Paper Evaluation

How to Read a Scientific Paper BIOC/MCB 568 — Fall 2010 John W. Little and Roy Parker–University of Arizona Back to 568 home page Translation into Belorussian The main purpose of a scientific paper is to report new results, usually experimental, and to relate these results to previous knowledge in the field. Papers are one of the most important ways that we communicate with one another. In understanding how to read a paper, we need to start at the beginning with a few preliminaries. We then address the main questions that will enable you to understand and evaluate the paper. . How are papers organized? 2. How do I prepare to read a paper, particularly in an area not so familiar to me? 3. What difficulties can I expect? 4. How do I understand and evaluate  the contents of the paper? 1. Organization of a paper In most scientific journals, scientific papers follow a standard format. They are divided into several sections, and each section serves a specific purpose in the paper. We first describe the standard format, then some variations on that format. A paper begins with a short  Summary  or  Abstract. Generally, it gives a brief background to the topic; describes concisely the major findings of the paper; and relates these findings to the field of study. As will be seen, this logical order is also that of the paper as a whole. The next section of the paper is the  Introduction. In many journals this section is not given a title. As its name implies, this section presents the background knowledge necessary for the reader to understand why the findings of the paper are an advance on the knowledge in the field. Typically, the Introduction describes first the accepted state of knowledge in a specialized field; then it focuses more specifically on a particular aspect, usually describing a finding or set of findings that led directly to the work described in the paper. If the authors are testing a hypothesis, the source of that hypothesis is spelled out, findings are given with which it is consistent, and one or more predictions are given. In many papers, one or several major conclusions of the paper are presented at the end of this section, so that the reader knows the major answers to the questions just posed. Papers more descriptive or comparative in nature may begin with an introduction to an area which interests the authors, or the need for a broader database. The next section of most papers is the  Materials and Methods. In some journals this section is the last one. Its purpose is to describe the materials used in the experiments and the methods by which the experiments were carried out. In principle, this description should be detailed enough to allow other researchers to replicate the work. In practice, these descriptions are often highly compressed, and they often refer back to previous papers by the authors. The third section is usually  Results. This section describes the experiments and the reasons they were done. Generally, the logic of the Results section follows directly from that of the Introduction. That is, the Introduction poses the questions addressed in the early part of Results. Beyond this point, the organization of Results differs from one paper to another. In some papers, the results are presented without extensive discussion, which is reserved for the following section. This is appropriate when the data in the early parts do not need to be interpreted extensively to understand why the later experiments were done. In other papers, results are given, and then they are interpreted, perhaps taken together with other findings not in the paper, so as to give the logical basis for later experiments. The fourth section is the  Discussion. This section serves several purposes. First, the data in the paper are interpreted; that is, they are analyzed to show what the authors believe the data show. Any limitations to the interpretations should be acknowledged, and fact should clearly be separated from speculation. Second, the findings of the paper are related to other findings in the field. This serves to show how the findings contribute to knowledge, or correct the errors of previous work. As stated, some of these logical arguments are often found in the Results when it is necessary to clarify why later experiments were carried out. Although you might argue that in this case the discussion material should be presented in the Introduction, more often you cannot grasp its significance until the first part of Results is given. Finally, papers usually have a short  Acknowledgements  section, in which various contributions of other workers are recognized, followed by a  Reference  list giving references to papers and other works cited in the text. Papers also contain several  Figures  and  Tables. These contain data described in the paper. The figures and tables also have legends, whose purpose is to give details of the particular experiment or experiments shown there. Typically, if a procedure is used only once in a paper, these details are described in Materials and Methods, and the Figure or Table legend refers back to that description. If a procedure is used repeatedly, however, a general description is given in Materials and Methods, and the details for a particular experiment are given in the Table or Figure legend. Variations on the organization of a paper In most scientific journals, the above format is followed. Occasionally, the Results and Discussion are combined, in cases in which the data need extensive discussion to allow the reader to follow the train of logic developed in the course of the research. As stated, in some journals, Materials and Methods follows the Discussion. In certain older papers, the Summary was given at the end of the paper. The formats for two widely-read journals,  Science  and  Nature, differ markedly from the above outline. These journals reach a wide audience, and many authors wish to publish in them; accordingly, the space limitations on the papers are severe, and the prose is usually highly compressed. In both journals, there are no discrete sections, except for a short abstract and a reference list. In  Science, the abstract is self-contained; in  Nature, the abstract also serves as a brief introduction to the paper. Experimental details are usually given either in endnotes (for  Science) or Figure and Table legends and a short Methods section (in  Nature). Authors often try to circumvent length limitations by putting as much material as possible in these places. In addition, an increasingly common practice is to put a substantial fraction of the less-important material, and much of the methodology, into Supplemental Data that can be accessed online. Many other journals also have length limitations, which similarly lead to a need for conciseness. For example, the  Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences  (PNAS) has a six-page limit;  Cell  severely edits many papers to shorten them, and has a short word limit in the abstract; and so on. In response to the pressure to edit and make the paper concise, many authors choose to condense or, more typically, omit the logical connections that would make the flow of the paper easy. In addition, much of the background that would make the paper accessible to a wider audience is condensed or omitted, so that the less-informed reader has to consult a review article or previous papers to make sense of what the issues are and why they are important. Finally, again, authors often circumvent page limitations by putting crucial details into the Figure and Table legends, especially when (as in  PNAS) these are set in smaller type. Fortunately, the recent widespread practice of putting less-critical material into online supplemental material has lessened the pressure to compress content so drastically, but it is still a problem for older papers. Back to outline 2. Reading a scientific paper Although it is tempting to read the paper straight through as you would do with most text, it is more efficient to organize the way you read. Generally, you first read the Abstract in order to understand the major points of the work. The extent of background assumed by different authors, and allowed by the journal, also varies as just discussed. One extremely useful habit in reading a paper is to read the Title and the Abstract and, before going on, review in your mind what you know about the topic. This serves several purposes. First, it clarifies whether you in fact know enough background to appreciate the paper. If not, you might choose to read the background in a review or textbook, as appropriate. Second, it refreshes your memory about the topic. Third, and perhaps most importantly, it helps ou as the reader integrate the new information into your previous knowledge about the topic. That is, it is used as a part of the self-education process that any professional must continue throughout his/her career. If you are very familiar with the field, the Introduction can be skimmed or even skipped. As stated above, the logical flow of most papers goes straight from the Introduction to Results; accordingly, the pape r should be read in that way as well, skipping Materials and Methods and referring back to this section as needed to clarify what was actually done. A reader familiar with the field who is interested in a particular point given in the Abstract often skips directly to the relevant section of the Results, and from there to the Discussion for interpretation of the findings. This is only easy to do if the paper is organized properly. Codewords Many papers contain shorthand phrases that we might term ‘codewords', since they have connotations that are generally not explicit. In many papers, not all the experimental data are shown, but referred to by â€Å"(data not shown)†. This is often for reasons of space; the practice is accepted when the authors have documented their competence to do the experiments properly (usually in previous papers). Two other codewords are â€Å"unpublished data† and â€Å"preliminary data†. The former can either mean that the data are not of publishable quality or that the work is part of a larger story that will one day be published. The latter means different things to different people, but one connotation is that the experiment was done only once. Back to outline 3. Difficulties in reading a paper Several difficulties confront the reader, particularly one who is not familiar with the field. As discussed above, it may be necessary to bring yourself up to speed before beginning a paper, no matter how well written it is. Be aware, however, that although some problems may lie in the reader, many are the fault of the writer. One major problem is that many papers are poorly written. Some scientists are poor writers. Many others do not enjoy writing, and do not take the time or effort to ensure that the prose is clear and logical. Also, the author is typically so familiar with the material that it is difficult to step back and see it from the point of view of a reader not familiar with the topic and for whom the paper is just another of a large stack of papers that need to be read. Bad writing has several consequences for the reader. First, the logical connections are often left out. Instead of saying why an experiment was done, or what ideas were being tested, the experiment is simply described. Second, papers are often cluttered with a great deal of jargon. Third, the authors often do not provide a clear road-map through the paper; side issues and fine points are given equal air time with the main logical thread, and the reader loses this thread. In better writing, these side issues are relegated to Figure legends, Materials and Methods, or online Supplemental Material, or else clearly identified as side issues, so as not to distract the reader. Another major difficulty arises when the reader seeks to understand just what the experiment was. All too often, authors refer back to previous papers; these refer in turn to previous papers in a long chain. Often that chain ends in a paper that describes several methods, and it is unclear which was used. Or the chain ends in a journal with severe space limitations, and the description is so compressed as to be unclear. More often, the descriptions are simply not well-written, so that it is ambiguous what was done. Other difficulties arise when the authors are uncritical about their experiments; if they firmly believe a particular model, they may not be open-minded about other possibilities. These may not be tested experimentally, and may even go unmentioned in the Discussion. Still another, related problem is that many authors do not clearly distinguish between fact and speculation, especially in the Discussion. This makes it difficult for the reader to know how well-established are the â€Å"facts† under discussion. One final problem arises from the sociology of science. Many authors are ambitious and wish to publish in trendy journals. As a consequence, they overstate the importance of their findings, or put a speculation into the title in a way that makes it sound like a well-established finding. Another example of this approach is the â€Å"Assertive Sentence Title†, which presents a major conclusion of the paper as a declarative sentence (such as â€Å"LexA is a repressor of the  recA  and  lexA  genes†). This trend is becoming prevalent; look at recent issues of  Cell  for examples. It's not so bad when the assertive sentence is well-documented (as it was in the example given), but all too often the assertive sentence is nothing more than a speculation, and the hasty reader may well conclude that the issue is settled when it isn't. These last factors represent the public relations side of a competitive field. This behavior is understandable, if not praiseworthy. But when the authors mislead the reader as to what is firmly established and what is speculation, it is hard, especially for the novice, to know what is settled and what is not. A careful evaluation is necessary, as we now discuss. Back to outline 4. Evaluating a paper A thorough understanding and evaluation of a paper involves answering several questions: a. What  questions  does the paper address? b. What are the main  conclusions  of the paper? . What  evidence  supports those conclusions? d. Do the data actually  support  the conclusions? e. What is the  quality  of the evidence? f. Why are the conclusions  important? a. What questions does the paper address? Before addressing this question, we need to be aware that research in biochemistry and molecular biology can be of several different types: |Type of research |Question ask ed: | |Descriptive |What is there? What do we see? | |Comparative |How does it compare to other organisms? Are our findings | | |general? | |Analytical |How does it work? What is the mechanism? | Descriptive  