Paper on your Study

User Generated

znexvrznex

Writing

Description

Throughout this course, you have examined other doctoral studies and begun to apply design tools, such as the Design Alignment Tool (DAT), to your own work. For this Final Paper, you apply the knowledge and skills that you have developed to prepare a paper about your planned study.

To Prepare

  • Review the Learning Resources for this course, include including the templates, rubrics, and checklists.
  • Think about how these tools and resources will apply to your project study or dissertation.

NEEDS To be Completed:

  • Write a 2- to 3-page paper explaining your project study idea (read below).
  • Discuss how you will use the templates, rubrics, and checklists to ensure that your study aligns all elements in the process.
  • Your paper should be written using scholarly tone and in APA-style with citations and references.


My project study is idea is

Providing instructional Strategies for English Langage Learners

Problem Statement

According to Moole (2014) the number of English Language Learner (ELL) students increased in the years that past in the United States of America. In a report submitted in 2016 by Koppelman and Goodhart, the number ELL students in the USA in the year 2004-05 was 9.1% an estimate of 4.3 million students as compared to 2013-14 which was 9.3% an approximate value of 4.5 million students while in 2014-15 the number was 4.6 million at 9.4%. Columbia had a bigger number of at 10.0% compared to other seven states (Maryland, Arizona,) . The ELL students in public school in the US rose between 2004-2005 and 2014-2015 in all states but 15 with the greatest being in Maryland at 4.4% while the least decrease was in Arizona at 13.8%. According to the data released by Department of Education the number of ELL students living on disability has also increased significantly with 665,00 students being identified in 2014-2015 as compared to 330,000 in 2004-2005.

Gunning (2013) said that the students face challenges that ought to get addressed to make their learning successful. He argued that it’s almost impossible to avoid the problems, but it's easy preparing the students and creating an attractive environment that facilitates easy learning. According to research conducted by Cooper, Robinson, Slansky, and Kiger in 2014, most of the students, for instance, prefer speaking in their foreign languages thus making it difficult to improve their English learning process.

Also, most of the students control the entire lesson where they express their experiences and varied understanding of problems they face (Schnorr, Freeman-Green, & Test, 2015). Relatively, Hill and Miller, n.d.,(2013), argue that the students get too dependent to conduct any task by themselves. The ELL process gets difficult to accomplish for such issues that must get addresses. This study aims at exploring the strategies that if well implemented by their teachers would make the ELL learning environment easy to adapt and make the process of learning the English language easy..

Purpose Statement

The goal of this study is to explore how ELL students deal with challenges of use dense unfamiliar vocabulary, how they use homonyms and synonyms, the difficulties they encounter with grammar, especially "exceptions to the rules" and how they deal with word order, sentence structure and syntax in their classroom setting. Tomlinson (2014) argued that teachers have primary roles not only teaching but empowering and inspire the learners to remain focused on their area of study. In 2015, Cervetti, Kulikowich, and Bravo said that if teachers adapt to the needs of their students, then most of the problems would get resolved. This study, therefore, examines the effective ways in which ELL educators can counter the challenges they face. Pinter (2017) asserts that studying the English Language helps learners understand other subjects quickly because most of the subjects studied in the US are written in English. This paper, therefore, will explore the significance of dealing with difficulties associated with studying the English Language to learners.

Possible Research Question(s)

  • What are the challenges faced by ELL students in the process of learning the English Language?
  • What effective strategies help English Language Learners curb these challenges?
  • What is the significance of studying the challenges associated with English Language in schools?

