©2014 Walden University 1 Academic Writing Expectations

©2014 Walden University 1
Academic Writing Expectations Checklist
The faculty Assessor will use this checklist to evaluate whether
your written responses adhere to the
conventions of scholarly writing. Review this checklist prior to
submitting your Assessment to ensure your
writing follows academic writing expectations. Click the links
to access Writing Center resources:
Sentence-Level Skills
Constructing complete and correct sentences
Note: See an explanation of sentence components and how to
avoid sentence fragments and run-ons.
Using and spelling words correctly
Note: See a list of commonly misused words and information on
MS Word’s spell check.
Using punctuation appropriately
Note: See the different types of punctuation and their uses.
Using grammar appropriately

Note: See a Grammarly tutorial to catch further errors.
Paragraph-Level Skills
Using paragraph breaks
Note: See a description of paragraph basics.
Focusing each paragraph on one central idea (rather than
multiple ideas)
Note: See an explanation of how topic sentences work.
Use of Evidence
Using resources appropriately
Note: See examples of integrating evidence in a paper.
Citing and referencing resources accurately
Note: See examples of citing and referencing resources in a
paper.
Paraphrasing (explaining in one’s own words) to avoid
plagiarizing the source
Note: See paraphrasing strategies.
Formatting Written Assignments
Using appropriate APA formatting, including title page,
margins, and font
Note: See APA overview and APA template from the Writing
Center.

Comments:
http://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/grammar/sente
nces
http://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/grammar/runo
nsentences
http://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/grammar
http://waldenwritingcenter.blogspot.com/2011/03/making-word-
work-for-you.html
http://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/punctuation
http://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/grammarly
http://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/paragraphs
http://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/paragraphs/top
icsentences
http://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/evidence
http://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/apa/citations
http://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/evidence/para
phrase/effective
http://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/apa
http://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/templates
What Is Test Reliability/Precision?
Chapter 5
What Is Reliability/Precision?
Measurement error: variations in measurement using a reliable

instrument.
Reliable test: is one we can trust to measure each person in
approximately the same way every time it is used.
2
Miller, Foundations of Psychological Testing, 6e. © SAGE
Publications, 2020.
If you need to provide additional explanations or tips for
instructors about the content of the slides, please do so here.
If your book has chapter learning objectives, reference the
objective that corresponds to this section of the text here.
2
Classical Test Theory
True score (T): is a measure of the amount of the attribute that
the test is designed to measure.
Random error: The second part of an observed test score
consists of random errors that occur anytime a person takes a
test (E).
3
Publications, 2020.
3

True Score
Random Error
Systematic Error
4
Publications, 2020.
4
The Formal Relationship Between Reliability/Precision and
Random Measurement Error
Parallel
Reliability coefficient: the correlation between the two sets of
test scores
5
Publications, 2020.

5
Three Categories of Reliability Coefficients
Test–retest method: a test developer gives the same test to the
same group of test takers on two different occasions.
Correlation: the scores from the first and second admini strations
are then compared.
Practice effects: occur when test takers benefit from taking the
test the first time (practice), which enables them to solve
problems more quickly and correctly the second time.
6
Publications, 2020.
6
Alternate-Forms Method
Alternate forms: the test developer creates two different forms
of the test.
Order effects: changes in test scores resulting from the order in
which the tests were taken.
Parallel forms: describes different forms of the same test.
7

Publications, 2020.
7
Internal consistency method: is a measure of how related the
items (or groups of items) on the test are to one another.
Split-half method: is to divide the test into halves and then
compare the set of individual test scores on the first half with
the set of individual test scores on the second half.
8
Publications, 2020.
8
Homogeneous tests: measuring only one trait or characteristic.
Heterogeneous tests: measuring more than one trait or
characteristic.