research often takes place in the early stages of our understanding of a system. We can't formulate hypotheses about how a system works, or what its interconnections are, until we know what is there. Typical descriptive approaches in molecular biology are DNA sequencing and DNA microarray approaches. In biochemistry, one could regard x-ray crystallography as a descriptive endeavor. Comparative  research often takes place when we are asking how general a finding is. Is it specific to my particular organism, or is it broadly applicable? A typical comparative approach would be comparing the sequence of a gene from one organism with that from the other organisms in which that gene is found. One example of this is the observation that the actin genes from humans and budding yeast are 89% identical and 96% similar. Analytical  research generally takes place when we know enough to begin formulating hypotheses about how a system works, about how the parts are interconnected, and what the causal connections are. A typical analytical approach would be to devise two (or more) alternative hypotheses about how a system operates. These hypotheses would all be consistent with current knowledge about the system. Ideally, the approach would devise a set of experiments todistinguish among these hypotheses. A classic example is the Meselson-Stahl experiment. Of course, many papers are a combination of these approaches. For instance, researchers might sequence a gene from their model organism; compare its sequence to homologous genes from other organisms; use this comparison to devise a hypothesis for the function of the gene product; and test this hypothesis by making a site-directed change in the gene and asking how that affects the phenotype of the organism and/or the biochemical function of the gene product. Being aware that not all papers have the same approach can orient you towards recognizing the major questions that a paper addresses. What are these questions? In a well-written paper, as described above, the Introduction generally goes from the general to the specific, eventually framing a question or set of questions. This is a good starting place. In addition, the results of experiments usually raise additional questions, which the authors may attempt to answer. These questions usually become evident only in the Results section. Back to Evaluating a paper b. What are the main conclusions of the paper? This question can often be answered in a preliminary way by studying the abstract of the paper. Here the authors highlight what they think are the key points. This is not enough, because abstracts often have severe space constraints, but it can serve as a starting point. Still, you need to read the paper with this question in mind. Back to Evaluating a paper c. What evidence supports those conclusions? Generally, you can get a pretty good idea about this from the Results section. The description of the findings points to the relevant tables and figures. This is easiest when there is one primary experiment to support a point. However, it is often the case that several different experiments or approaches combine to support a particular conclusion. For example, the first experiment might have several possible interpretations, and the later ones are designed to distinguish among these. In the ideal case, the Discussion begins with a section of the form â€Å"Three lines of evidence provide support for the conclusion that†¦ First, †¦ Second,†¦ etc. † However, difficulties can arise when the paper is poorly written (see above). The authors often do not present a concise summary of this type, leaving you to make it yourself. A skeptic might argue that in such cases the logical structure of the argument is weak and is omitted on purpose! In any case, you need to be sure that you understand the relationship between the data and the conclusions. Back to Evaluating a paper d. Do the data actually support the conclusions? One major advantage of doing this is that it helps you to evaluate whether the conclusion is sound. If we assume for the moment that the data are believable (see next section), it still might be the case that the data do not actually support the conclusion the authors wish to reach. There are at least two different ways this can happen: i. The logical connection between the data and the interpretation is not sound ii. There might be other interpretations that might be consistent with the data. One important aspect to look for is whether the authors take multiple approaches to answering a question. Do they have multiple lines of evidence, from different directions, supporting their conclusions? If there is only one line of evidence, it is more likely that it could be interpreted in a different way; multiple approaches make the argument more persuasive. Another thing to look for is implicit or hidden assumptions used by the authors in interpreting their data. This can be hard to do, unless you understand the field thoroughly. Back to Evaluating a paper e. What is the quality of that evidence? This is the hardest question to answer, for novices and experts alike. At the same time, it is one of the most important skills to learn as a young scientist. It involves a major reorientation from being a relatively passive consumer of information and ideas to an active producer and critical evaluator of them. This is not easy and takes years to master. Beginning scientists often wonder, â€Å"Who am I to question these authorities? After all the paper was published in a top journal, so the authors must have a high standing, and the work must have received a critical review by experts. † Unfortunately, that's not always the case. In any case, developing your ability to evaluate evidence is one of the hardest and most important aspects of learning to be a critical scientist and reader. How can you evaluate the evidence? First, you need to understand thoroughly the methods used in the experiments. Often these are described poorly or not at all (see  above). The details are often missing, but more importantly the authors usually assume that the reader has a general knowledge of common methods in the field (such as immunoblotting, cloning, genetic methods, or DNase I footprinting). If you lack this knowledge, as discussed  above  you have to make the extra effort to inform yourself about the basic methodology before you can evaluate the data. Sometimes you have to trace back the details of the methods if they are important. The increasing availability of journals on the Web has made this easier by obviating the need to find a hard-copy issue,  e. . in the library. A  comprehensive listing of journals  relevant to this course, developed by the Science Library, allows access to most of the listed volumes from any computer at the University; a  second list  at the Arizona Health Sciences Library includes some other journals, again from University computers. Second,  you need to know the  limitations  of the methodology. E very method has limitations, and if the experiments are not done correctly they can't be interpreted. For instance, an immunoblot is not a very quantitative method. Moreover, in a certain range of protein the signal increases (that is, the signal is at least roughly â€Å"linear†), but above a certain amount of protein the signal no longer increases. Therefore, to use this method correctly one needs a standard curve that shows that the experimental lanes are in a linear range. Often, the authors will not show this standard curve, but they should state that such curves were done. If you don't see such an assertion, it could of course result from bad writing, but it might also not have been done. If it wasn't done, a dark band might mean â€Å"there is this much protein or an indefinite amount more†. Third, importantly, you need to distinguish between what the data show and what the authors  say  they show. The latter is really an interpretation on the authors' part, though it is generally not stated to be an interpretation. Papers usually state something like â€Å"the data in Fig. x show that †¦ â€Å". This is the authors' interpretation of the data. Do you interpret it the same way? You need to look carefully at the data to ensure that they really do show what the authors say they do. You can only do this effectively if you understand the methods and their limitations. Fourth, it is often helpful to look at the original journal, or its electronic counterpart, instead of a photocopy. Particularly for half-tone figures such as photos of gels or autoradiograms, the contrast is distorted, usually increased, by photocopying, so that the data are misrepresented. Fifth, you should ask if the proper controls are present. Controls tell us that nature is behaving the way we expect it to under the conditions of the experiment (seehere  for more details). If the controls are missing, it is harder to be confident that the results really show what is happening in the experiment. You should try to develop the habit of asking â€Å"where are the controls? † and looking for them. Back to Evaluating a paper f. Why are the conclusions important? Do the conclusions make a significant advance in our knowledge? Do they lead to new insights, or even new research directions? Again, answering these questions requires that you understand the field relatively well. Back to Evaluating a paper Back to outline Back to 568 home page [pic] BIOC/MCB 568 — University of Arizona http://www. biochem. arizona. edu/classes/bioc568/bioc568. htm Last modified August 18, 2010 All contents copyright  © 2010. All rights reserved. How to review a scientific paper? |Contents | |  [hide] | |1  Why me? | |2  Am I a suitable reviewer? | |3  How does the review process work? | |4  How do I start? | |5  What to look for? | |6  How to put it in words? | |7  What to recommend? | |8  How to approach a revision? | |9  I’ve done all this work†¦ what do I get out of it? | |10  Further reading | [edit]Why me? You may be surprised that you may be asked as a peer-reviewer for an authorative journal when you yourself are still a PhD-student and with a limited number of published articles. This does not make you an inappropriate reviewer. You may have been ‘found’ in several ways: 1. When submitting a paper, you will often be asked to fill out contact details and area’s of expertise and/or keywords. Journal editors can screen the journal database for potential reviewers with research expertise matching that of the paper. 2. You could have been requested as a reviewer by the submitting authors 3. You could have been suggested as a reviewer by another reviewer (when declining an invitation to review a paper, one is usually asked to suggest an alternative reviewer) or an editor may know you personally. 4. You could have been found based on previous articles you’ve published that were referenced in the submitted manuscript, or simply found on pubmed. [edit]Am I a suitable reviewer? If you seriously question your ability to review the manuscript, you should decline the review invitation. This may be because you are not familiar with the subject, because you are biased towards the submitted work (e. g. ecause of personal relations with the authors, or because the paper is highly competitive with your own work), or just because you feel too inexperienced. However, in the latter case, you may consider accepting the review and asking a more experienced colleague to assist you with the review. Also, it is an excellent way to learn how to peer-review an article by first assistin g colleague in their reviews. Please always keep confidentiality in mind. Contact the editor if you have any questions. [edit]How does the review process work? 1. The editor and ultimately editorial board decide on the fate of the manuscript. . After a manuscript is assigned to an editor, it is read by the editor and he or she decides if the paper is sent out for peer-review. Occasionally, a triage review is commissioned, where an external reviewer is asked for an opinion if the paper should be sent out for full review. 3. Reviewers are invited and receive an abstract of the manuscript. Usually, 2 or more reviewers are sought. 4. After acceptance of the invitation for review, reviewers receive the full manuscript. If a reviewer then discovers that he or she is not suitable after all, the invitation for review can still be declined. 5. The reviewers write their reviews. Usually, this consists of a) filling out a form with scores (for novelty, technical excellence, appropriateness of manuscript preparation, etcetera), b) comments to the authors, and c) comments to the editor. Typically, an advice regarding overall priority for publication and/or acceptance is asked for, which is blinded to the authors. 6. After the editor has received the reviewer comments, he may decide to commission another reviewer, particularly if reviewer opinions are contradictory or if there is a need for specific expertise, e. g. additional review by a statistical expert. . After all reviews have been completed, the editor and editorial board decide to either a. accept the manuscript, b. accept the manuscript after (minor) revision, c. reject the article, but invite to revise the manuscript, or d. reject the manuscript. 8. Note that an editor will generally reserve the right to edit your reviewer comments to the author. Over-enthusiastic com pliments may be removed if the editor eventually decides to reject the paper. Also, you may see that your comments the editor are also passed on to the authors if the editor feels this is appropriate. 