Unformatted Attachment Preview

EdD Project Study Checklist: Qualitative • • • • • The following provides guidance for reporting on EdD qualitative project studies. All items may not be relevant to your particular study; please consult with your chair for guidance. The checklist items may not necessarily be in the order that works best for your doctoral study. Please consult with your committee; however, the checklist should work well in the absence of other considerations. Instructions for students: o Indicate on the checklist the page number (use the actual document page number, not the MS Word pagination) where the appropriate indicator is located. o Respond to comments from the committee in each comment history box. Do not delete previous commentsjust add your response in the appropriate space. Instructions for the chair and/or committee members: o Provide specific feedback in the comment history column. Do not delete previous commentsjust add your response in the appropriate space. o If you made detailed comments on the draft (using track changes and comments), you can make reference to the draft rather than restate everything in the checklist comment history section. Date: (click here and type today’s date) Student’s Name: Program: Committee Members’ Names: Chairperson: Member: University Research Reviewer: Student ID: Front Matter Checklist Items Comment History Title Chair Comments: (click here) Second Member Comments: (click here) URR Comments: (click here) Most important conceptual issue investigated. Qualitative tradition applied. Participant group to which the study applies. Describe the overall problem and why it is important. Identify the purpose of the study. State the theoretical foundations and/or conceptual frameworks, as appropriate. Summarize the key research question(s) as statements. Describe, concisely, the overall research design, methods, and data analysis procedures. (include number of participants) Identify key results, conclusions, and project as an outcome (for the final study only). Conclude with a statement on the implications for positive social change and local applications. Student Response: (click here) Abstract Chair Comments: (click here) Second Member Comments: (click here) URR Comments: (click here) Student Response: (click here) Section 1: The Problem Checklist Items Describe the local problem that prompted the study. Discuss the gap in practice in appropriate scholarly language. Situate the problem within the larger population or educational situation. Present the rationale or justification for the problem choice. Present support from data, including appropriate personal communications. Answer the question, “Who thinks this is a problem other than you?” Conclude with the purpose or intent of the study. Define and cite any special terms associated with the problem—including variables and/or conceptual terms. Present citations from scholarly literature or local documents—no dictionaries or Wikipedia, etc. Pg/NA Comment History The Local Problem Chair Comments: (click here) Second Member Comments: (click here) URR Comments: (click here) Student Response: (click here) Rationale Chair Comments: (click here) Second Member Comments: (click here) URR Comments: (click here) Student Response: (click here) Definition of Terms Chair Comments: (click here) Second Member Comments: (click here) URR Comments: (click here) Student Response: (click here) Present the significance of the study problem. Describe how studying this problem might be useful to the local educational setting. Begin with a paragraph statement to frame the questions in relation to the problem and purpose of the study. State the research questions. The questions should investigate the nature of the problem and the best solution to the problem. Significance of the Study Chair Comments: (click here) Second Member Comments: (click here) URR Comments: (click here) Student Response: (click here) Research Question(s) Chair Comments: (click here) Second Member Comments: (click here) URR Comments: (click here) Student Response: (click here) Review of Literature The first review of literature in the EdD Project Study addresses the problem. Conceptual Framework Identify and define the concept and/or phenomenon that grounds the study. Concisely describe the conceptual framework (a description of the body of research that supports the need for the study) as derived from the literature. State the logical connections among key elements of the framework. State how the framework relates to the study approach and key research questions, as well as to instrument development and data analysis, where appropriate. Review of the Broader Problem Present an overview of topics covered in the review and indicate how the search was conducted. (Search terms and efforts to find related research should be explained.) Provide a critical review of the broader problem associated with the local problem addressed in the study. Demonstrate saturation; 25-40 current (within 5 years of study completion), peer-reviewed sources in addition to the framework references and seminal works as needed. Discuss any relevant public data. Include a critical analysis of the body of literature (and should not read like an annotated bibliography). Chair Comments: (click here) Second Member Comments: (click here) URR Comments: (click here) Student Response: (click here) Chair Comments: (click here) Second Member Comments: (click here) URR Comments: (click here) Student Response: (click here) Implications Discuss implications for possible project directions based on anticipated findings of the data collection and analysis. Include tentative directions for the project deliverable, but the findings of the research must inform the development of the project. Avoid stating outcomes and project as a foregone conclusion. End with a transition statement that contains a summary of key points of the section. Present an overview of the content of remaining sections. Chair Comments: (click here) Second Member Comments: (click here) URR Comments: (click here) Student Response: (click