Presenting Outdoor and Indoor Play In this assignment, you will design outdoor and indoor play areas using photos you take yourself or from the Web. You will develop a slide presentation showcasing your play areas and a rationale for each piece of equipment/other materials you select based on early childhood principles, guidelines, and standards related to the role of play. NOTE: You will submit a draft of your slide presentation to the Module 4 discussion where you will provide and receive peer review. Course Objectives  Develop an early childhood curriculum framework reflecting developmentally appropriate practices and aligning with specific learning areas.  Apply state and national standards, principles, and guidelines for early childhood education across content areas in alignment with developmentally appropriate practices.  Evaluate the role of play in early childhood development. Directions: 1) Save and print the Module 4 Application. 2) In preparation for the assignment, review these Module 4 readings: Olsen, H. (2013). Creating and enriching quality and safe outdoor environments. Dimensions of Early Childhood, 41(3), 11-17. Spencer, K. H., & Wright, P. M. (2014). Quality outdoor play spaces for young children. YC: Young Children, 69(5), 28-34. Mullick, A. W. (2013). Inclusive indoor play: An approach to developing inclusive design guidelines. Work 2013 Supplement, 1(44), 5-17. 3) Develop a 10-slide PowerPoint or Prezi presentation of an outdoor play area and an indoor play area of your own design. 4) Include a title slide and a references slide in APA (6th edition) format. 5) Use photos of equipment and other materials you take yourself and/or find on the Web. 6) In the slide text, provide a rationale for each selection based on guidelines and principles for outdoor and indoor play cited in the research literature. If state and national standards reference indoor and outdoor play requirements, use those as well. 7) Submit a draft of your slide presentation to the Module 4 Discussion by Wednesday at 11:59 PM PT. Provide feedback to at least one classmate by Thursday at 11:59 PM PT and a second classmate by Saturday at 11:59 PM PT. 8) As applicable, use the peer feedback to revise your slide presentation. 9) Follow the directions to submit your final slide presentation.

nstructionsUsing class material, the articles listed below, and research where appropriate develop a 6-8-page research paper that addresses the relationship of structure to culture in creating an effective and efficient place to work. For this assignment, you will evaluate the strategies managers can utilize to impact organizational structure and culture. Address the following in your paper:Explain how organizational structure interfaces with organizational culture to create a smooth work and decision-making flow. Be sure to include a discussion of how organizational purpose relates to the relationship between the integration of structure and culture.Select two organizations from the best places to work. Research and describe their structures and cultures.Select two organizations from the worst places to work. Research and describe their structures and cultures.Identify and explain why the structure and culture work well in those organizations that are deemed best places to work. Identify and explain what does not work well in structure and culture in those organizations that are not favored by their employees.In the case of the disliked organizations, recommend three strategic ways a manager could improve the interface of structure and culture.Finally, many large organizations are trying to transition to smaller more flexible structures. Suggest at least three management strategies that can make a bureaucratic organization a more team-oriented, collaborative, and inclusive culture.Use of at least five scholarly articles and other professional sources to support your work. Additional Requirements and How to Prepare the SubmissionAPA formatting with in-text citations and a reference list is required.Read the grading rubric for the assignmentCheck the instructions to make sure all elements of the assignment have been covered.Third-person writing is required. Third-person means that there are no words such as “I, me, my, we, or us” (first-person writing), nor is there use of “you or your” (second-person writing). If uncertain how to write in the third person, view this link: https://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/gramma... .Contractions are not used in business writing, so the expectation is that students do not use contractions in assignments.Paraphrase and do not use direct quotation marks. This means you do not use more than four consecutive words from a source document, put a passage from a source document into your own words and attribute the passage to the source document. Provide the page or paragraph number. Note that a reference within a reference list cannot exist without an associated in-text citation and vice versa.Do not use books as source material.Students are expected to use a variety as well as multiple course readings and research to support ideas, reasoning, and conclusions.Submit the final project into the appropriate assignment submission folder. NOTE: All submitted work is to be your original work. You may not use any work from another student, the Internet or an online clearinghouse. You are expected to understand the Academic Dishonesty and Plagiarism Policy and know that it is your responsibility to learn about instructor and general academic expectations with regard to proper citation of sources as specified in the APA Publication Manual, 7th Ed. (Students are held accountable for in-text citations and an associated reference list only). Additional Sources may include:The Best Companies to Work For10 Unmistakeable Signs of a Toxic CultureForbes Just CompaniesForbes Best EmployersForbes