9. If a manuscript is resubmitted after revision, it is usually resent to the original reviewers. [edit]How do I start? Before reading the manuscript, make sure you know the aims and scope of the journal. Read the manuscript and supplementary files for a first time, without spending too much time on details. Consider reading additional literature, such as relating articles by the same authors. Then re-read the manuscript in detail and try to follow the line of thought of the authors. Identify the hypothesis, key findings and assess if the (discussion of) the results adequately reflects back on the original hypothesis. Critically assess the methods and representation of data in the text, tables and figures. Draft a review. Re-read the manuscript and re-read you review. [edit]What to look for? Visit the journal’s website, where criteria for reviewers are commonly supplied. Also, see if there is a score-sheet as this will also tell you what the editors would like you to look for. As a general check-list, consider the following points (taken from the BMJ website): †¢ Is the paper important? †¢ Is the work original? Does the work add enough to what is already in the literature? †¢ Is there a clear message? Does the paper read well and make sense? †¢ Is this journal the right place for this paper? Scientific reliability: †¢ Abstract/summary — does it reflect accurately what the paper says? †¢ Research question — is it clearly defined and appropriately answered? †¢ Overall design of study — is it adequate? †¢ Participants studied   are they dequately described and their conditions defined? †¢ Methods — are they adequately described? For randomised trials: CONSORT Ethical? †¢ Results — does it answer the research question? Credible? Well presented? †¢ Usefulness of tables and figures? Is the quality good enough? Can some eliminated? Is the data correct in the tables? †¢ Interpretation and conclusions — are they warranted by and sufficiently derived from/focused on the data? Message clear? †¢ References — are they up to date and relevant? Any glaring omissions? [edit]How to put it in words? As a reviewer, it is your task to objectively assess the strengths and weaknesses in a manuscript, provide constructive criticism and list suggestions for improvement. It may help to organize your reviewer comments to the author as follows: – a brief summary of the findings in the article. This helps organize your own grasp on the data in the article. Also, it helps the associate editor and editorial board to understand the content of the manuscript. Finally, it shows the author that you have read and understood the manuscript. – consider giving a general comment on the article on e. g. novelty and overall impression of the data and manuscript preparation. -list major comments. Number them for clarity. Major comments are comments, questions and/or suggestions that are in your view essential points that need to be appropriately addressed for the manuscript to become acceptable for publication. list minor comments such as typographic errors or suggestions for additional non-essential data to be included. Also keep in mind: Be kind. Even a ‘bad’ paper has generally required substantial investment of time and effort by the authors. Do not be tempted by the reviewer anonymousity to make unkind remarks. Be fair. Try to be objectively critical. Do not hesi tate to identify flaws in the manuscript, but keep eye for balancing criticism with potential strengths of the manuscript, technical limitations and the nature of the journal. If you give criticism, also give a motivation, including literature references if applicable. Be concise. Be ‘action-able’. Providing practical suggestions for textual changes or additional experiments helps convey what you think would improve the manuscript better than simple criticism. [edit]What to recommend? You give advice to the editor regarding the manuscript and this advice generally includes an advice on how the paper should be handled. It is a misconception that reviewers decide if a paper is accepted: the editor and editorial board ultimately decide. This also means that it is essential to refrain from including an advice on acceptance or rejection of a paper in the review comments that are provided. Editors may edit your comments if you imply acceptance or rejection. Consider recommending a major revision if you feel the paper would become acceptable for publication if your suggestions are adequately addressed. If you feel that the manuscript would be insufficient for publication even after revision, e. g. based on limited novelty, rejection would be more appropriate. [edit]How to approach a revision? If a manuscript is returned to the authors with the invitation to resubmit after revision, you will commonly be asked to review the revised manuscript and author correspondence with replies to your comments. However, this is at the editor’s discretion. If you receive a revised manuscript, focus on the response to your own review and in principle limit yourself to the points you previously raised. See if the authors have satisfactorily addressed your comments. Check with your original comments to see if the authors have included all the points you raised. It is not good practice if you come up with new criticisms regarding points that you could have identified during your first assessment of the manuscript. Also, try to finish your re-evaluation with some priority as this is customary with resubmissions and will prevent excessive delay of anuscript publication. If you had numbered your major comments and had provided action-able suggestions, you will now appreciate the importance of doing so. [edit]I’ve done all this work†¦ what do I get out of it? Writing a good review takes costly time. However, there are several reasons why every researcher should write peer-reviews. First, for you as a researcher, you will find that participating in the reviewing process will increase the quality of your own work and likelihood of getting your articles accepted. You’re given an insider’s view of the reviewing process. Also, going through the process of peer-reviewing a manuscript and reading other reviewer’s comments, will help you critically assess your own manuscript more effectively. Second, for you as a researcher, building a track record of journals that request your services as a reviewer may be a component of your curriculum vitae. Also, a track record of good reviews will enhance your reputations with the editors. Third, as a reviewer, you’re given an early peak at novel unpublished data. This brings a major responsibility and breaching confidentiality to scoop a submitting author would be a serious offence. However, it may give an incentive to (re)direct your experiments so that you have a ‘head-start’ after eventual publication of the manuscript you’re reviewing. Fourth, writing a review means you are participating in the social culture of research. You are helping the editor that invited you. You are making peer-review possible for the submitting author and ultimately, you are enabling the continuing process of keeping a high quality level of science. Finally, invited editorial comments are often commissioned to reviewers that provided a good track record of peer reviews and showed profound insight in he reviewed manuscript. [edit]Further reading http://www. people. vcu. edu/~aslee/referee. htm http://www. medscape. com/viewarticle/409692_3 Uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. JAMA. 1997 Mar 19;277(11):927-34 Downloadable from e. g. [here] Home  Ã‚  Ã‚  About  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Cont act  Ã‚  Ã‚  Contribute  Ã‚  Ã‚  Feedback †¢ Log in / create account ? Research Topics ? Learning Resources ? Dutch Investigators ? Dutch Publications ? Clinical Trials ? Practical PhD guide ? Useful links pic] ? Online forum [pic] ? Agenda ? PLAN/Courses ? Newsletters ? Spotlights ? Photo Gallery ? Jobs/Trainees Top of Form [pic][pic]  Ã‚  [pic] Bottom of Form Supported by: [pic] [pic] [pic] | | | | ? About NIER ? Disclaimers ? Views: 5,040 ? Modified: 13:53, 26 January 2009. ? Hosted by Xentax Foundation |Reviewing a Manuscript | |for Publication | |Allen S. Lee | |Professor, Department of Information Systems   | |Eminent Scholar, Information Systems Research Institute | |School of Business   | |Virginia Commonwealth University | |http://www. eople. vcu. edu/~aslee/ | |Published as an invited note in | |Journal of Operations Management   | |Volume 13, Number 1 (July 1995), pp. 7-92. | |If you copy, download, or circulate this paper, please simply inform the author (at  [email  protected] mit. edu) | |that you are doing so. | |This paper is based on remarks that the author prepared for presentation at the New Faculty Workshop held at | |the 23rdAnnual Meeting of the Decision Sciences Institute in Miami Beach, Florida, November 22, 1991. |  Ã‚   | |[pic] | |Abstract | |This paper offers suggestions about how to review a manuscript submitted for publication in the fields of | |management information systems, organizational studies, operations management, and management in general. |Rationales for the suggestions and ill ustrative sample comments are provided. | |  Ã‚  Ã‚   | |[pic] | |Contents | |Abstract | |Action 1:  Ã‚  Ã‚   Start out with your own summary of the manuscript. | |Action 2:  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Let the editor and author know what your expertise does, and does not, cover. |Action 3:  Ã‚  Ã‚   Give â€Å"action-able† advice. | |Action 4:  Ã‚  Ã‚   Convince the authors by arguing from their own assumptions and framework. | |Action 5:  Ã‚  Ã‚   Provide both (1) your general, overall reaction and (2) a list of specific, numbered | |point-by-point comments. | |Action 6:  Ã‚  Ã‚   List the manuscript’s strengths. | |Action 7:  Ã‚  Ã‚   Quote, give the page number, or otherwise explicitly locate the parts of the manuscript to which | |you are referring. | |Action 8:  Ã‚  Ã‚   Offer comments on tables, figures, and diagrams. |Action 9:  Ã‚  Ã‚   Be kind. | |Action 10:  Ã‚  Ã‚   Be frank, in a tactful way, about your own emotional reaction. | |Action 11:  Ã‚  Ã ‚   Do some of your own library research. | |Action 12:  Ã‚  Ã‚   If rejecting the manuscript, suggest what future research efforts might examine. | |Action 13:  Ã‚  Ã‚   If recommending a revision, spell out alternative scenarios for how the revision could be done. | |Action 14:  Ã‚  Ã‚   Provide citations or a bibliography. | |Action 15:  Ã‚  Ã‚   Date your review. | |Why Review? |Conclusion | |  Ã‚   | |[pic] | | | |As management researchers, we regard the behavior of managers, systems professionals, and other organizational | |participants to be a manifestation of the values that they hold as members of their organization and their | |profession. In the same way, we may regard our own behaviors, as reviewers of manuscripts in the â€Å"double blind†| |reviewing process, to be a manifestation of the values that we hold as members of the community of scholars. As| |an author and editor, I have seen our community manifest the best and the worst of human values in the | |anonymous reviews offered on manuscripts submitted for publication. Some reviewers rise to the occasion and | |give extensive help, even though the anonymous reviewing process promises them nothing in return for their | |efforts. Other reviewers hide behind the anonymity of the reviewing process, offering negative remarks that | |they would not have the courage to voice in public. My immediate purpose is to offer suggestions, based on the | |reviews I have seen as an author and editor, about how to provide useful, kind, constructive, and responsible | |reviews of manuscripts submitted for publication. I offer these suggestions to my colleagues who review | |manuscripts submitted for publication in research journals in management information systems, organizational | studies, operations management, and other fields of management. | |1. Suggestions for Reviewing a Manuscript | |For many of the suggestions below, I offer sample comments to illustrate my points. I have based these comments| |on actual reviews. | |1. 1  Ã‚  Ã‚   Start out with Your Own Summary of the Manuscript | | | |As a reviewer for a manuscript, I was surprised, upon subsequently receiving the associate editor’s own review,| |to see that he began with a summary of the manuscript. After all, an author knows what his or her own | |manuscript is about, so why summarize it? | |Apparently, at least in this case, the summary was provided for the benefit of the senior editor, not | |necessarily the author. The associate editor’s review was, I realized, as much a recommendation to the senior | |editor as it was an explanation to the authors. Because a reviewer’s review is, in the same way, a | |recommendation to an editor, I have come to believe that a summary of the manuscript being considered is no | |less useful in the reviewer’s review. | |I now believe that an opening summary may also be useful to the manuscript’s author and to the reviewer himself| |or herself. For the author, how effectively the reviewer’s summary does or does not capture the gist of the | |manuscript may serve as one measure of how effectively the manuscript communicates its message. For the | |reviewer, the very exercise of composing a summary encourages and virtually assures a thorough reading of the | |manuscript. | |Opening summaries are also useful to the editor when the manuscript is controversial. Occasionally, as an | |editor, I have wondered if the different reviewers assigned to a controversial manuscript have actually been | |sent the same manuscript. An opening summary of the manuscript, presented from the reviewer’s own perspective, | |would be a big help to the editor when he or she is trying to reach a decision on a manuscript that evokes | |controversial reactions. |Some illustrative sample comments are: | |This paper represents a major effort to test two competing theories about user satisfaction with electronic | |mail†¦ The methodolo gy of the paper consists of†¦ The data were gathered from two field sites†¦ The major | |finding was that†¦ The contributions to theory and practice would appear to be†¦ | |  Ã‚   | |This manuscript pursues two somewhat conflicting goals. It attempts to†¦, while it also tries to†¦. The authors | |do a good job of the first one, but their treatment of the second one raises more questions than it answers. | | | |1.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Let the Editor and Author Know What Your Expertise Does, and Does Not, Cover | | | |By stating where you have expertise and, no less important, where you lack expertise, you will be helping the | |editor and author in their job of interpreting and weighing your comments. Reviewers, in voluntarily | |identifying where their expertise may be lacking with regard to the manuscript being reviewed, might even gain | |additional credibility for their claims about where they do have expertise. | |I read the paper from two perspectiv es: 1) someone who has employed the same methodology that the authors are | |using and 2) someone who is not familiar at all with the substantive area that the authors are investigating. | |My criticisms and suggestions are offered entirely from the first perspective. |For the reader, such as myself, who is unfamiliar with concepts X, Y, and Z, the authors present no helpful | |explanation of these concepts or justification for their inclusion in the study in the first place†¦Ã‚  Ã‚   | |  Ã‚   | |Another problem I had is that, probably like most of the people who read this journal, I am not deeply read in | |all three of the research fields that the authors draw upon. I cannot judge how well this paper builds on past | |research. | |   | |1. 