here) Summary Chair Comments: (click here) Second Member Comments: (click here) URR Comments: (click here) Student Response: (click here) Section 2: The Methodology First part of Section 2 relates to proposal stage / second half relates to final study and includes results Checklist Items Pg/NA Comment History Qualitative Research Design and Approach Describe how the research or evaluation design Chair Comments: (click here) derives logically from the problem and research Second Member Comments: (click here) (guiding) question. URR Comments: (click here) Provide a description of the qualitative tradition or research design that will be used. Student Response: (click here) Justify the choice of research design with explanations why other likely choices would be less effective. If conducting an evaluation, include the type of evaluation (goal-based, outcomes based, formative, or summative), justification for using this type of evaluation, the goals for a goalbased evaluation, the outcomes and performance measures that will be utilized as indicators, and the overall evaluation goals. Participants Describe the criteria for selecting participants. Chair Comments: (click here) Justify the number of participants, balanced with Second Member Comments: (click here) depth of inquiry. (In general, the fewer the URR Comments: (click here) participants the deeper the inquiry per individual.) Student Response: (click here) Describe the procedures for gaining access to participants. Explain methods of establishing a researcherparticipant working relationship. Present measures that will be taken for the protection or participants’ rights, including confidentiality, informed consent, and protection from harm. Describe and justify the data for collection. The data must be appropriate to the type of evaluation and to the qualitative tradition chosen. Identify each data collection instrument and source (observation sheet, interview protocol, focus group protocol, video-tape, audio-tape, artifacts, archived data, and other kinds of data collection instruments). Identify the source for each data collection instrument (published or researcher produced). Data Collection Chair Comments: (click here) Second Member Comments: (click here) URR Comments: (click here) Student Response: (click here) If historical or legal documents are used as a source of data, demonstrate the reputability of the sources and justify why they represent the best source of data. Establish sufficiency of data collection instruments to answer research questions. Provide processes for how and when the data are to be generated, gathered, and recorded. Describe the systems for keeping track of data and emerging understandings (research logs, reflective journals, cataloging systems). Explain the procedures for gaining access to participants. Present the role of the researcher—including past/current professional roles at the setting, past/current professional relationship with the participants, how these roles and relationships may affect data collections, and the researcher’s experiences or biases that are related to the topic. Present how and when the data will be analyzed—including coding procedures and software applications, when appropriate. Describe the evidence of quality and procedures to assure accuracy and credibility of the findings (e.g., member checks, triangulation, peer debriefing, clarifying researcher bias, etc.). Data Analysis Chair Comments: (click here) Second Member Comments: (click here) URR Comments: (click here) Student Response: (click here) Explain the procedures for dealing with discrepant cases. If this is an evaluation study, present the limitations of the evaluation. Limitations Chair Comments: (click here) Second Member Comments: (click here) URR Comments: (click here) Student Response: (click here) [Content of Proposal Ends Here. See APA Form and Style Check at the end of the Checklist.] Checklist Items Clearly review the process by which the data were generated, gathered, and recorded. Build the findings from the problem and research question(s). Present patterns, relationships, and themes as findings supported by the data and aligned with the research questions. Account for all salient data in the findings and appropriately handles discrepant cases. Discuss the evidence of quality how the study followed procedures to address accuracy of the data (e.g., member checks, triangulation, etc.) Refer to appropriate evidence in appendixes (sample transcripts, researcher logs, field notes, etc.) Summarize outcomes logically and systematically in relation to the problem and research question(s) and to the larger body of literature on the topic, including the Section 2: The Methodology (do not repeat section heading) (For Final Study) Pg/NA Comment History Data Analysis Results Chair Comments: (click here) Second Member Comments: (click here) URR Comments: (click here) Student Response: (click here) conceptual/theoretical framework. Describe the project deliverable as an outcome of the results. The student and committee must meet to discuss the findings and the most appropriate project based on the findings. Committee approval is required before the student may proceed to write Section 3--The Project. Section 3: The Project (For Final Study) Checklist Items Present a brief description of the proposed project. Remember that the project is the artifact or deliverable that students create based on the findings from their research. This completed, doctoral-level product is placed in Appendix A of the final study. There are 4 basic genres of projects: Evaluation Report (for an evaluation study) • Explains purpose of evaluation, criteria, & major outcomes • Addresses local needs • Meets standards for PE—length varies— plan on 15-30 pages Curriculum Plan • Includes purpose, level, learners, scope, & sequence • Describes materials, units, & lessons in detail (objectives, activities, assessments, teacher notes, and evaluation plan) • Specifies details of plan—minimum of 9 week curriculum plan Professional Development/Training Curriculum and Materials • Includes