Raising the Bar

/in /by

At a minimum, this critique should address the following questions or issues. If, in your opinion, your article does not address one or more of them, then you should say so and defend or justify why you believe that to be the case. In all cases, defend or justify your answers with specific references to words, phrases, or passages in the article and corresponding references to the assigned readings for the course. In other words, while your critique should be written in your own words (third person only), you do need to make references to specific words, phrases, and relevant passages in the text of your article, as well as

corresponding references to the assigned readings for the course. Each of the following items in BOLD must be listed as a heading on your critique. Do not use bullet points. Discuss in your critique the questions/issues under each bolded item. If a question/issue does not apply, please explain why.
    Summary (1-2 pages)
o    Summarize the contents of your article.
o    Who wanted the policy or program evaluated? In other words, why did the author(s) conduct the evaluation?
    Evaluation Goal(s) (1 page)
o    What were the goals or desired outcomes of the policy or program under examination?
o    How did the author(s) propose to evaluate the policy or program in terms of its goals or outcomes?
    Theoretical Perspective (2-3 paragraphs)
o    What theory connects the policy or program to the goals or outcomes?
o    What rival or plausible explanations or theories were ruled out?
o    How did the theory guide the author(s) in their conduct of the evaluation?
    Research Methods (2-3 paragraphs)
o    What principal research method(s) did the author(s) use in the conduct of the evaluation?
o    Did any unintended or unanticipated consequences arise? If so, what were they?
o    How and why did they arise?
    Conclusion (1 page)
o    What did the author(s) conclude? On what basis?
o    Did the policy or program achieve its intended goals or outcomes in whole, in part, or not at all? If so, why or why not?
o    To what uses were the results of the evaluation to be put?
o    Based on the results of the evaluation, what principal recommendations did the author(s) make?
    Evaluation Concepts (1-2 pages)
o    After you have written your summary, identify which of the following apply to the article. Be sure to define the concept and explain how each of your selections applies to your article.

Read chapters 3 – 6 from Joseph S. Wholey, Harry P. Hatry, and Kathryn E. Newcomer, editors, Handbook of Practical Program Evaluation, Latest Edition as well as Module 2 lecture materials (and journal articles).

stereotypes

/in /by

Scholarly work often builds upon what has been done by others. This is perfectly ethical, presuming that the work is properly credited and there is a clear delineation between the writers original thought and what they are borrowing from others.

Review the following abstracts from three journal articles. Then, open a new Word document and, entirely in your own words, describe your understanding of gender self-stereotyping given this material. Attempt to integrate the articles together into a cohesive statement, making sure to use APA citations as appropriate. All articles must be referenced at least once. Suggested length is 12 paragraphs.

Article 1 (Chiu et al., 1998):

Abstract: Recent research has shown that the presence of stereotype-relevant environmental cues can inadvertently bias people’s judgments of others in the direction of the stereotype. The present research demonstrated analogous activation effects on self-stereotyping. In two experiments, the effects of stereotype activation on the tendencies to stereotype others and to self-stereotype were examined. Experiment 1 tested whether incidental exposure to gender-related materials might activate gender stereotypes and hence affect perception of another person. Experiment 2 investigated gender stereotype activation effects on female and male high school students’ self-presentation behaviors. The results showed that incidental exposure to stereotype-relevant environmental cues increased both stereotyping and self-stereotyping tendencies. The findings were discussed in terms of their implications for understanding the basic principles of knowledge activation and application, and for reducing stereotyping and self-stereotyping. (p. 401)

Article 2 (Heyder & Kessels, 2013):

Abstract: One cause proposed for boys relatively lower academic achievement is a feminisation of schools that might result in a lack of fit between boys self-concept and academic engagement. Research so far has investigated math-male and language-female stereotypes, but no school female stereotypes. Our study tested for implicit gender stereotyping of school and its impact on boys achievement in N=122 ninth-graders from a large city in Western Germany using the Go/No-go Association Task (GNAT). Gender role self-concept and grades in math (representing an academic domain stereotyped as male) and German (domain stereotyped as female) were assessed using written questionnaires. It was found that, overall, students associated school more strongly with female than with male, and that this association of school with female was related to boys academic achievement. The more strongly boys associated school with female and the more they ascribed negative masculine traits to themselves, the lower their grades in German were. Boys academic achievement in math was unrelated to the extent to which they perceived school as feminine and themselves as masculine. Girls grades in both German and math were unrelated to their gender stereotyping of school. These findings emphasize the importance of fit between a students gender, gender role self concept and gender stereotyping of school for academic achievement. Strategies to improve this fit are discussed. (p. 605)

Article 3 (Hirnstein, Andrews, & Hausmann, 2014):