3  Ã‚  Ã‚   Give â€Å"Action-able† Advice | |Advice stated in the form of do-able tasks is mutually advantageous to the author and the reviewer in the event| |that the editor asks for a revision. For the author, the advised actions point to a â€Å"fixed target† where he or | |she may aim the revision. For the reviewer, the advised actions (as further interpreted by the editor) may | |serve as the criteria on which to judge the revision. In contrast, a reviewer who offers vague generalities, | |and no action-able advice, in his or her first review would have no real â€Å"handle† with which to approve or | |disapprove the revision; such a reviewer might very well find a revision returning to â€Å"haunt† him or her. | |If my concerns can be addressed successfully in a revision, then I believe the paper should be published. I | |have four major concerns. They are†¦ | |  Ã‚   | |Therefore, I recommend rejection, but would be willing to review a revised version if (1) †¦Ã‚   and (2) †¦Ã‚   | |  Ã‚   | |The following suggestions are provided to improve the weaknesses pointed out above: | |Clearly state the objectives, contributions, and limitations of the study. | |Provide a definition of what you mean by Organizational Support System and use it consistently throughout the | |paper. | |Using this definition, narrow down the literature review. | |1.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Convince the Authors by Arguing from  Their Own Assumptions and Framework | |  Ã‚  Ã‚   | |A reviewer can always take issue with a manuscript’s assumptions and framework. However, disagreeing with the | |assumptions is not always an effective reviewing strategy because, strictly speaking, all assumptions are | |incorrect for what they assume away. An alternative strategy is to accept the manuscript’s assumptions (if only| |for the sake of argument) and then to point out any shortcomings in the manuscript by examining the | |consequences that follow from these assumptions. (Indeed, if the assumptions lead to no objectionable | |consequences, then the assumptions might not be bad assumptions in the first place.    By casting the review in | |terms of the authors’ own framework, the reviewer might then be more likely to convince the authors by courting| |and affirming the authors, rather than by disputing the authors. | |On the first page, the paper says that it will do the following†¦ The rest of the paper, however, does not | |follow through adequately on what it promised to do. In particular, according to the standards of the research | |framework that the authors themselves have chosen, the following things still need to be done or need to be | |done better†¦ Still, there is much potential value in what the paper initially proposed and I encourage the | |authors to flesh out the paper’s ide as more thoroughly. Along these lines, my suggestions are†¦ | |If the reviewer wishes to suggest a different framework and set of assumptions to the authors, this suggestion | |would be more convincing after the reviewer has demonstrated that he or she has given due consideration to the | |authors’ original framework, rather than dismissing it outright. | |1. 5  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Provide Both (1) Your General, Overall Reaction and (2) a List of Specific, Numbered Point-by-Point | |Comments | |  Ã‚   | |As an author, I have received some reviews consisting entirely of numbered, point-by-point comments that give | |the impression that the reviewer was simply typing up his or her review as he or she was reading my manuscript | |linearly, sentence-by-sentence, turning it page-by-page. Whereas such a review might be detailed and even | |exhaustive, I have found that such reviews sometimes negatively criticize me on matters that I actually address| |satisfactorily later in the manuscript. These reviewers do a good job of analyzing the words in my manuscript, | |but they appear to put no effort into discerning what I meant by these words. My impression has been that these| |reviewers considered the reviewing job to be a burden and just wanted to get it over. I have found that if | |there is no statement of an overall reaction from the reviewer, I am sometimes left wondering about what the | |reviewer really means. In fact, in this situation, I sometimes wonder if the reviewer himself knows what he | |means. For these reasons, I believe that a general, overall reaction or overview from the reviewer is needed as| |much as his or her specific, point-by-point comments. | |  However, there is at least one occasion in which a linear, sentence-by-sentence, and page-by-page reading | |might be useful. When I am a reviewer, I will occasionally amend my review by paging through the manuscript | |once more and enumerating, point-by-point, any comments which I had planned to make when I first read the | |manuscript, but which somehow did not make their way into the main body of my review. | |Numbering the major points in a review is helpful to the editor and author. For instance, an editor could then | |conveniently say to the author, â€Å"Pay particular attention to points 2, 3, and 5 by Reviewer 1. † | |1. 6  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  List the Manuscript’s Strengths | |  Ã‚  Ã‚   | |Perhaps the most disheartening review I have ever seen is one that began with the single-sentence paragraph, | |â€Å"There are several problems with this paper,† and followed with a numbered, blow-by-blow listing of all the | |alleged problems in the manuscript. An accompanying listing of the manuscript’s strengths would have made the | |review more palatable (and hence convincing) to the author. |   | |A listing of the manuscript’s strengths takes on added importance when the reviewer’s recommendation is that | |the manuscript should be rejected. Is there really nothing in the manuscript that would make it worthy of a | |revision? Making up a list of the manuscript’s strengths would help make sure that no stone is left u nturned. | |The major asset of this manuscript is that it presents a new approach to†¦This, in turn, raises interesting | |general issues such as: (1)†¦(2)†¦(3)†¦Ã‚   | |  Ã‚   | |Major strengths. |The objective of this paper is of high interest and use to IS managers. | |The authors are exceptionally clear about how this study builds on past studies. | |The methodology, while new to IS, is clearly explained. | |1. 7  Ã‚  Ã‚   Quote, Give the Page Number, or Otherwise Explicitly Locate the Parts of the Manuscript to Which You | |Are Referring | |This will pinpoint what you find difficult to understand, what you disagree with, or exactly what you believe | |needs to be changed. Moreover, if the author should disagree with your assessment, then the author may respond | |precisely to your objection. |In the third paragraph on page 9, it is not clear to me that the authors understand the concept of construct | |validity. | |  Ã‚   | |On page 3, in the literat ure review section, the paper says, â€Å"†¦only 12 percent of the past studies examined the| |same factors we will be examining in this study†¦. † Exactly which studies were these? I do not doubt your | |statement, but I would like to be able to evaluate it for myself. | |  Ã‚   | |On page 2, why does the prior research necessarily suggest that we need to study this topic, as you claim? | |1.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Offer Comments on Tables, Figures, and Diagrams | |  Ã‚  Ã‚   | |Because tables, figures, and diagrams often appear at the end of the manuscript, they often do not receive the | |attention they deserve. However, I believe that reviewing an illustration can be equivalent to reviewing a | |thousand words. Because illustrations are often overlooked in reviews, a detailed comment about an illustration| |might favorably impress the author and editor, suggesting to them that the reviewer is especially | |conscientious. Also, suggesting a new table, figure, or d iagram may encourage the author to sharpen his or her | |argument. | |Table 6 makes no sense to me. The labels along the vertical axis are mentioned nowhere in the text. | |I don’t understand the reason for including Figure 4. What is the relevance of the number of X broken down | |into three categories? | |1. 9  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Be Kind | |  Ã‚  Ã‚   | |There are tactful ways to express negative criticisms. For example, if you are unsure what the contribution of | |the manuscript is, say  Ã¢â‚¬Å"What’s new? †Ã‚  instead of â€Å"So what? †I believe that if the criticism cannot be stated in a| |kind and constructive way, then the criticism might not be worth stating at all. Also, unkind remarks in a | |review that is otherwise valid may create difficulties for the editor who would like to persuade the author | |that the review does have merit. | |1. 10  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Be Frank, in a Tactful Way, about Your Own Emotional Reaction | |  Ã‚   | |Some reviews tend to be dry. As an author and editor, I find that any hint or explicit statement about the | |reviewer’s feelings will help me to interpret what he or she means. | |I had a hard time making a recommendation on this manuscript . . . The paper is nicely written and competent, | |but dull. It is hard to get excited about the findings. | |I am very excited about this paper. At a recent conference a colleague and I were on a panel where we debated | |similar points†¦ | |1. 11  Ã‚  Ã‚   Do Some of Your Own Library Research | |  Ã‚   | |In my experience as an author and editor, I tend to give an extra measure of credibility to reviewers who have | |done some library or other research for their review. This effort makes the review appear sincere and | |convincing. A quotation from a book or article that the reviewer has looked up can be impressive. |On page 14, I was intrigued by the paper’s quotation of Carlson, so I decided to look up Carlson’s article. My | |interpretation of Carlson’s article is. . . | |1. 12  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  If Rejecting the Manuscript, Suggest What Future Research Efforts Might Examine | |  Ã‚  Ã‚   | |Our own behavior as reviewers in the â€Å"double blind† review process reveals our individual values, which may | |include adversarial values and collegial values. Rejecting a manuscript and offer ing only the reasons for | |rejection reveals a person who has no contribution to make to the overall community of scholars. Rejecting a | |manuscript, but also offering suggestions about what the author could pursue instead or pursue differently in | |future research, reveals a person who is integrated into the community of scholars and seeks to foster its | |growth. | |1. 13  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  If Recommending a Revision, Spell Out Alternative Scenarios for How the Revision Could be Done | |  Ã‚   | |Simply saying â€Å"this paper needs a good re-write† is not, by itself, helpful, especially if it is true. Often, | |there is more than one way to revise a manuscript. Suggest two or more scenarios, mention what you believe to | |be the advantages or disadvantages of each one, and leave the choice up to the author. | |1. 4  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Provide Citations or a Bibliography | |  Ã‚   | |A citation that the author finds helpful can be as valuable as a thousand or more words in the rest of the | |review. | |1. 15  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Date Your Review | |  Ã‚   | |As an author and editor, I do not apprecia te late reviews. Once, I noticed that a colleague of min e | |prominently displayed the current date at the top of a review that he was about to send in. He said that the | |date would let the authors of the manuscript know that, if the overall cycle time on their manuscript was | |excessive, he was not the cause. I also suspect that a date on a review can function as an incentive for | |subsequent participants in the review process to act on the manuscript promptly. | |2. Why Review? | |   | |I see four benefits to engaging in the effort of reviewing a manuscript submitted for publication. | |Benefits to the Reviewer in the Short Run  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Typically, a reviewer will receive the reviews by the other | |reviewers and the editor. Doing a review therefore confers an insider’s view of the reviewing process. The | |reactions of the other reviewers and the editor all contain potential lessons for one’s own manuscripts to be | |submitted for publication. In reviewing manuscripts, one also gains access to invaluable bibliographies. | |Access to these bibliographies is sufficient justification, in itself, to find the time to participate in the | |reviewing process. | |Benefits to the Reviewer in the Long Run  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Good reviewers are hard to find. A track record of good reviews | |will enhance one’s reputation with editors, who may then serve (if need be) as job contacts or outside | |reviewers in one’s tenure, promotion, and re-appointment process. In this regard, one’s performance in his or | |her review of a manuscript can be compared to one’s performance in a job interview. Good reviews can benefit | |one’s career. | |Benefits to Others  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Numerous people have helped me launch my career as an university teacher and researcher. | |When they ask me to review a manuscript for which they are the editor or track chair, I regard their request as| |an opportunity for me to return some of the help they have given me. In our research culture, doing a review | |of a manuscript is a socially significant gesture. | |Benefits to One’s Own School of Thought  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  As an author, I often have the experience in which reviewers, | |hostile to and ignorant of the research traditions that I embrace, misreview my submission. Therefore, | |whenever I find that I am a reviewer for a submission that falls in my own school of thought, I expend extra | |efforts to give it a careful, constructive review. Realizing that the refereeing process is political, I will | |do my best to be supportive and affirmingly critical, drawing attention to any major significant points in the | |submission and delineating in explicit, constructive, and â€Å"action-able† ways how the author’s research can be | |improved. As a result, the editor would, if necessary, have some â€Å"ammunition† with which to neutralize any | |hostile and ignorant reviews and thereby to justify a positive editorial decision on this submission. | |3. Conclusion | |No review of a manuscript must incorporate all the features I have described above. I am also confident that | |there are additional useful features I have not yet encountered. I have identified these features based on my | |own experience as a member of the management research community. I encourage my colleagues to do the same. | |Do actual instances of good reviews follow from rules for how to review a manuscript for publication, or do | |rules for ho