Best CompaniesMoney Worst Companies to Work For100 Great Places to WorkDue DateOct 6, 2020 11:59 PMHide Rubrics Rubric Name: Org Structure- 10% This table lists criteria and criteria group name in the first column. The first row lists level names and includes scores if the rubric uses a numeric scoring method. Criteria ExcellentGoodDevelopingNeeds ImprovementFailingCriterion Score Analysis of structure and culture design interfaces to make a more efficient/effective organization Add Feedback 2 points Analysis of interface was logically concluded by using ideas that were supported from a thorough use of class material; reflects an insightful and complex understanding of how together they make efficient and effective organizations(1.8-2.0) 1.7 points Analysis of interface was logically concluded by using ideas that were supported from a thorough use of class and research material; reflects a good understanding of how together they make efficient and effective organizations but either structure or culture was underdeveloped.(1.6-1.799) 1.5 points Analysis of interface was mostly logically concluded by using ideas that were supported from an adequate use of class and research material; reflected a general understanding of how together they make efficient and effective organizations but was underdeveloped overall. (1.4-1.599) 1.3 points Discussion attempt was poor because of lack of support from class material, and research. Examples were not always present and criteria were weakly or incorrectly addressed.(1.2-1.39) 0 points Explanation was not made or minimal depth to the explanation leaving the impression of an incorrect or unsupported understanding of the concepts.(0- 1.19) / 2 / 2 * Criterion score has been overridden Evaluation of 2 "good to work for" companies Add Feedback 0.5 points Selections were clearly and definitively made with evaluation. (.45-.50) 0.425 points Selections were clearly made and reasoning was slightly underdeveloped(.40-.449) 0.37555 points Selections were clearly made but reasoning contained opinion and was underdeveloped overall.(.35-.399) 0.325 points Discussion about both exists but discussion of why was vague and not illustrated well(.30-.349) 0 points No choice offered or missing selection reasoning.(0.299) / 0.5 / 0.5 * Criterion score has been overridden Evaluation of 2 "not good to work for" focusing on the company's culture and structure design Add Feedback 0.5 points Selections were clearly and definitively made with detailed evaluation and reasoning focusing on structure and culture(.45-.50) 0.425 points Selections were clearly made and reasoning was slightly underdeveloped(.40-.449) 0.375 points Selections were clearly made but reasoning contained opinion and was underdeveloped overall.(.35-.399) 0.25 points Discussion about both exists but discussion of why was vague and not illustrated well (.30-.349 0 points No choice offered or missing selection reasoning. (0-.299) / 0.5 / 0.5 * Criterion score has been overridden Critical analysis of culture and structure work well in good workplaces Add Feedback 1 point Excellent critical analysis of when culture and structure work well in good workplaces were logically concluded by using ideas that were supported from a thorough use of class material; reflects an insightful and complex understanding of how together they make efficient and effective organizations(.90-1.0) 0.85 points Explanation and examples of why culture and structure work well in good workplaces were concluded by using ideas that were supported from a thorough use of class and research material; reasoning shows a good understanding of how together they make efficient and effective organizations but either structure or culture was underdeveloped.(.80- .899) 0.75 points Explanation and examples of why culture and structure work well in good workplaces were supported from an adequate use of class and research material; discussion reflected a general understanding of how structure and culture work together but was underdeveloped overall.(.70-.799) 0.65 points Discussion attempt was poor because of lack of support from class material, and research. Examples were not always present and criteria were weakly or incorrectly addressed.(.60-.699) 0 points Explanation was not made or minimal depth to the explanation leaving the impression of an incorrect or unsupported understanding of the concepts.(0- .59) / 1 / 1 * Criterion score has been overridden Critical analysis of culture and structure do not work well in bad workplaces Add Feedback 1 point Excellent critical analysis of when culture and structure do not work well in bad workplaces were logically concluded by using ideas that were supported from a thorough use of class material; reflects an insightful and complex understanding of how together they make inefficient and ineffective organizations(.90-1.0) 0.85 points Explanation and examples of why culture and structure do not work well in bad workplaces were concluded by using ideas that were supported from a thorough use of class and research material; reasoning shows a good understanding of how together they make efficient and effective organizations but either structure or culture was underdeveloped.(.80- .899) 0.75 points Explanation and examples of why culture and structure do not work well in bad workplaces were supported from an adequate use of class and research material; discussion reflected a general understanding of how structure and culture work together but was underdeveloped overall.(.70-.799) 0.65 points Discussion attempt was poor because of lack of support from class material, and research. Examples were not always present and criteria were weakly or incorrectly addressed.(.60-.699) 0 points Explanation was not made or minimal depth to the explanation leaving the impression of an incorrect or unsupported understanding of the concepts.