IF-AT’s Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered...

52

TAGS:

Transcript of IF-AT’s Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered...

Page 1: IF-AT’s Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered after class – must provide.
Page 2: IF-AT’s Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered after class – must provide.
Page 3: IF-AT’s Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered after class – must provide.
Page 4: IF-AT’s Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered after class – must provide.
Page 5: IF-AT’s Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered after class – must provide.
Page 6: IF-AT’s Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered after class – must provide.

IF-AT’s www.epstienducation.com

Page 7: IF-AT’s Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered after class – must provide.

Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered after class – must provide specific evidence – only team that appeals

benefits when appeal is accepted

Page 8: IF-AT’s Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered after class – must provide.
Page 9: IF-AT’s Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered after class – must provide.
Page 10: IF-AT’s Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered after class – must provide.
Page 11: IF-AT’s Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered after class – must provide.

Simultaneous Reporting

Page 12: IF-AT’s Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered after class – must provide.

Applications and Reporting Options

Page 13: IF-AT’s Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered after class – must provide.

Simultaneous Reporting

Page 14: IF-AT’s Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered after class – must provide.

A pharmaceutical company wants to determine whether a sleeping pill is

effective. They randomly assign individuals either to take a sleeping pill or to

take a placebo. They compare the amount of time participants are asleep.

They hypothesize the sleeping pill group will sleep longer than the placebo

group.

a. Chi-square goodness of fit test

b. Contingency table analysis (chi-square test of independence)

c. This can’t be analyzed using a chi-square!!

Source: Marie Thomas

Page 15: IF-AT’s Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered after class – must provide.

A patient with a Brain Stem Stroke has collapsed a lung from intractable hiccups and feed-tube aspirates. He was admitted to intensive care to deal with the subsequent pneumonia. A few weeks later he is moved to a regular ward and the PRN order for Baclofen has expired (Baclofen, Gabapentin family of drugs - off label use to control intractable hiccups). The patient has begun to hiccup again and is growing increasingly distressed that nothing is being done. The patient’s wife has repeatedly come to the nurse’s station demanding action. It is Friday night of a long weekend and the doctor on call is not returning the page. The Doctor had made is very clear to the nurses, that he is not to be called. It appears to be a doctor oversight that it was not renewed. The wife persistently demands action and the nurse begins to cry. The head nurse intervenes. The head nurse should:

A. Do nothing, but continue to attempt to contact the doctor

B. Give the patient the pill and note it in the chart

C. Give the pill, chart it, and continue calling the doctor

D. Mark a pill as spoiled and leave it with the patient

Page 16: IF-AT’s Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered after class – must provide.

The blood was drawn from the men in the fed state. Which one of the statements below provides the best support for their being in the fed state?

A. Glucagon levels in the men are too high to indicate the fasted state.

B. Glucose levels in the men are the strongest indicators of the fed state.

C. The observed levels of liver synthesized plasma proteins albumin and transferrin are diagnostic for the fed state.

D. Low levels of free fatty acids and ketone bodies (acetoacetate and -OH butyrate) coupled with relatively high levels of insulin suggest the fed state.

E. The RQ near 1 rules out vigorous exercise and must be related to the fed state.

Page 17: IF-AT’s Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered after class – must provide.

Small Whiteboards

Page 18: IF-AT’s Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered after class – must provide.

A patient come into emergency with the following symptoms...

A. What is the first thing you would do? And why?

B. What is the first test you would order? And why? C. What would be the worst thing to do? And why?

Page 19: IF-AT’s Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered after class – must provide.

You are consulting for a new business owner who wants to open a dry-cleaning

store in Norman, Oklahoma. Where would you recommend locating a new

dry-cleaning business (and why)?

Page 20: IF-AT’s Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered after class – must provide.

Push Pin in Map

Page 21: IF-AT’s Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered after class – must provide.
Page 22: IF-AT’s Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered after class – must provide.
Page 23: IF-AT’s Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered after class – must provide.
Page 24: IF-AT’s Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered after class – must provide.
Page 25: IF-AT’s Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered after class – must provide.
Page 26: IF-AT’s Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered after class – must provide.
Page 27: IF-AT’s Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered after class – must provide.
Page 28: IF-AT’s Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered after class – must provide.

Excel - Part 1

Page 29: IF-AT’s Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered after class – must provide.

Excel - Part 2

Page 30: IF-AT’s Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered after class – must provide.

Excel Reporting

Instructor enters numerical positions then displays all at once

One page summary– principles and approach and not calculations (16 pt font or bigger)

AB C

D

E

F

G

-0.6

-0.4

-0.2

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

-0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2

NACA 3312 A

B C

D E

F G

Excel – Part 3

Page 31: IF-AT’s Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered after class – must provide.
Page 32: IF-AT’s Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered after class – must provide.
Page 33: IF-AT’s Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered after class – must provide.

The next example is from a course in earth and ocean sciences (Jones, 2009). The image on the left is the original data graphic provided to teams, and the image on the right is an overlay of the responses from two teams, each using their own color. Teams were required to interpret the data by identifying two linear features with lines and the location of one additional feature with a circle.

Page 34: IF-AT’s Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered after class – must provide.

Stacked Overheads

The image on the left is the original data graphic provided to teams, and the image on the right is an overlay of the responses from two teams, each using their own color. Teams were required to interpret the data by identifying two linear features with lines and the location of one additional feature with a circle.

Jones, 2009

Page 35: IF-AT’s Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered after class – must provide.

Hot Seat 1

Page 36: IF-AT’s Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered after class – must provide.