African American Gay Rights Essay

I cannot begin to argue about African American/Hispanic LGBT, living in New York City and their civil rights without remembering the public outcry against black civil rights. Although the focus of this paper is on African American/Hispanic LGBT living in New York City and Their Rights to Marriage I have decided to start my paper of by discussing the civil rights movement of the 1960’s. The civil rights movement of the 1960’s and the continuing struggle against race-based discrimination were rooted in the struggle against slavery. As early as the eighteen hundreds the United States legislative had laws known as segregation laws that limited certain freedom to them. They had to live in separate neighborhood, attend separate schools, drive in the back of public buses verses in the front where Whites were; African American would not dare go against these laws back then because if and when they did, they were unjustly imprisoned, beaten lynched and more for just trying to exercise human rights. In the 1960s African Americans led a fight to remove the legally codified vestiges of slavery from our constitution and from state and local laws. Most repulsive among these, were Jim Crow laws that required racial segregation; African Americans had to endure all these things until The Civil Rights Movement. The modern concept of civil rights was pioneered by African Americans in their long struggle to become full citizens of the United States. From the Civil Rights Movement to the Stonewall Riots of 1969 to May 17, 2004, the LGBTQ movement has made some tremendous gains into mainstream society, a reality that has not been afforded to African Americans. The African American Civil Rights Movement gave birth to many other civil rights movements in the 1960s. African Americans not only made new law, their success gave new hope. Among the many efforts sparked by the African American Civil Rights Movements were the efforts to end discrimination against women, Hispanic Americans, Native Americans, and Asian Americans, people with disabilities and lesbians and gays. Some African American still has one more river to cross because now African American LGBT are fighting a new civil war, the fight for same sex marriage; the right to be legally married. Currently, marriage has two distinct components: civil marriage and the religious ritual of marriage. Mixed-gender couples can have a civil marriage without the religious ceremony/ritual. Couples can have a religious ceremony/ritual, without a civil marriage. Some couples can choose both. However, to receive the legal protections of marriage, a couple must have a civil marriage, which is the only marriage that can be addressed by courts or legislatures. The LBGT believe that the rights and legal protections of civil marriage that are given to mixed-gender couples and families should also be extended to couples and families who are headed by same-gender couples. These include the rights of survivorship, inheritance, insurance, joint income tax filing, and a myriad of rights that many mixed-gender couples take for granted. For African American LGBT, state regulation has been particularly harsh. State sodomy law has had a way of preventing LGBT from acquiring some of the rights they are entitle to. Today, fewer than half the state has sodomy laws. LGBT recognizes New York City for being the birth place for many modern gay movements; however, New York has not yet passed any law giving LGBT legal protection and political support, (right to marriage being on of them). New York State gay rights bill, first introduced in 1971, still has not become law. While other states, like Vermont has established civil unions for LGBT, New York has not. Andy Humm writes that the biggest gay-related debate throughout the country right now is over government sanction of same-sex elationships. Vermont has gone the furthest, establishing â€Å"civil unions† for gay couples that confer almost all of the rights to which a married man and woman are entitled, though stopping short of full legal marriage. New Yorkers may travel to Vermont for the civil ceremony as of July 1, but there is some question as to what legal weight it will carry back home. The federal government enacted the â€Å"Defense of Marriage Act† (DOMA) in 1996 when it looked as if Hawaii might give same-sex couples marriage licenses. It barred federal recognition of legal same-sex marriages performed in any state and gave the other states the right not to honor such a contract. Thirty-two states have passed laws barring recognition of same-sex marriages performed in other states, even though no state or nation allows gay couples to obtain a marriage license. (Holland will likely be the first in 2001. ) A New York version of the Defense of Marriage Act is pending in Albany, but has not had a vote in either chamber. Bibliography Diane Silver et al. , The New Civil War: The Lesbian and Gay Struggle For Civil Rights (New York; New York:1997), 25-26 Andy Humm, â€Å"The State of gay rights in New York,† Available http://www. gothamgazette. com/iotw/gayrights/ (Accessed May 16, 2005).

Article Critique Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Critique - Article Example The food choices that people make decide how successfully the body handles all its functions and activities (Whitney & Rolfes, 2011, p.2). Hence, one can maintain healthy body by choosing nutritious food (Whitney & Rolfes, 2011, p.2). Sadly, the hectic nature of modern life has made people to ignore the quality of food they eat. The article â€Å"A diet for better energy,† written by Diana Rodriguez, is targeted at people who need high energy levels to fulfill the demands of hectic life. As the tips given in the article are precise and practical in nature, it is an excellent source of information and worth recommending to others. Reliability The article â€Å"A diet for better energy,† written by Diana Rodriguez is a reliable source of information. After reading the article, one can find various aspects and qualities which prove that the article is worth reading and reliable in nature. Some of the ways in which the article can be recommended as authentic and reliable ar e discussed below. It is not an Advertisement The first important aspect that shows that this article is not worthless is the fact that it is not written to advertise any product or a service. That is, it is not written with an intention to promote any nutrition product or food item. Also, there is no hint of any attempt at subtle advertisement as the article does not mention any names of the food brands or health services. The products or the food items that are mentioned, for example chicken, lentils, beans, fish etc., are general in nature and not branded. This shows that the article is authentic and not fake. Article is Reviewed The second reason why the article is reliable is that it is reviewed by a professional from medical field. The article is reviewed by Christine Wilmsen Craig, MD (Rodriguez). Christine Craig has a valid degree in medicine. Her medical degree and postdoctoral training has been earned from the University of Missouri-Columbia (Everyday Health para 11). When the article is reviewed by the professional in medical field, then it means that the information provided in the article is authentic and based on scientific research. Based on Expert Opinion The third reason for the article to be reliable source of information is that the article is written on the basis of interviews with people in the field of nutrition and diet. For example, the information about the foods that give prolonged energy level is based on the interview of Melissa Rifkin, who is a registered dietitian at the Montefiore Medical Center in the Bronx, N.Y. (Rodriguez para 5). Similarly, Suzanne Lugerner, RN, who is the director of clinical nutrition at the Washington Hospital Center in Washington, D.C., is consulted to gain information regarding the role of fluids in sustaining energy levels in human body (Rodriguez para 7). Later on in the article, the information regarding the healthy pattern of meals is provided after consulting Tara Harwood, a registered dietitian at the Cleveland Clinic in Ohio (Rodriguez para 10). In this way, all the important information regarding the diet and nutrition is based on information gathered from reliable sources, that is, from the professionals in field of diet and nutrition. Hence, the article is very reliable and authentic. Information Matches with the Reliable Source The information regarding the nutrients and its functions, given in the article, matches the information given in the book called