9
Publications, 2020.
9
Scorer Reliability
Scorer reliability or interscorer agreement: the amount of
consistency among scorers’ judgments
Intrascorer reliability: whether each clinician was consistent in
the way he or she assigned scores from test to test.
10
Publications, 2020.
10
The Reliability Coefficient
Adjusting Split-Half Reliability Estimates

Other Methods of Calculating Internal Consistency
11
Publications, 2020.
11
The Reliability Coefficient
Calculating Scorer Reliability/Precision and Agreement
Interrater agreement: an index of how consistently the scorers
rate or make decisions.
Intrarater agreement: when one scorer makes judgments, the
researcher also wants assurance that the scorer makes consistent
judgments across all tests.
12
Publications, 2020.
12

Interpreting Reliability Coefficients
Calculating the Standard Error of Measurement
Standard error of measurement (SEM): is an estimate of how
much the individual’s observed test score (X) might differ from
the individual’s true test score (T).
Interpreting the Standard Error of Measurement
13
Publications, 2020.
13
Interpreting Reliability Coefficients
Confidence Intervals
Confidence interval--a range of scores that we feel confident
will include the test taker’s true score.
14
Publications, 2020.

14
Factors That Influence Reliability
Test Length
Homogeneity
Test–Retest Interval
15
Publications, 2020.
15
Factors That Influence Reliability
Test Administration
Scoring
Cooperation of Test Takers
16
Publications, 2020.

16
Generalizability Theory
Generalizability theory: an approach to estimating
reliability/precision.
17
Publications, 2020.
17
PART 1
Read the attached powerpoint slides and Answer the following
questions. Minimum 300 words, must have in-text citation and
references in APA format

Test Reliability
Identify three tests that are of interest to you. These could be
tests that we have already discussed this semester, tests that you
will be taking and writing your summaries on, or tests that just
interest you! I would recommend choosing some of the
assessments that have been in existence and used for quite some
time because you will find more information readily available.
1. Search the Internet to find information about the reliability of
each test. Please be sure to reference any supporting journal
articles that have tested the reliability of the instruments you
have chosen.
2. Report the type of reliability testing conducted on the test
and the characteristics of the test takers in each reliability
study.
3. Write one paragraph explaining the similarity or difference
between the methods used to estimate reliability for each test.
4. Be sure to support your discussion with scholarly sources.
PART 2
Need responses for following discussion posts – minimum 150
words for each response and must have in-text citation and
reference in APA format
Response 1
We learned about reliability/validity and how test scores should
be consistent for this week's discussion. We rely heavily on
tests results to have precision and to trust the measurement of
each test user's approximate scores the same way every time it
is used (Lovler & Miller, 2020). Looking at different reliability
tests, I am intrigued to learn more about using the Spearman-
Brown formula, Cohen's Kappa, and standard error of
measurement. Different types of tests require strategic
calculations of the results and the ability to measure behaviors.

These are the three tests I found that I want to investigate
further.
Projective Tests- We all know about MBTI and its testing
ability when it comes to personality. Still, there is another test I
want to check, such as the Thematic Appreciation Test (TAT), a
projective measurement and technique intended to evaluate a
person's patterns of thought, attitudes, observational capacity,
and emotional responses to ambiguous test materials
(Encylopedia of Mental Disorders, n.d.). I looked this up and
found that it is widely used by practicing clinicians; however,
clinicians use different cards or a different number of cards.
This process makes it incredibly difficult to obtain reliability
and validity estimates and almost impossible to compare results.
(Cherry, 2020.)
Achievement Tests – Achievement/Motivation tests, such as
the Wechlar Individual Assessment test or the Ray Achievement
Motivation Scale, can provide insights on individuals'
achievement-orientated behaviors. Test users scores differently
depending on how motivated and the way they answer the
questions (Britt, 2012). What I like about these tests is that the
questions are opinion based and depending on the sequence of
the answers, the tests rate you on how far individuals are
achievers in life.
Neuropsychological Tests – These tests are specifically
designed tasks used to measure a psychological function known
to be linked to a particular brain structure or pathway. The Beck
Depression Inventory is a nominal scale measurement that rates
depression scores ranging from mood, self-dislikes,
indecisiveness, to loss of libido (Beck & Steer, 1984).
Reliability is likely due to how individuals are compared due to
their socioeconomic background and cultural differences. There
had been some consistencies among the users that found high
levels of depression (Beck & Steer, 1984). Validity is
questioned because of how the tests were distributed, the design
of the test, and the reconstruction of the questions.
Methods used to estimate reliability depends on how the