(0- .59) / 1 / 1 * Criterion score has been overridden Specific strategies for improvement for the bad companies with support Add Feedback 2 points Strategies for improvement are concluded using logical reasoning (justification) that were thoroughly supported by course and research material and showed insightful and complex understanding as to how the improvement recommendations will lead to success(1.8-2.0) 1.7 points Recommendations for improvement are concluded using logical reasoning (justification) that were supported by course and research material but 1 to 2 minor areas in the discussion were underdeveloped because of missing connections between either structure or culture (1.6-1.799) 1.5 points Most recommendations for improvement are concluded using logical reasoning (justification) that were supported by course and research material with missing connections.(1.4-1.599) 1.3 points Attempt was made to make recommendations but most were missing; those presented were either unclear or implied; conclusions derived from logical reasoning supported by the facts, class material and research was minimal or not present.(1.2-1.39) 0 points (0- 1.19) / 2 / 2 * Criterion score has been overridden Analysis of reading materials for recommendations of how companies can move from bureaucratic to flexible companies and why it is necessary Add Feedback 1 point Analysis was insightful, comprehensive, and the reasoning justified the need for the recommendations given. All was supported by class material and research.(.90-1.0) 0.85 points .Analysis was, comprehensive, and the reasoning mostly justified the need for the recommendations given, but some aspects were underdeveloped. All was supported by class material and research. (.80-.899) 0.75 points Analysis was, general and the reasoning sufficiently justified the need for the recommendations given, but some most aspects were underdeveloped. All was supported by class material and research.(.70-.799) 0.65 points Attempt was made to justify recommendations made but those presented were either unclear or implied; those conclusions present were rarely derived from logical reasoning supported by the facts, class material and research or not present(.60-.699) 0 points Explanation was not made or minimal depth to the explanation leaving the impression of an incorrect or unsupported understanding of the concepts.(0-.59) / 1 / 1 * Criterion score has been overridden Outside Research Selection: materials used show academic validity and are appropriate for the topic intended Add Feedback 1 point More than the required sources were used to support the ideas and conclusions drawn throughout the paper and they were of academic quality and demonstrated appropriate application to the topic under discussion. (.90-1.0) 0.85 points Required outside sources were used to support the ideas and conclusions drawn throughout the paper and they were of academic quality and demonstrated appropriate application to the topic under discussion(.80- .899) 0.75 points Required outside sources were used to support the ideas and conclusions drawn throughout the paper and they mostly were of academic quality and demonstrated appropriate application to the topic under discussion. . (.70-.799) 0.65 points Less than the required outside research source was used to support the ideas and conclusions drawn throughout the paper and/or the academic quality was not valid or failed to be appropriate to the topic under discussion.(.60-.699) 0 points No outside reference material was used.(0- .599) / 1 / 1 * Criterion score has been overridden Writing Mechanics Add Feedback 0.5 points Strictly adheres to standard usage rules of written English using paragraphs and sentence rather than bullets, including but not limited to capitalization, punctuation, run-on sentences, missing or extra words, stylistic errors, spelling and grammatical errors. No contractions or jargon used. 0 to 2 errors noted.(.45-.50) 0.425 points Excellently adheres to standard usage of mechanics: conventions of written English, including capitalization, punctuation, and spelling. 3 to 6 errors noted.(.40-.449) 0.375 points Satisfactorily adheres to standard usage rules of mechanics: conventions of English, including capitalization, punctuation, and spelling. 7 to 10 errors noted.(.35-.399) 0.325 points Minimally adheres to standard usage rules of mechanics: conventions of written English, including capitalization, punctuation, and spelling. More than 10 errors found.(.30-.349) 0 points Does not adhere to standard usage rules of mechanics: conventions of written English largely incomprehensible; or errors are too plentiful to count.(0-.299) / 0.5 / 0.5 * Criterion score has been overridden APA Style (7th ed.) Add Feedback 0.5 points One to 2 APA style or usage errors; Proper citation of source material is used throughout paper; Reference titles follow APA with only the first word, the first word after a colon and proper nouns capitalized.(.45-.50) 0.425 points Attempts in-text citations and reference list but 3 - 4 APA style errors noted or fails to use APA citations when appropriate 1-2 times.(.40-.449) 0.375 points Attempts in-text citations and reference lists; APA style errors are noted throughout document with 5-6 errors noted; Fails to use APA citations when appropriate 3 - 4 times in document.(.35-.399) 0.325 points Attempts in-text citations and reference lists; Fails to use APA citation when appropriate 5-6 times; Fails to use APA citations when appropriate 5-6 times in document or presents a total of 1-2 in-text citations and reference list in a paper when requires APA citations are needed throughout the document.(.30-.349) 0 points No attempt at APA style; or attempts either in-text citations or reference list but omits the other.(0-.299) / 0.5 / 0.5 * Criterion score has been overridden Rubric Total Score Total Total Score Clear Override / 10 / 10