purpose, goals, learning outcomes, & target audience • Outlines components, timeline, activities, trainer notes, & module formats • Provides materials (PPTs, etc.), implementation plan, & evaluation plan • Specifies hour-by-hour detail of training— minimum of 3 full days of training Policy Recommendation with Detail (position paper) Pg/NA Comment History Introduction Chair Comments: (click here) Second Member Comments: (click here) URR Comments: (click here) Student Response: (click here) • Includes background of existing policy/problem, summary of analysis/findings • Presents major evidence from both literature and research • Outlines recommendations—connected to the evidence—related to audience • Appropriate length varies by topic—plan on 15-30 pages Describe the goals of the proposed project. Present a scholarly rationale of why the project genre was chosen including considerations of the data analysis in Section 2, and how the problem will be addressed through the content of the project. Present a scholarly review of literature related to the specific genre of project. (Must not repeat themes from Section 1 review of literature.) Explain how the genre is appropriate to address the problem and criteria from the research and/or theory used to guide development of the project. Present a thorough, critical, interconnected analysis of how theory and research support the content of the project, including discussion of findings from Section 2. Indicate how search was conducted, including search terms and efforts to find related research. Demonstrate saturation through the use of 2540 recent (within 5 years of study completion date), peer-reviewed sources. Present justification if not meeting minimum number of sources or if other types of sources are used. Present the needed resources, existing supports, potential barriers, and potential solutions to barriers. Discuss the proposal for implementation, including a timetable. Explain the roles and responsibilities of student Rationale Chair Comments: (click here) Second Member Comments: (click here) URR Comments: (click here) Student Response: (click here) Review of the Literature Chair Comments: (click here) Second Member Comments: (click here) URR Comments: (click here) Student Response: (click here) Project Description Chair Comments: (click here) Second Member Comments: (click here) URR Comments: (click here) Student Response: (click here) and any others involved. Project Evaluation Plan Chair Comments: (click here) Second Member Comments: (click here) URR Comments: (click here) Unless the project genre was an evaluation, present the type of evaluation planned for the project deliverable (goal-based, outcomes based, formative, or summative). Provide a justification for using this type of evaluation. Explain the overall goals of the project (for a goals-based evaluation) or outcome measures that will be utilized (for an outcomes-based evaluation). Discuss the overall evaluation goals. Include a description of the key stakeholders. Student Response: (click here) Project Implications Chair Comments: (click here) Second Member Comments: (click here) URR Comments: (click here) Summarize possible social change implications. Provide importance of the project to local stakeholders and in larger context. Student Response: (click here) Section 4: Reflections and Conclusions (For Final Study) Checklist Items Ground a discussion of project strengths and limitations in addressing the problem in the appropriate literature. Focus discussion on project deliverable, not research or local site. Describe ways to address the problem differently based up work of the study. Present alternative definitions of the problem and alternative solutions to the local problem. Describe what was learned about the processes—specific to the research and development of the project. Use scholarly language throughout. Present reflective analysis about personal learning/growth of self as a scholar, practitioner, and project developer—specific to the research Pg/NA Comment History Project Strengths and Limitations Chair Comments: (click here) Second Member Comments: (click here) URR Comments: (click here) Student Response: (click here) Recommendations for Alternative Approaches Chair Comments: (click here) Second Member Comments: (click here) URR Comments: (click here) Student Response: (click here) Scholarship, Project Development, and Leadership and Change Chair Comments: (click here) Second Member Comments: (click here) URR Comments: (click here) Student Response: (click here) and development of the project. Reflect and discuss on the importance of the work overall, and what was learned. Reflection on the Importance of the Work Chair Comments: (click here) Second Member Comments: (click here) URR Comments: (click here) Student Response: (click here) Implications, Applications, and Directions for Future Research Describe the potential impact for positive social Chair Comments: (click here) change at the appropriate level (individual, Second Member Comments: (click here) family, organizational, and societal/policy). URR Comments: (click here) Ensure implications for social change do not exceed the study boundaries. Describe methodological, theoretical, and/or empirical implications, as appropriate. Describe recommendations for practice and/or for future research, as appropriate. Provide a strong “take home” message that captures the key essence of the study. Student Response: (click here) Conclusion Chair Comments: (click here) Second Member Comments: (click here) URR Comments: (click here) Student Response: (click here) Appendix A: The Project (For Final Study) Checklist Items Include all components of project in Appendix A. Meet standards of genre at a scholarly doctoral level. Refer to genre examples/standards in rubric for Section 3. Ensure immediate applicability to setting and problem. Use appropriate language for stakeholders or audience. Include only original products. Comment History Chair Comments: (click here) Second Member Comments: (click here) URR Comments: (click here) Student Response: (click