administrators design the test and when tests are administered to
the users. Results can also have many factors to form precision
outcomes of the tests depending on the errors of tests and the
reliability coefficients that can measure behaviors properly.
Reference
Beck, A.T., & Steer, R.A. (1984). Internal consistencies of the
original and revised beck depression inventory. Journal of
Clinical Psychology 40(6), 1365-
1367. https://web.a.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?v
id=10&sid=e28a4843-21f1-4b12-9608-acff691a2786%40sdc-v-
sessmgr03
Britt, M. (2012). Test reliability explained [Video]. YouTube.
Play Video
Cherry, K. (2020). Why Is the thematic apperception test used
in therapy? VeryWell
Mind.https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-the-thematic-
apperception-test-tat-2795588
Encyclopedia of Mental Disorders (n.d.) Thematic apperception
test. http://www.minddisorders.com/Py-Z/Thematic-
Apperception-Test.html
Miller, L. A., & Lovler, R. L. (2020). In Foundations of
psychological testing: A practical approach (6th ed., pp. 54–84).
SAGE.
Response 2
I have chosen to discuss and compare the reliability of the
following personality tests: DiSC, Big Five Personality Test
(B5T), and Meyers-Brigg Type Indicator (MBTI).
In a study conducted by Roodt (1997) on DiSC reliability and
validity, the test-retest method was used on 90 randomly-
selected employees from several companies in Kwa-Zulu-Natal
and Gauteng, South Africa. No further information is given on
the characteristics of the test participants in regards to the

actual study. The questionnaire given to the participants
consisted of 24 questions each with four options to select: the
respondents were instructed to select a response that most
closely resembled themselves and a response that was least like
themselves for each question (Roodt, 1997).
The reliability test conducted for B5T involved interscale
correlations (Satow, 2021), which measures internal
consistency. The test itself measures attributes by asking
similar questions in different ways about the same attributes.
Since the test is well-known, it has been taken many times by
many different people worldwide. For this study, test results
were taken and used from the online website Psychomeda from
the period of June 2019 to July 2020 (Satow, 2021). The test is
free and anonymous, and the sample size consisted of 21,048
records, with 13,123 female respondents between 20 and 30
years of age with high school diplomas and jobs (Satow, 2021).
Then, of course, this meant that the sample size of men
numbered 7,925.
Parallel forms were used to test the reliability of the MBTI. The
study consisted of mailing 2733 questionnaires to business
school alumni who were managers with postgraduate
management qualifications (Lamond, 2001). Of the 2733
questionnaires mailed, 523 questionnaires were received
(Lamond, 2001). Most of the respondents were born in
Australia, while three quarters of the respondents were male
with the modal age group being 40-49 years old (Lamond,
2001). Fifteen percent of the respondents were born in a non-
English speaking country, and 40% of the non-Australian born
respondents were Asian (Lamond, 2001).
In the DiSC study, Roodt (1997) applied the same instrument to
the same respondents at a later stage and then the correlation
scores were calculated. In regards to the reliability test
conducted in the B5T study, Cronbach’s scale was used for