Corporate involvement in public shool such as snack vending machines Research Paper

Corporate involvement in public shool such as snack vending machines - Research Paper Example For example, before the advent of vending machines, employees used to leave their offices or workstations while students departed from the school’s main buildings in order to go and make a purchase of either cigarettes, snacks, lottery tickets, alcohol, or cologne from the small shops that were located within the vicinity, which were been manned by attendants or shopkeepers. However, with technological advancement and the subsequent development of vending machines, which dispenses such small products mentioned above after customers inset authentic money on the machine, it was no longer viable to establish or even maintain small shops around public places such as school or office compounds. The development of vending machines presented retailers with an opportunity to sell their assorted products at more convenient locations using branded vending machines, and according to Salyers, this has further provided retailers with an opportunity to market themselves in specific target m arkets (28-29). Because of this business interest, corporations have become more involved in the affairs of schools particularly because of their vending machine services, and this presents both negative and positive impact in public schools. Positive impact of the involvement of corporations in public schools

Discussion Questions Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words - 5

Discussion Questions - Assignment Example The first step in the selection process is the generation of a master jury list. Rules of membership of a jury are common in most states and include citizenship, majority age, sound health, and freedom from a felony charge. The clerk then selects part of the list, based on the rules, into the Venire and notifies the selected individuals to appear before the court. Some of the potential jurors may however not be summoned. The last step in the selection is the scrutiny of the proposed jurors for competence and lack of conflict of interest into bias. The stage is called Voir Dire (Gaines and Miller 326, 327). The decision on whether to charge an accused or not, and which charges to make, remains at the discretion of the prosecutor. The prosecutor may however consider existence of probable cause and the possibility of arguing a case beyond reasonable doubt as legitimate reasons for the decision to charge or not, and for the charge to make (Gaines and Miller 287, 288). Weight of evidence defines the degree to which evidence offered in a trial process is valid and convincing. Strong weight of evidence implies a strong argument while a weak weight of evidence implies evidence and arguments that leaves doubt. Weight of evidence is used in a criminal trial to inform juror’s decisions based on the doctrine of proof beyond reasonable doubt. A strong weight of evidence informs the jury high chances of decision for the argument towards a guilty charge. The jury, however, sometimes decides against weight of evidence (Erastus-Obilo 137). Circumstantial evidence is indirect evidence to a case at trial. The evidence may be used to establish likelihood of occurrence of an element of crime in order to support an claim but not to prove a fact. The type of evidence may also be used in a criminal trial, together with other substantial evidence, to establish a fact to the case (Gaines and Miller 334). I believe that the

Module 3 SLP - microbial metabolic and environmental growth Essay

Module 3 SLP - microbial metabolic and environmental growth - Essay Example Different microbial species present varying degrees of thermal stability of its proteins and enzymes (Brooks et al., 2007). Hence, microorganisms display different temperature ranges that are optimal for their growth and metabolism. Those organisms which grow best at low temperatures (15-20 OC) are called psychrophiles. Mesophylic groups grow best at 30-37 OC while thermophilic forms grow best at a temperature range of 50-60 OC. According to a study conducted by Radke-Mitchell and Sandine (1986), L. bulgaricus has an optimum growth temperature range of 43-46 OC. On the other hand, E coli grows best at 37 OC, similar to the normal body temperature (Don, 2008). This is not surprising because E. coli forms a part of the body’s normal bacterial flora (Don, 2008). The significance of maintaining a certain range of pH for bacterial metabolism and growth is demonstrated by the fact that hydrogen ion concentration influences the integrity and functions of proteins, and other biochemical processes (Campbell and Reece, 2004). The acidity and alkalinity of the environment also affects the availability of nutrients essential for the growth of microorganisms. Those species that grow best at a pH range of 6.0-8.0 are called neutralophiles. Meanwhile, microorganisms with optimum pH growth of 3.0 or lower are classified as acidophiles while those with optima at a pH of 10.5 or higher are called alkaliphiles (Brooks et al., 2007). Beal et al. (2009) reported that L. bulgaricus achieve its highest biomass in culture when maintained at pH 5.0. Cell viability was also noted to be at its peak at pH 5.0 (Beal et al., 2009). On the other hand, the optimum pH for growth of E. coli is 6.0-8.0 (York et al., 1984). The process of energy production, termed respiration, operates by virtue of electron acceptors. Oxygen serves as an electron acceptor in bacterial respiration (Brooks et al., 20097). Organisms which strictly require oxygen for its

E-commerce Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2500 words

E-commerce - Essay Example The changes brought about by the Internet have even broader implications. With the advent of Internet technology, every company becomes a global company, with the means and opportunity to buy and sell from, or strike an alliance with, any company, anywhere, anytime. This golden opportunity brings with it a level of complexity that surpasses anything that all but the most far-flung global enterprises have experienced to date. The recent explosion of information and information technology (IT) has induced corporate management to utilize its ingenuity in creating the best available means to manage the flow of information, control flow channels, and integrate the different assets (both hardware and software) of IT utilized by the different departments and divisions of the corporation. As companies invest heavily in information-based systems, they are vesting more (Cunningham 23-24). Like many processes, the design of a web site can be broken down into simple steps, and each step can then be further broken down in to tasks and actions. Most researches are based on the principle that most large projects can be reduced to ‘bite-sized chunks’, thus reducing the fear factor and avoiding the sense of being overwhelmed by the gargantuan nature of the task ahead (Coltman 57). Creating an action plan, setting achievable targets within sensible deadlines, and distributing responsibility appropriately, will ensure that the project moves forwards as smoothly as possible. There are four basic stages through which the planner has to move to create an effective project plan: awareness, familiarity, understanding and readiness (Eisenberg et al 38). The web is a publishing and communication medium, and as such it needs to be focused on the audience. As with any strategic development, the company should conduct some basic market research prior to the web site development. This will help keep the company planning process focused on the customer and demonstrate that the company is aware of the wider environment in which web site exists. There are many research tools and services on the web that can assist the company with this process (Eisenberg et al 49). When setting up a web site or e-business, the company should do as much research as it can to find out who is offering similar services on-line (and off-line). It is crucial to use search engines, company lists, newsgroups and word of mouth to get as much information on competitors as the company possibly can. Most importantly, the company should not stop researching once the e-company/dotcom is off the ground. It is important to carry on researching and refining (Nielsen 30). For organizations creating a new brand, or launching themselves on to the web for the first time, the selection of an effective domain name can be a difficult process. All the 'good' names seem to have gone, and the organization's preferred domain name might have been taken by someone with no apparent claim to that name (Lucas 98). Trademark and copyright issues aside, choosing a domain name is often simpler than many organizations think: the most important aspects are that it should be memorable, and easy to spell and type. Issues relating to brand reinforcement and literal, descriptive names are secondary, and can be dealt with by effective marketing and explanatory text on the web

Language and Literacy Programs Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Language and Literacy Programs - Essay Example 113). Skills based instruction then can be viewed as a bottom-up approach to language instructions, whereas whole language operates more from a top-down approach. There is a convergence of these programs in an approach referred to as ‘balanced literacy’. As the name suggests this approach combines word based instruction, with phoneme based skill tasks. 2. Within the context of the debate between whole language and skills-based instruction the term â€Å"principled eclecticism† is a significant concern. In this way principled eclecticism refers to the combination of word based modes of language instruction with skills based modes of language instruction. This approach has also been referred to as balanced literacy. This approach combines the best features of the two models. One considers that word based instruction may more functionally contribute to reader fluency as they allow the reader to engage in full sentence interaction. In this way this approach is impleme nted at end of lessons or for more fluent readers. This is then balanced with skills-based modes of instruction. This approach is effectively implemented for complex word forms, as well as beginning of lesson instruction. 3. There are a number of elements to a balanced literacy program. While there are a multitude of elements, this research considers three prominent approaches. One approach is the implementation of summarizing. Summarizing is firmly rooted in the word based mode of language instruction as it necessitates that students implement a top-down process of reasoning in synthesizing information (McGregor, p. 60). Another prominent approach is teacher-modeling. While this approach can be implemented for whole word formations, it is more prominently implemented in breaking down words phonemes so learners can practice literacy (McGregor, p. 60). A final component of a balanced literacy program is making inferences. Making inferences occurs as students attempt to determine the meaning of a word from its position in the context of a sentence (McGregor, p. 60). This approach is a word based component of a balanced literacy program in that the student is attempting to determine meaning from a complete word, as well as a larger sentence structure. 4. The role of the principal is a crucial feature of an exemplary reading program. The exemplary reading program is structured so that students who achieve a level of competency for their progress are recognized for their achievement. In this way the principal becomes a significant contributing force. Oftentimes exemplary reading programs issue certificates or awards based on the student’s progress. The principal will then sign this certificate as a means of authenticating the process, or call the student up in front of the classroom or school (Miller, p. 10). In this context the principal represents a significant authority figure through which the recognition contributes both to the student’s motivati ng and overriding self-esteem. 5. There are a number of concerns in establishing a reading program. One prominent concern is the nature of the students involved in the instruction. Students come from a variety of socio-economic backgrounds with a variety of skill levels. These factors influence the reading program as it may potentially be necessary to implement differentiated instruction in