here) APA Form and Style Check Checklist Items Citations and Referencing All citations have been crosschecked to ensure that there are corresponding references (and that there are no references that do not have associated citations). All sources are cited correctly per APA formatting requirements (for example, studies listed in alphabetical order by first author; no first names of authors). Grammar, Spelling, and Syntax Comment History Chair Comments: (click here) Second Member Comments: (click here) URR Comments: (click here) Student Response: (click here) The paper has been thoroughly checked for grammar, spelling, and syntax errors. For the final doctoral study, the doctoral study has been checked for correct verb tense representing a completed study. Headings Headings are used, consistent with the Walden Doctoral study Template. Chair Comments: (click here) Second Member Comments: (click here) URR Comments: (click here) Student Response: (click here) Chair Comments: (click here) Second Member Comments: (click here) URR Comments: (click here) Student Response: (click here) Use of the Writing Center Template The Writing Center Doctoral Study Template (APA, 6th edition) was used to construct the proposal and/or doctoral study so that all formatting is correct. Chair Comments: (click here) Second Member Comments: (click here) URR Comments: (click here) Student Response: (click here) Use of Academic Integrity Check An anti-plagiarism report was run with the exclusions setting set to “Exclude < 4 words”. Previous submissions (false matches) should also be excluded. Chair Comments: (click here) Second Member Comments: (click here) URR Comments: (click here) Student Response: (click here) Ed.D. Doctoral Planning Tool with Active Links to Resources The 18 Doctoral Milestones Linked to “Just in Time” Information (Revised 9/25/15) Use this Planning Tool to set personal completion goals for each milestone. This is not a contract. This is only a planning tool that neither promises nor predicts the rate of student progress or time to degree completion. Time to completion will vary by student, depending on individual progress and credits transferred, if applicable. For a personalized estimate of your time to completion, call an enrollment advisor at 1-866-492-5336. – How to use this Tool Students are required to show progress each term in order to receive satisfactory grades and remain in the program. The program limit is 8 years Term before 8081 EDUC 8081 EDUC 8090 Prospectus approved in TaskStream use the rubric Your Doctoral Committee Assignment Form (DCAF) Submitted Submit URR Request Form 2 wks before proposal approval Target ______ _____ ______ Before 3 mo. Insert Chair & 2nd member approve proposal per rubric and checklist _______ Proposal to URR Review Begin URR revisions URR Approval Proposal Oral Conference Submit IRB Application IRB Approval ______ ______ ________ ______ _______ 19 mo. 21 mo. Date Sample Timeframe* Doc Process 18.5 mo. 19 mo. 21.5 mo. 21.5 mo. 22 mo. (12 additional mos.) Collect & Analyze Data, write up all findings Complete 1st draft of completed Capstone Study Committee approves final draft using the appropriate rubric and/or checklist Final draft URR Review Begin URR revisions URR Approval Form & Style Review Final Oral Conference Final URR Review Final Study Approved by CAO _______ ______ ______ _______ _______ ______ ______ _______ ______ 33 mo. 33 mo. 24 mo. 29 mo. 31 mo. 31 mo. 34 mo. 35 mo. 36 mo. *Cumulative, based on 60 months for the entire program Key Doctoral Process Resources Arranged Chronologically (Links to What You Need, When You Need It) All EdD HEAL candidates must complete a Project Study. All candidates enrolled after 1/1/2009 must complete a Project Study. Non-Heal students enrolled before 1/1/2009 may choose either Project or Research study. EdD SPED & ECE students also have a choice. Please confer with your program director if you have questions. General Policies and Procedures – The Walden Student Handbook Residency Completion - Go to MyWalden and click on Student Center to find the Residency Center. All students should have completed a residency before beginning the doctoral process. □ Step 1: Prospectus-completed and approved in ePortfolio o Go to the Walden Doctoral Capstone Resource Website o Review the Writing Center Doctoral Capstone Preproposal Starter Kit o Review “What resources are available to help me write my capstone” o Get the EdD Doctoral Committee Assignment Form (DCAF) o You owe it to yourself: Survey the Resources at Find resources at Student Support o Review My Doctoral Research (MyDR) tutorials o Click to find the Prospectus Guide o Click to find the EdD Prospectus Template o Click to find the Prospectus Rubric o Click to find and complete Research Planning and Writing tutorials o Click and learn to love revisions o Click for APA Reference List APA Helps o Complete the Design Alignment Tool o Click to learn about Scholarly Voice o What resources are available to help me write my capstone □ Step 2: Proposal 2 o o o o o o o o o Click to find the EdD Doctoral Study Rubric Click to find the Design Alignment Tool Click to find the EdD Doctoral Study Writing Template Be sure to study Doctoral-Level Writing, including • Word Choice • Tone • Use of Evidence Click to Ask a Librarian for assistance Click to improve your skills in Critical Reading and Critical Thinking Click to review Ethical Guides for various types of research Click to find the Center for Research Quality • Trouble with Theoretical/Conceptual Framework? Theoretical Frameworks • Literature Reviews; Common Errors Made When Conducting a Literature Review • Reviewing the Literature and Incorporating Previous Research • Trouble with Methodology? Research Design: A Tutorial Click to find Writing Center Capstone Resources. This is a great resource! Have you planned for a major life event? This cannot be scheduled but one should plan for it. Find resources at Student Support and/or contact Academic Advising □ Step 3: Proposal University Research Review (URR) o Click to find Academic Integrity and Turnitin