Abstract: Sex differences in specific cognitive abilities are well documented, but the biological, psychological, and sociocultural interactions that may underlie these differences are largely unknown. We examined within a biopsychosocial approach how gender stereotypes affect cognitive sex differences when adult participants were tested in mixed- or same-sex groups. A total of 136 participants (70 women) were allocated to either mixed- or same-sex groups and completed a battery of sex-sensitive cognitive tests (i.e., mental rotation, verbal fluency, perceptual speed) after gender stereotypes or gender-neutral stereotypes (control) were activated. To study the potential role of testosterone as a mediator for group sex composition and stereotype boost/threat effects, saliva samples were taken before the stereotype manipulation and after cognitive testing. The results showed the typical male and female advantages in mental rotation and verbal fluency, respectively. In general, men and women who were tested in mixed-sex groups and whose gender stereotypes had not been activated performed best. Moreover, a stereotype threat effect emerged in verbal fluency with reduced performance in gender stereotyped men but not women. Testosterone levels did not mediate the effects of group sex composition and stereotype threat nor did we find any relationship between testosterone and cognitive performance in men and women. Taken together, the findings suggest that an interaction of gender stereotyping and group sex composition affects the performance of men and women in sex-sensitive cognitive tasks. Mixed-sex settings can, in fact, increase cognitive performance as long as gender-stereotyping is prevented. (p. 1663)
Reference

Chiu, C., Hong, Y., Lam, I. C., Fu, J. H., Tong, J. Y., & Lee, V. S. (1998). Stereotyping and self-presentation: Effects of gender stereotype activation. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 1(1), 81-96. doi:10.1177/1368430298011007

Heyder, A., & Kessels, U. (2013). Is school feminine? Implicit gender stereotyping of school as a predictor of academic achievement. Sex Roles,69(11-12), 605-617. doi:10.1007/s11199-013-0309-9

Hirnstein, M., Andrews, L. C., & Hausmann, M. (2014). Gender-stereotyping and cognitive sex differences in mixed- and same-sex groups.Archives Of Sexual Behavior, 43(8), 1663-1673. doi:10.1007/s10508-014-0311-5

disscussion 3

/in /by

Read the case file from Brandl, Criminal Investigations, He Hit Her Until She Fell . . . and That Was Just the Beginning starting on page 363 of your textbook. Then consider if you were the criminal investigator assigned to investigate this case, what interview questions would you have asked the witnesses and why?
Then, respond to the posts of at least two (2) other peers with substantive feedback.

Identify the ethical issues within the field of Business.

/in /by

Enhance learning through the use of personal management tools and study strategies.

GEL 1.1: Demonstrate college-level communication through the composition of original materials in Standard American English.

GEL 7.1: Identify the ethical issues within the field of Business.

Assignment Scenario

Candie Cardigan has been asked to model CARDWAREs newest sweater line that is made of thin and yet warm material, called Naturally There, as it can withstand temperatures of 30 below 0. Because this will provide CARDWARE with good publicity of its newest clothing line, she agrees to walk the runway in Fashion City. The modeling event is being held at the Easton Hotel. Celebrities and those involved in the fashion industry will be in attendance. Several models precede Candie and her debut of Naturally There. Clad in a tasteful skirt, 4-inch high heels and a green Naturally There sweater, Candie proceeds to the end of the runway. A small wrinkle in the carpet causes Candies left shoe to get caught and she falls over the end of the runway onto the row of judges. Unfortunately, Myra, a judge and world renowned model, suffers a broken nose and cut to her face from one of Candies shoes.

Myra wants to bring a lawsuit based on negligence against CARDWARE and Candie.

Assignment Instructions

You are the paralegal working for CARDWAREs corporate counsel and have been asked to draft a 23-page double-spaced memorandum to the CEO, Casandra (Cassie) Cardigan and discuss the following:

The elements one must establish to bring a cause of action based on negligence.
Potential defenses that CARDWARE and Candie may use against Myras claim.
Checklist Before Submitting Your Assignment

Read the question and what is being asked of you twice.
Review the chart on negligence and the defenses.
Structure your Assignment in memorandum form.
Example:

Date:

To: Candie Cardigan, CEO

CARDWARE Inc.

From: [Your Name]

Re: Negligence Requirements and Potential Defenses to Myras Claim

Organize your memorandum with an introduction, body, and conclusion. Note: Your memorandum length of 23 pages is separate from the cover sheet and reference page.
Keep all font color consistent throughout. If a blue hyperlink appears, remove it by hovering over it and right click. A vertical dropdown menu will appear. Click on Remove Hyperlink.
Avoid the use of first person.
Provide in-text citations. If a reference is listed in your reference page, make sure it is displayed within your submission where you retrieved information from.
Provide hanging indents where needed.
Double space throughout your submission, including throughout your reference page. Note: This includes between your references.
Your reference page should be separate from the body of your submission.
Use Times New Roman size 12 font.
Provide an APA formatted cover sheet.
Directions for Submitting Your Assignment:

Please label your projects: username-project-unit.doc. For example, a student named Tina Allen would name her file TAllen-CriminalLawEssay-Unit2.doc. Submit your Assignment by selecting the appropriate Dropbox by the end of the unit.