How does cultural views impact on education Essay

How does cultural views impact on education - Essay Example Therefore, the purpose and principals must be maintained for success (Wilson, p. 16). There are also many democratic views that have much influence on the culture of successful schools. Parents must also be involved with the students and teachers in major decisions for progress to be made. Some parents are even invited to serve on the school decision making groups. Preparing the students for the world of democracy must be taken very seriously. Developing educational caring relationships within the educational establishments also creates a much healthier learning environment. Respect and responsibility are critical for establishing these kinds of relationships. Once a more personal relationship is created with the students and faculty, the learning process is always more understandable (Dorczak, p. 47). Many high schools have also been funded by organizations promoting better culture. These were just small contributions, but eventually led to much larger amounts of funding as a result of the success initiating culture the schools has for everyone. Even the large colleges were taking part in promoting better relationships in the classrooms and campuses. However, the relationships must also extend to the communities outside of the schools. Helping the communities in ways which are acceptable to the surrounding areas will create a positive image for the schools. Activities such as lending help with work tasks, aiding the elderly, homeless or disabled, and joining organizations which also pre-form many community helping events are all good ideas to improve the neighborhoods. A positive environment for learning is also created with culture, and creates a passion that makes individuals want to share their knowledge with friends and family. When this passion is created it can be released in many healthy ways such as simple

Narrowing Down of Gender Biased Disparities in US Federal and Civil services Essay Example for Free

Narrowing Down of Gender Biased Disparities in US Federal and Civil services Essay Narrowing Down of Gender Biased Disparities in US Federal and Civil Services The early 1970s witnessed a male dominant workforce in all departments of civil and federal services in the United States. Authoritative positions were held mainly by men. ‘Sex Based Glass Ceilings in the US State Level Bureaucracies 1987-1997’ written by Margaret Reed et al. (2004) has relevant data from the US Government offices. The authors analyzed the data and concluded that this gap has narrowed down significantly with women breaking the impediments in the glass ceilings prevalent in administrative positions. According to him, the glass ceiling is not that pervasive in distributive and regulatory agencies but very less pervasive in the services of redistributive agency which will be discussed later in this paper. Mani (2004) in his ‘Women in the Federal Civil Service’, analyses more about the influence of veterans preference to see if it stands as an impediment to women’s career in the federal civil services. Lewis and Oh (2008) exclusively discuss about the male-female pay differences in their paper ‘A Major Difference? ’ They deal effectively with pay disparities. For this, they makes an in depth study of different major subjects in colleges that brings a change in salary and administrative positions. He uses samples of different races, whites and blacks, and Hispanics in his analysis and proves that there is no disparity among races in terms of salary or status. All the three papers propose a common positive trend in women’s education level, salary, status, higher positions in civil and federal workforce. Each paper is exclusive in describing a unique sub-topic with significance and data analysis. Women are close to men in almost all departments thereby bridging the gender gap between 1990 and 2000. All the three papers with data show the disparities and gender differences between 1970 and 1990 that gradually reduced and the percentage variation is insignificant in the year 2000. Reed et al. ’s (2004) paper can be considered as a main discussion of the topic where he touches upon women’s employment, pay disparities and impediments to glass ceilings. Reed (2004) brings about the discussion on glass ceiling and glass wall that existed in three different agencies. The other two papers: ‘A Major Difference? ’ and ‘Women in the Federal Civil Service’ can be considered as a supportive or additional research without much contradictory opinions though each paper touches upon distinctive subtopics distinctively. The data analysis in all the three papers almost arrive at the same percentage of variation between men and women in salary, education in civil and federal workforce. All the three essays borrowed data from government offices like U. S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission EEOC national (data set for Sex Based Glass Ceilings in the US State Level Bureaucracies 1987-1997’), US Office of Personnel Management (data set for ‘ Major Difference’) and US Office of Personnel Management (data set for ‘Women in the Federal Services’) This data is useful in performing analysis of employees by job category, functional policy areas, salary levels, sex, number of male-female veterans, and male-female non-veterans. This data is not available in the open. It has been provided to the authors on request by the respective universities. This data helps to conduct Significance Test, Logistic Regression tests, Chi-square test and t test to come up with statistical evidence supporting their statements. Reed et al. (2004) use this data to arrive at ceiling ratios while discussing about pay disparities between male and female. When we discuss about gender disparities, or women’s impediments to acquire managerial positions, a common opinion is cited as a drawback in women: they are lack of commitment to affirmative action, lack of developmental assignments, gender biased organization cultures and stereotypes, outright discrimination, assuming leadership roles and welfare composition (Reed et al. 2004). Mani (2004) is also of the same view when he discusses about the reason for gender wage gap. According to him, sex discrimination in hiring and promotions, shortcomings in public policies and social changes played a major role between 1970 and 1990. While discussing pay disparities and acquiring higher positions that remain in disfavor of women, we need to consider that women were in the habit of selecting arts and social subjects in colleges that relatively fetched lower salary and lower administrative positions compared to men who were in the habit of selecting computer science, business and other professional studies. The second factor is that women are mostly connected with familial tie-ups and involved in childbearing, preferring to travel less, etc. automatically kept them away from competing with men for parity in pay or the highest positions in administrative levels. In 1990s, the above-said factors did not stand in the way of women to keep them away from competition. Many women started choosing professional colleges and decided to work in areas where men alone where dominant. Education played a major role in bridging the gap between men and women in pay disparities and higher positions in administrative levels. However, reaching top most authoritative levels was decided on various other factors that led to the disappointment of women. The percentage of gap un-bridged can be considered as due to the shortcomings in public policies and social changes as suggested by Mani (2004). Lewis and Oh (2008) in his exclusive study on pay differences, also attributes the unexplainable gaps in pay disparities to sexual discrimination and difference in government treatment of apparently compatible men and women. All three studies agree that this kind of partial treatment to women has reduced significantly and women are well placed in terms of education, pay, and administrative positions in the late 1990s. The percentage of development in every decade from 1970 is shown through analysis of data. Mani (2004) analyzes the influence of veterans in the civil life to see if it stands as an impediment to women’s opportunity of becoming a top level managers. Earlier in 1970s and 1980s there was considerable reason to believe that veterans had the advantage in federal civil service over non-veterans. The case started reversing in the 1990s with non- veterans getting more salaries and more job advantages. This is because, the women came stronger in studies in all departments. The growing number of women in public and their demands were heeded and respected by the government. The impediments came to a halt with the implementation of Equal Pay Act. Besides, George Bush signed Civil Rights acts of 1991 which allowed women to challenge unfavorable decisions in the bureaucracy and in the courts. Mani (2004) has ultimately concluded his views on veterans and their changing state is in the civil society with time. He proves with the empirical data that veterans no longer remain as an impediment for women in obtaining success in the civil and federal positions. Reed (2004) raises the question of women and their under representation as institutionalized democratic practices when it comes to high level positions. He used two models (i) socio-psychological model that emphasizes the importance of organizational culture that exclude women, and (ii) the systemic model that focuses on the distribution of power and opportunities available to women. Unlike Lewis and Oh (2008), and Mani et al. (2004), Reed (2004) gets into details of three different agencies and the opportunities and positions held by women in them. Regulatory agencies such as police are considered to be a male dominant workforces. Obviously, the presence of glass ceilings is more visible here. The redistributive agency includes management of public welfare programs, rehabilitation, public health services etc that involve more service related jobs where women are appointed traditionally at various levels. The glass ceilings are less pervasive in top administrative positions in redistributive agency. These disparities stated by Reed (2004) are narrowed down in 1990s. Distributive agencies involve construction, repair and administration of bridges, community development, etc in which men use to be dominant. The authors clearly observe the presence of glass wall and an impervious glass ceiling to get into top level management positions. Lewis and Oh (2008) do not segregate in detail, the three agencies via regulatory, distributive and redistributive agencies and so failed to categorize women where their representation, for example departments like police protection, fire, dept, etc was minimum. Without these information, one does not get to know that women are doing fairly well to reach management positions in redistributive agencies. From all the three papers, we understand that there is an increase in percentage of women in all positions of workforce. The empirical data suggests that the percentage increase is gradual from 1970 through the years and in 1995, women were earning about 89% of salary compared to men. Women too started obtaining higher degrees from colleges. Their presence was seen in many upper management positions. However women have not advanced into the highest and most prestigious positions in organizations. According to Reed (2004), the government is becoming creative in implementing strategies to reduce the gender gap but these efforts are not uniformly distributed in all the states. Many women, about 3 million, as teachers, are not included in the data considered for analysis. This is a significant population that chose teaching profession for convenience and so the percentage of variation in disparities between men and women could have been improved if this work force is distributed in other civilian jobs. The proportion of women in various jobs determines various other factors. Mani (2004) has disclosed the veterans and their status in the civil services after the post Vietnam war. His paper helps to understand how the early veterans without much education levels happened to claim up the ladder in civilian positions. We also come know of the rigorous training the veterans possessed to meet the requirements once they come out to the civil life. However, at a later stage, the non-veterans had the advantage over veterans by virtue of their higher education, experience in civil environment and the change of law that preferred veterans in selection procedures. The transition is shown with the help of data available from the U. S. Office of Personal Management Central Personal Data File (OPM CPDF). Comparison among male veterans, male non-veterans, female veterans, female non-veterans with and without considering sex aspect give a clear picture of preferences and impediments over the decades. The scenario in 1995 shows that the disparities among all the four groups have been settled in such a way that one group does not hinder the prospect of the other group while competing for civilian jobs and in promotions. There was a significant difference in salary between men and women after all the analysis conducted by Mani (2004). Like in other papers, Mani (2004) too agrees with sex discrimination, the shortcomings in the public policies and social changes that impact women’s career. But his opinion is slightly different compared to the other two: after 1998, there was still occupational segregation and salary disparities between men and women. The other two papers showed that much of the gender gap is narrowed down around 1999, whereas Mani (2004) still shows differences that requires rectification from the government side. All the three papers with data and analysis reveal the changes in social and cultural changes through the history of United States. All the three papers used more or less the similar data borrowed from the government departments. This can be considered as a major drawback in the results obtained. If each paper used a different data from different sources to conduct statistical analysis, it would have been more appealing. All the three papers do not consider or omit a few factors evenly while doing the analysis. For example, the 3 million teachers (Reed, 2004) avoided in one paper is a wise decision which is not found in the case of other two papers. All the three papers are trying to arrive at showing the percentage of gap narrowing down in disparities between male and female without considering similar factors in the analysis. This cannot be taken strongly for absolute results. However, the data from the government sources and its utilization in analyzing the subject to provide with statistics at various levels certainly convince the readers that there is improvement in lessening of glass walls and ceilings, equality in pay and acquiring top level management positions in the civil and federal workforce. References Lewis, B. Oh, S. S. , (2008). A Major Difference? Fields of Study and Male–Female Pay Differences in Federal Employment. Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University, Atlanta. Mani, B. G. (2004). Women in the Federal Civil Service: Career Advancement, Veterans’ Preference, and Education. Reid, M. (2004). Sex-based Glass Ceilings in US State-Level Bureacracies, 1987-1991. Administration and Society.