o Click to find the Univ. Research Review (URR) submission process o Click to find the URR Request Form and URR FAQs o Want to speed up? Click to learn about Capstone Intensive Retreats □ Step 4: Proposal Oral Conference o Click to find the Form to Schedule Proposal Conference □ Step 5: Institutional Review Board (IRB) Approval o Double-check IRB Guides, FAQ, & Tutorials 3 o o o o Click to find the IRB Office Hours for Questions Click to find the IRB application and all sample documents from the IRB Page of the CRQ website Review Sample Documents for IRB Research Ethics and Compliance Links □ Step 6: Completion of Doctoral Study Final Draft o Click to find Writing Center Resources, including: • Prewriting • Writers Block • And a good review of Scholarly Writing • • • • • Refresh yourself on using concise, precise, and clear language. Learn how to avoid bias. Rediscover the power of strong, logical arguments. Follow these guidelines for incorporating evidence into your work. Check out some general resources on scholarly writing. □ Step 7: URR Approval o Click to find URR policies □ Step 8: Form and Style Review o Click for the Form & Style Timeline o Click for the Form & Style Form & Style checklist o For Doctoral Study answers from the Writing Center, email editor@waldenu.edu. □ Step 9: Doctoral Study Oral Conference o Click to find the Form to Schedule Proposal Conference □ Step 10: Final URR Review o Click to find info about Abstracts at the Writing Center o Click to find Abstract Office Hours & Assistance at the Center for Research Quality □ Step 11: Chief Academic Officer Approval o Click to learn about Publishing through ProQuest 4 o o o o Click to find the Graduation Application Click to learn about the Doctoral Study Award Program Click to learn about Writing for Publication & Conference Presentations Click to learn about Presidential Alumni Research Dissemination Awards Finally, remember that your chair and other faculty members are your best resources for specific, content-related questions. 5 Student Name: Date: Design Alignment Tool Study Problem and Purpose Provide one sentence for each. They must align with all RQ rows. Research Questions Data Collection Tools Datapoints Yielded List each research question (RQ) in a separate row below. Add or delete rows, as needed. List which instrument(s) are used to collect the data that will address each RQ. List which specific questions/variables/scales of the instrument will address each RQ. RQ 1: RQ 2: RQ 3: Data Source List which persons/artifacts/records will provide the data. Data Analysis Briefly describe the specific statistical or qualitative analyses that will address each RQ. EdD Capstone Rubrics and Checklists by Stage Revised EdD Rubrics and Checklists…Can you explain clearly what forms are required when? The stages and timing of the University Research Review process have not fundamentally changed; only the documents have changed. However, the following outline may help clarify. Proposal Writing Stage Student: Complete the proposal and the appropriate Doctoral Study Checklist by identifying the page number where items are located in the proposal. Use the comment blocks to provide any clarifying information for the reviewers. Student: Submit the proposal and Doctoral Study Checklist to the Committee Chair. Committee Chair: Review the proposal and the Doctoral Study Checklist and evaluate the proposal. ➢ If the proposal is assessed as not ready for committee review based on the criteria in the Doctoral Study Minimum Standards Rubric, the Committee Chair provides feedback to the student using the Checklist and/or the Doctoral Study Minimum Standards Rubric (depending on the nature of the feedback). ➢ If the proposal is assessed as ready for further review, the Committee Chair forwards the proposal, the Doctoral Study Checklist, and his/her completed Doctoral Study Minimum Standards Rubric to the Committee Member for review. ➢ Once the Committee Chair and Committee Member agree that the proposal has met all the Doctoral Study Minimum Standards Rubric criteria (items 1-8 of the 10 criteria), the proposal is ready for Committee URR review. The Committee Chair then forwards to the Committee URR: 1) proposal document; 2) Turnitin Report; 3) the completed Doctoral Study Checklist completed by the student and with any comments by the committee Chair and/or Member; and 4) the Doctoral Study Minimum Standards Rubrics completed by each member indicating that the applicable standards have been met (it is best to keep the history of comments to the student for Committee URR to review as well). Doctoral Study Writing Stage Student: Complete the doctoral study and extend the Doctoral Study Checklist by identifying the page number where items are located in the final doctoral study. Add directly to the checklist used for the proposal, when possible. Use the comment blocks to provide any clarifying information for the reviewers. Student: Submit the completed doctoral study and Doctoral Study Checklist to the Committee Chair. Committee Chair: Review the final study and the Doctoral Study Checklist and evaluate the final study. ➢ If the study document is assessed as not ready for committee review based on the criteria in the Doctoral Study Minimum Standards Rubric, the Committee Chair provides feedback to the student using the Checklist and/or the Doctoral Study Minimum Standards Rubric (depending on the nature of the feedback). ➢ If the final study is assessed as ready for further review, the Committee Chair forwards the study, the Doctoral Study Checklist, and a completed Doctoral Study Minimum Standards Rubric to the Committee Member for review. ➢ Once the Chair and Committee Member agree that the final doctoral study has met all the Doctoral Study Minimum Standards Rubric criteria (all of the 10 criteria), the doctoral study is ready for Committee URR review. The Committee Chair then forwards to the Committee URR: 1) final doctoral study document; 2) Turnitin Report; 3) the completed Doctoral Study Checklist completed by the student and with any comments by the