interscale correlations with the reliability scores on each of the
personality attributes. Inter-correlation calculations were
conducted prior to the gathering of data from tests on the
Psychomeda website (Satow, 2021). Additionally, all statistical
calculations were conducted with the statistics program R, R
Core Team, 2020, version 4.0.3 (Satow, 2021). The reliability
of the MBTI was tested using two forms of the research
instrument: Form A for MBTI and Form B for the Managerial
Style Measure (Lamond, 2001). “To test whether the ordering of
the questions had affected the respondents’ answers to the
MBTI, the reliability of the MBTI was determined separately
for the two forms” (Lamond, 2001, p.19). Different reliability
tests were needed for each study due to the methods used and
the characteristics of the psychological assessments themselves.
The DiSC study involved the same companies which then
allowed the same respondents to participate, so it was feasible
to use the test-retest method. In the case of the B5T study, the
sample size was extremely large, and it was not possible to
perform the other reliability tests with random respondents’
data from the testing website. While both the test-retest method
and parallel forms could have been used to test the reliability of
the MBTI, the parallel forms method was more suitable given
the mode of administration- mail surveys- of the questionnaires
to a large pool of recipients.
Resources
Lamond, D. (2001). The Myers-Brigg Type Indicator: Evidence
of its validity, reliability and normative characteristics for
managers in an Australian context. Macquarie University.
Roodt, K. (1997). Reliability and validity study on the Discus
personality profiling system. University of South Africa.
Satow, L. (2021, January 31). Reliability and validity of the
enhanced Big Five Personality Test (B5T).
https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/wsugv

PermalinkShow parentReply
SL002: Hate Crimes: Analyze characteristics of hate crimes
against protected race, religion, disability, national origin,
sexual orientation, and gender categories.
Written Response Submission Form
Your Name: First and last
Your E-Mail Address: Your email here
Instructions
Write your responses where it reads “Enter your response here.”
Write as much as needed to satisfy the requirements
indicated. Each item contains the Rubric, which will be used to
evaluate your responses.
For this Assessment, you will examine four real life hate crime
cases in order to determine what characteristics make
each a hate crime. You will also examine the effects of hate
crimes, potential community responses, and how criminal
justice organizations can address the impact of hate crimes.
Item 1

Define hate crimes, generally. (1–2 paragraphs)
Your Response
Enter your response here.
Rubric
0
Not Present
1
Needs Improvement
2
Meets Expectations
Sub-competency 1: Analyze characteristics of hate crimes
against protected race, religion, disability, national
origin, sexual orientation, and gender categories
Define hate crimes,
generally. (1–2
paragraphs)
LO 1.1: Define hate crimes
Response is not present. Response is incomplete or
contains inaccuracies.
Response provides a
succinct and accurate
definition of hate crimes, as
defined in the United States
legal system.

Item 2
For each of the four hate crimes below, describe the specific
factors in each case that made it a hate crime. (1–2
paragraphs each)
• Matthew Shepard
• Charleston church shooting
• Private Barry Winchell
• Yusor Mohammad Abu-Salha, Deah Shaddy Barakat, and
Razan Mohammad Abu-Salha
Your Response
Rubric
0
Not Present
1
Needs Improvement
2
Meets Expectations

Sub-competency 1: Analyze characteristics of hate crimes
against protected race, religion, disability, national
origin, sexual orientation, and gender categories
Describe the specific
factors in each case that
made it a hate crime. (1–2
paragraphs each)
LO 1.2: Explain
characteristics of specific
hate crimes that make them
fit the legal definition of the
term
Response is not present. Response defines the
specific defining factors for
some, but not all, of the four
hate crimes, or response is
vague or contains
inaccuracies.
Response contains an
accurate and clear
explanation of the specific
factors that make each of
the four cases a hate crime,
as defined by the U.S. legal
system.

Item 3
Choose one of the four cases, and imagine it occurred in your
community. Describe the impact this hate crime might have
had on your community. In your response, consider other
members of the protected class as well as the community as a
whole. Then explain how the community should respond (e.g.,
with gatherings, town halls, educational programming,
volunteer work) and why. (3–4 paragraphs)
Your Response
Rubric
0
Not Present
1
Needs Improvement
2
Meets Expectations
Sub-Competency 2: Evaluate the impact of hate crimes on
communities
Choose one of the
four cases, and
imagine it occurred in
your community.
Describe the impact
this hate crime might

have had on your
community. In your
response, consider
other members of the
protected class as
well as the
community as a
whole. (2–3
paragraphs)
LO 2.1: Evaluate the impact
of hate crimes on
communities
Response is not present. Response is vague,
incomplete, or contains
inaccuracies.
Response clearly describes
potential impacts of the
selected hate crime on the
student’s community.
Includes effects on
members of the relevant
protected class and the
community as a whole.
0
Not Present