Child Observation Guidelines

Child Observation Guidelines Before an assessment of a child can take place to plan their learning and development, we need to observe them. Observation is vital for early years practitioners to find out what stage a child is currently at, what their needs are and what interests them. You can learn a lot about the children you work with simply by stepping back and watching them. This may at first seem to be a waste of time, but if you study the children, you are going to be more likely to meet their needs. Childcare workers automatically watch the children in their care they want to know that the children are safe, happy, healthy and developing well. Watching or observing closely can often reassure them that everything is alright but may also alert them to problems or illness. Any discussion about a child usually relates what has been seen , heard or experienced and leads to conclusions about personality , likes , and dislikes etc. anyone who works with children needs to develop the skill of observing them (some times to be written/recorded to check that a child is: Safe not in any danger from the environment, from themselves or others. Contented there are many reasons a child might be miserable , some may relate to physical comfort ( e.g. wet nappy , hunger , thirsty) or emotional discomfort (e.g. main carer is absent, or comfort object lost ) or lack of attention or stimulation. Healthy eats and sleeps well and is physically active (concerns about this may indicate that they are unwell) Developing normally in line with general expectations for his/her age in all areas, there will be individual differences but delays in any e.g. crawling/walking or speaking may show a need for careful monitoring and perhaps specialist help. Any particular strength or talent may also be identified and encouraged. observing is one of the most important daily aspects involved in childcare without observation the overall planning and assessment in the setting will be affected. Early years practitioners need to base their planning on their observations so without observations we cannot be entirely sure that overall planning will meet their needs. By carefully observing the children we can learn their needs and know when they are ready to move on to the next stage. By adapting experiences, routines and activities to include things that are particularly important to every individual child we can build on their attention span and curiosity. Likewise we can use observation to pinpoint areas where a child needs additional help. There are 5 main skills associated with effective observation. Looking we need to look at our children and analyse what they are doing and what responses to give in certain situations. Listening it is vital we pay attention to the children and listen to how they interact with both children and adults. Recording we should accurately record any important things in which we have observed. Thinking we must use our observations to think how to plan effectively for each child and maybe involve the childs parents for activity planning. Questioning sometimes our observations need to be clarified, confirmed or rejected. If the child is at an age to respond to questions you should involve them directly. Do not let preconceived ideas or assumptions cloud our observations, they must be done with an open mind and judgement of the child should not affect the way an observation is carried out. For example observing children in a group and in the past one child has had difficulty in mixing with others , do not let your past assumptions hinder the observation as it will be pointless to carry out any observation if you have already decided the outcome. 4.2 Main ways in which observations can be recorded. There are many ways in which observations can be recorded , each have advantages and disadvantages and most early years practitioners need to be familiar with several of these . The most frequently used recording methods are written notes such as Free description (also known as narrative description or written record) this method records the behaviour of a child over a very short period of time, often less than 5 minutes. The observer notes down what they are seeing which gives a portrait of the childs activity during this time. Checklists and kick charts these are mostly used to assess the childs development, specific activities are looked for either during a structural assessment (i.e. where a child is asked to do activities) or by observing children over a period of time. Time sample this is used to look at childrens activity over a predetermined length of time for example, a morning. Children are observed at regular intervals during the recording, say every 10 minutes and the observation is recorded on a prepared sheet. Event sample this is mostly used to look at a childs one aspect of development or behaviour, such as how frequently a child sucks their thumb or shows aggression towards other children. Every time a child shows the type of behaviour or activity it is recorded on a prepared sheet. Target child this is used to record one activity over a long period without any gaps in the recording process. Several codes or signs are used during this process to allow the observer to maintain the recording. Some methods of observing children provide more information than other methods that give plenty of info are referred to as open methods. For more objectivity closed methods are useful. A checklist is an example of a closed method of recording. With all these methods available for use whilst observing it is important that you choose one to suit your purpose. For example the free description method is good for examining closely how a child achieves. Something, but it will not tell you about a childs general activity over a long period. Other ways in which an observation can be recorded or by taking photographs of a child doing certain activities and catching developmental milestones, permission is always needed by the childs parents to allow photographs to be taken and also to use a video camera which can used to record development milestones or just to record an activity which the children are involved in so the childs parents/carer can also see the child doing the activity or milesto ne, as some parents dont like to miss out on anything. Whichever method of recording is chosen to be used, all observations must contain sufficient information so that they are useful and that they are understood by anyone else who may need to look at them. 4.3 Analyse the 3 types of planning that can be used in early years settings The observation, assessment and planning cycle assists early years practitioners to collate effectively the information they have gathered and to plan what to do next. There are 3 types of planning. Long term long term ensures the early years practitioners cover all the areas of learning and development and the principles of the early years foundation framework, the first of these frameworks published in England is called birth to three matters , this framework was published by the department for education and skills in 2002 and is for use by all professionals who are involved in the delivery or planning of services for young children in England. The pack comprises of an introductory booklet, poster, video, cd-rom, and 16 a4 component cards relating to four areas or aspects that have been identified as necessary for the development of all children. Long term planning enables the early years practitioners to think about the key areas necessary for supporting babies and young children and encourages them to consider ways to balance the opportunities for supporting older children which will enable them to enjoy both free play and well planned adult activities which will stimulate and interest them, long term planning needs to take into account how you will plan activities to ensure a suitable balance between indoor and outdoor experiences and quiet and active times, and needs to ensure a broad and balanced curriculum. A long term plan should usually cover a 3 month period, a term or a year; it should provide a curriculum overview. It should be based on principles of good early years practice; it should review what children need to learn and how this will be implemented. All areas of learning should be considered and that it meets the development plan or school improvement plan (sip) as required by Ofsted, it should relate to all policies and procedures of the setting and ensure advance planning and consideration of specific activities (e.g. festivals or outings ). Medium term this should outline an overall program over say, one to two weeks. Medium term planning take into account the overall daily routine early years practitioners, such as feeding time , school runs, playgroups, outdoor play, quiet time sleep or rest time and individual interaction . medium term plans will need to be adjusted constantly because it will be influenced by the observations made of individual children it needs to include reviews of care routines, key worker relationships and the way the day is organised to offer play and experiences including the materials and physical resources; whilst observing children, getting to know them and their characters, you need to match observations to your medium term plans. The staff planning together should look at how to create a rich learning environment which links the long term plans to each child as an individual. The medium term plan should grow gradually and must be flexible, open to changes and moderations and all observati on profiles of all the children need to be looked at. Many early years settings now target particular children on particular days. This means each child is observed regular and the curriculum is planned in a differentiated way to cater for the interests and needs of individual children. Short term plan this includes the day to day activities, outings, resources specifically relating to the children in the setting on a daily or weekly basis. It is often helpful to use observations of the children from the previous day to enable to focus on their specific needs and to build on what they have learnt for example, the children might have asked to bake, you will need to consider ingredients and equipment will be necessary and how much time is needed to complete the task. 4.4 describe why planning is essential in the early years setting Planning is key to the effectiveness of any early years settings. Settings plan curriculum in many different ways, most find a way of planning which suits their needs, plans will also vary according to the objectives or areas of development /learning to be considered. Each child will need to be considered and observed in order to be provided with appropriate activities and experiences in the setting. Good planning is essential if practitioners are to make childrens learning effective, exciting, varied and above all progressive. Planning enables us to look at each child individually and build on our knowledge of them in order to see how they learn, what motivates them and how they make progress. Plans dont often need to be written down although recording things provides us with future reference which can be shared with others. Written plans allow us to look back so we can plan for the future.by doing this we can plan activities in which they are suitable for what we know they can alre ady achieve and build on their interests and experiences, for example by constructing a written plan to help a child recognise the no 1-20 we would be able to see at the end of the long term plan, The child knows the name of the numbers The child can recognise the numbers in a variety of contexts The child can write the numbers successfully If at the end of the long term plan the child as reached all the goals set for them, then you know your planning has been effective. Effective planning is challenging but it is essential, it is not always easy for practitioners working alone to carry out observations of individual children when they are responsible for the care and safety of others. Observations need to be carried out regular and not just at set times you should be observing the children in your care all the time and noting how they react to certain circumstances and everyday occurrences. Keep a diary handy to jot down anything which you observe which is of particular interest or information which may help you plans for your childs development. 4.5 critically explore the importance of assessments Whilst assessments need to be handled extremely sensitively it can be a way of recognising whether children need additional support or challenges. They are also used as a way of learning more about groups of children so that the curriculum can be adjusted to meet their interests and needs. It is also important to realise that assessing children is not an exact science and we should see any assessment as only a guide. Young children are ever changing and their development and interests reflect this; but assessments are extremely important and have many uses To review and check childrens overall development To extend childrens learning To support special needs To resolve a particular concern To evaluate activities and experiences To review childrens progress To share with other professionals To share information with parents To help with planning To evaluate routine strategies to gather all the information to assess a childs needed to be observed. Although a lot is learnt from simply spending time and observing assessing what you have observed will enable you to deepen your understanding of what you have seen. There are no set ways in which assessments need to be written, although the following points should be considered, The assessment should be based on what you have recorded The link between the childs actual stage of development and expected stage are noted Supported evidence should be provided Your assessment will help you collate this information so that it can be used in effective planning. For observation and planning and assessment to be effective they need to be carried out regularly, you need to get into the habit of observing children on a daily basis and assess the observations to enable you to plan the next stage for every child in your setting. Records need to be kept for each child (in a form of diary or scrapbook) and ways of extending on what they can already do to get to the next level need to be looked at. The more practice you have at observing, assessing and planning, the better you will become until it becomes second nature to you.