committee Chair and/or Member; and 4) the Doctoral Study Minimum Standards Rubrics completed by each member indicating that all standards have been met (it is best to keep the history of comments to the student for Committee URR to review as well). Final Study Stage/Post-Oral Defense (pre-CAO review) Committee Chair and Committee Member: ➢ Chair forwards the final study document and final quality rubric from each committee member directly to the URR, while copying doctoralstudy@waldenu.edu Committee URR: ➢ Forwards review (brief statement to chair, final document, and final quality rubric—indicating if approved for CAO review) to committee chair, while copying doctoralstudy@waldenu.edu EdD Minimum Standards Rubric The key indicators in the EdD Minimum Standards Rubric are used to assure the overall quality of the document. To be completed individually by the chair, committee member, and University Research Review (URR) member at the proposal and final study stages. Instructions For each indicator, choose “Target” (exceeds expectations), “Acceptable” (meets expectations), or “Unacceptable” (does not meet expectations) to represent if the document meets that quality indicator. All indicators are required. If review suggests that any parts of the indicator are not complete, the appropriate score is that the document is “Unacceptable.” For items marked “Unacceptable,” please indicate ways in which the document can be improved to meet the standard. Items 9 and 10 are relevant to the final study only. All reviewers must rate each indicator as Target or Acceptable in order for the document to be considered as having met minimum standards. Date: (click here and type today’s date) Student’s Name: Program: Student ID: Committee Members’ Names: Chairperson: Member: University Research Reviewer: Target Acceptable Unacceptable Referring to the appropriate checklist, the document is complete for the stage in the process and is of exceptional quality. Referring to the appropriate checklist, the document is complete for the stage in the process and is of acceptable quality. The candidate’s submission is unacceptable. 2. The problem is clearly articulated, worthy of doctoral level research, and within the scope of the discipline. The candidate has completed this criterion with exceptional quality. The candidate has completed this criterion with acceptable quality. The candidate’s submission is unacceptable. 3. The work is grounded in a focused application of the relevant theories or conceptual frameworks. The candidate has completed this criterion with exceptional quality. 1. The document includes all relevant items from the checklist. If unacceptable, which items are missing? If unacceptable, what is the reasoning for this assessment? The candidate has completed this criterion with acceptable quality. The candidate’s submission is unacceptable. If unacceptable, what other theories or frameworks might be more appropriate? 4. The literature review is exhaustive and reflects mastery of the current state of knowledge in the discipline related to the area of research. The candidate has completed this criterion with exceptional quality. The candidate has completed this criterion with acceptable quality. The candidate’s submission is unacceptable. If unacceptable, what is the reasoning for this assessment? Score/Level Target 5. The problem statement, purpose, research questions, and/or hypotheses, design, and methodology are consistent with the state of knowledge development in the discipline described in the literature review. The candidate has completed this criterion with exceptional quality. 6. The research design and methodology, including issues of sampling, sample size (quantitative and mixed method studies), participant numbers (qualitative and mixed method studies), instrumentation, data collection, data analyses, and procedures are appropriate to answer the research questions and/or test hypotheses. The candidate has completed this criterion with exceptional quality. 7. The problem statement, purpose, research questions and/or hypotheses, design, and methodology are consistent and aligned. The candidate has completed this criterion with exceptional quality. 8. The study describes implications for positive social change at the appropriate levels—individual, community, and/or societal (proposal and final study). The candidate has completed this criterion with exceptional quality. 9. Results are accurately presented and are aligned with the research questions and/or hypotheses, design, and analysis. The candidate has completed this criterion with exceptional quality. 10. Conclusions, limitations, recommendations, and/or outcomes are clearly described, are appropriate to the study scope, and are integrated into the state of knowledge described in the literature review. The candidate has completed this criterion with exceptional quality. Acceptable The candidate has completed this criterion with acceptable quality. Unacceptable The candidate’s submission is unacceptable. If unacceptable, what is the reasoning for this assessment? The candidate has completed this criterion with acceptable quality. The candidate’s submission is unacceptable. If unacceptable, what is the reasoning for this assessment? The candidate has completed this criterion with acceptable quality. The candidate’s submission is unacceptable. If unacceptable, in what ways could aspects of the prospectus be better aligned? The candidate has completed this criterion with acceptable quality. The candidate’s submission is unacceptable. If unacceptable, what is the reasoning for this assessment? The candidate has completed this criterion with acceptable quality. The candidate’s submission is unacceptable. If unacceptable, what is the reasoning for this assessment? The candidate has completed this criterion with acceptable quality. The candidate’s submission is unacceptable. If unacceptable, what is the reasoning for this assessment? Score/Level
Purchase answer to see full attachment
User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool's honor code & terms of service.