Hot Seat 2Pick Me or YouSpin for iPhone

Page 37: IF-AT’s Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered after class – must provide.

Hot Seat 3

Page 38: IF-AT’s Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered after class – must provide.

Gallery Walk 1Teams complete detailed worksheet

Page 39: IF-AT’s Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered after class – must provide.

Gallery Walk 2

Page 40: IF-AT’s Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered after class – must provide.

Google Doc and FormsStudent all enter data then instructor displays all

results at once

Page 41: IF-AT’s Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered after class – must provide.

Excel Chart Enter reported student values then display all at once

Page 42: IF-AT’s Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered after class – must provide.

Post-it note: Horse race

Page 43: IF-AT’s Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered after class – must provide.

Design Tournament

Page 44: IF-AT’s Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered after class – must provide.

Facilitation

Page 45: IF-AT’s Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered after class – must provide.

Structure of Application Activities

Page 46: IF-AT’s Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered after class – must provide.

Structure of Application Activities

Page 47: IF-AT’s Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered after class – must provide.
Page 48: IF-AT’s Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered after class – must provide.

Use pre-planned board plan to powerfully capture Application Activity

reporting discussion. This can be used for closure.

Page 49: IF-AT’s Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered after class – must provide.

Large Classes

Page 50: IF-AT’s Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered after class – must provide.

Team formation in large classes – use online survey and build teams from results – using nested sorting in Excel – actually same process as forming a line and counting

off, but electronic

Online Survey

Download results use Excel to build teams

Post teams and build classroom

map

Page 51: IF-AT’s Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered after class – must provide.

Use Barbara Millis team folders idea in large classes – makes handle of paper much more efficient – we ask

each team to send a representative to front of class to collect teams folder

Page 52: IF-AT’s Appeals Process – written scholarly argument, only from teams, and only considered after class – must provide.

Using classroom map so students know where to find their teammates – team of 6 in a tiered lecture hall gives the best team

shape


Scholarly Popular

Scholarly Popular

Scholarly Information New model for Brazil. Table of Contents Scholarly Communication today Scholarly Communication today Solution: Open Archives & Open.

Scholarly Information New model for Brazil. Table of Contents Scholarly Communication today Scholarly Communication today Solution: Open Archives & Open.

Scholarly Publishing 2.0

Scholarly Publishing 2.0

Future of Scholarly Publishing and Scholarly …...group on the future of scholarly publishing and scholarly communication were involved actively at every stage of the work. They chose

Future of Scholarly Publishing and Scholarly …...group on the future of scholarly publishing and scholarly communication were involved actively at every stage of the work. They chose

feATure > WH AT’S

feATure > WH AT’S

Launching a Scholarly Communication Department Launching a Scholarly Communication Department This work…

Launching a Scholarly Communication Department Launching a Scholarly Communication Department This work…

Scholarly communication & the blockchain · Outcome: Permissionless reuse and innovation of the scholarly metadata trail. Responsible, efficient governance of the scholarly metadata

Scholarly communication & the blockchain · Outcome: Permissionless reuse and innovation of the scholarly metadata trail. Responsible, efficient governance of the scholarly metadata

Scholarly Presentation

Scholarly Presentation

Scholarly Societies, Scholarly Publishing, and the New Information Ecology

Scholarly Societies, Scholarly Publishing, and the New Information Ecology

Scholarly Social - professional advice from people in scholarly communications and academic publishing

Scholarly Social - professional advice from people in scholarly communications and academic publishing

101 innovations in scholarly communication...101 innovations in scholarly communication: project overview & examples Fields: Scholarly communication Tools for research Research practices

101 innovations in scholarly communication...101 innovations in scholarly communication: project overview & examples Fields: Scholarly communication Tools for research Research practices

UNT Scholarly Works Laura Waugh Repository Librarian for Scholarly Works laura.waugh@unt.edu.

UNT Scholarly Works Laura Waugh Repository Librarian for Scholarly Works [email protected].

Scholarly Journal

Scholarly Journal

Scholarly Open Access - IPB Universitybiofarmaka.ipb.ac.id/biofarmaka/2015/Scholarly Open... · Scholarly Open Access Critical analysis of scholarly open‑access publishing LIST

Scholarly Open Access - IPB Universitybiofarmaka.ipb.ac.id/biofarmaka/2015/Scholarly Open... · Scholarly Open Access Critical analysis of scholarly open‑access publishing LIST

Scholarly Multimedia

Scholarly Multimedia

Embracing emerging opportunities in scholarly communication · Embracing emerging opportunities in scholarly communication Deborah Kahn, Publishing Director, Taylor & Francis Scholarly

Embracing emerging opportunities in scholarly communication · Embracing emerging opportunities in scholarly communication Deborah Kahn, Publishing Director, Taylor & Francis Scholarly

Fundraising Campaigns in Can ada Wh at’s New? Wh at’s Not ... · campaign fundraising continues to be alive and well in Canada today. Having said that, it would be fair to say

Fundraising Campaigns in Can ada Wh at’s New? Wh at’s Not ... · campaign fundraising continues to be alive and well in Canada today. Having said that, it would be fair to say

NEWSLETTER - Scholarly

NEWSLETTER - Scholarly

Here Comes the Sunburst: Measuring and Visualizing Scholarly Impact John Barnett Scholarly Communications Librarian Jennifer Chan Assistant Scholarly Communications.

Here Comes the Sunburst: Measuring and Visualizing Scholarly Impact John Barnett Scholarly Communications Librarian Jennifer Chan Assistant Scholarly Communications.

SCHOLARLY PROJECTS

SCHOLARLY PROJECTS