, bolded and centered. If there are multiple
appendices, label them with capital letters (e.g., Appendix A,
Appendix B, and Appendix C). Start each appendix on a new
Paragraphs of text can also appear in appendices. If they do,
paragraphs should be indented normally, as they are in the
body of the paper.
If an appendix contains only a single table or figure, as this
one does, the centered and bolded “Appendix” replaces the
centered and bolded label that normally accompanies a table
If the appendix contains both text and tables or figures, the
tables or figures should be labeled, and these labels should
include the letter of the appendix in the label. For example, if
Appendix A contains two tables and one figure, they should
be labeled “Table A1,” “Table A2,” and “Figure A1.” A table
that follows in Appendix B should be labeled “Table B1.” If
there is only one appendix, use the letter “A” in table/figure
labels: “Table A1,” “Table A2,” and so on.
Filename: APA 7 Student Sample Paper.docx
Title: Branching Paths: A Novel Teacher Evaluation Model for Faculty
Author: Victoria Ruiz
Creation Date: 10/19/20 3:01:00 PM
Change Number: 4
Last Saved On: 10/19/20 3:10:00 PM
Last Saved By: APA Formatting
Total Editing Time: 6 Minutes
Last Printed On: 10/19/20 3:10:00 PM
As of Last Complete Printing
Number of Pages: 19
Number of Words: 4,713 (approx.)
Number of Characters: 26,868 (approx.)
Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.
You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.Read more
Each paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.Read more
Thanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.Read more
Your email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.Read more
By sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.Read more