Explanation & Answer

Hi,Here you go, have a look

Running head: LEARNING ENGLISH

1

Providing Instructional Strategies for English Language Learners
Student
Institution

2

Problem Statement
The number of students learning English in the United States has been increasing. In
2014-2015 the number stood at 4.6 million students compared to 4.3 million in 2004-2005
majority of who were in the state of Columbia (Hill & Miller, 2013). The number of learners in
the public schools rose across the country with the highest number recorded in the state of
Maryland while Arizona had the least. The number of disabled learners also increased to 665,
000 in 2015 compared to 330,000 in 2004. According to Spencer & Harris-Bowlsbey (2013),
that it is easy to prepare students for learning purposes by creating an attractive environment.
Most students preferred speaking in their foreign languages which complicate the learning
process. Similarly students are known to get too indolent failing to perform tasks on their own.
The purpose of the study is to explore ways of making the English learning process easy to adapt
to.
Purpose Statement
This study deals with challenges relating to grammar, sentence structure and syntax of
English language learners in a classroom setting. It also explores ways in which educators can
effectively counter these problems.
Possible Research Question(s)
i.

What problems do ELL students encounter in learning English as a language

ii.

What are the appropriate measures to overcome the challenges

3

Planning Tool with Active Links to Resources
This tool will help in setting activities and timelines for each activity. By setting
milestones this tool will assist in gauging the rate of completion of planned activities and
whether or not set targets are being achieved. It is an instrumen...


Anonymous
Very useful material for studying!

Studypool
4.7
Trustpilot
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4

Similar Content

Related Tags