1
Needs Improvement
2
Meets Expectations
Explain how the
community should
respond (e.g., with
gatherings, town
halls, educational
programming,
volunteer work) and
why. (1 paragraph)
LO 2.2: Propose
community responses
to hate crimes
Response is not present. Response is vague or
suggested community
responses may not
appropriate or feasible for
the community.
Response provides a
succinct argument for
appropriate community
responses to the relevant
hate crime.
Item 4
Still imagining the crime occurred in your community, how
should the criminal justice organizations in your community

address its impact? (2–4 paragraphs)
Your Response
Rubric
0
Not Present
1
Needs Improvement
2
Meets Expectations
Sub-Competency 3: Propose strategies to prevent hate crimes or
address their impact
Still imagining the
crime occurred in
your community, how
should the criminal
justice organizations
Response is not present. Response is vague or
suggested strategies may
not be appropriate or
feasible for the community.
Response provides a
succinct argument for
appropriate criminal justice
responses to the relevant
hate crime.

0
Not Present
1
Needs Improvement
2
Meets Expectations
in your community
address its impact?
LO 3.1: Propose strategies
for criminal justice
organizations to address the
effects of hate crimes
Item 5
Identify three specific action items that could be planned or
done to prevent further hate crimes. (1–2 paragraphs)
Your Response
Rubric

0
Not Present
1
Needs Improvement
2
Meets Expectations
Sub-Competency 3: Propose strategies to prevent hate crimes or
address their impact
Identify three specific
action items that could be
planned or done to
prevent further hate
crimes. (1–2 paragraphs)
LO 3.2: Propose strategies
to prevent hate crimes
Response is not present. Response is vague,
inaccurate, or provides
fewer than three specific
action items.
Response provides a
concise explanation of three
specific action items that
could be planned or done to
prevent further hate crimes
in the community.

References
Provide a citation for each resource you used to write your
response to this Assessment. The following citation is provided
as an example:
• Chakraborti, N., & Garland, J. (2015). Hate crime: Impact,
causes, and responses (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Mastery Rubric
In order to achieve mastery of this Competency, you must
achieve a “2” on every rubric row in
addition to meeting the additional expectation indicated in the
Mastery Rubr ic.
Mastery Rubric No Yes
Exceeds Expectations: Solving Problems
Learning Objective: Having
selected from among
alternatives, recommends

logical and clear approaches
to solve problems
The written responses do not integrate
evidence-based approaches from relevant
academic and professional literature
related to responding to, addressing, and
preventing hate crimes.
The written responses integrate evidence-
based approaches from relevant academic
and professional literature related to
responding to, addressing, and preventing
hate crimes.
Professional Skills Building
The Faculty Assessor will provide feedback based on the
following Professional Skills: Engaging Multiple
Social and Cultural Perspectives, Information Literacy, and
Inquiry and Analysis. Although the feedback is
here to inform the development of your skills, it is not a barrier
to achievin g the Competency, unless the
writing is too poor to be able to score the content of the
Assessment. Review the rubric and check your
work based on the learning objectives listed. If you are
concerned that your writing will not meet these
expectations yet, reach out to your Faculty Subject Matter
Expert (SME) so he or she can work with you to

further develop this important professional skill.
It is highly recommended that you use this opportunity to
practice these important skills in the context of
this Competency Assessment in order to receive feedback about
your current level of proficiency.
Engaging Multiple Social and Cultural Perspectives: Apply
strategies to develop intellectual flexibility and
broad knowledge that enables perception of the world through
the perspectives of diverse social and cultural
perspectives.
0
Not Present
1
Needs Improvement
2
Meets Expectations
LO4: Evaluate competing
social and cultural
perspectives on specific
problems in order to arrive at
a solution
Evaluation is not present. Response provides an

incomplete evaluation of
perspectives and/or does
not offer a viable solution.
Response provides a
thorough evaluation of
differing perspectives and
is able to make a judgment
regarding viable solutions.
Information Literacy: Apply strategies to evaluate information
in order to effectively analyze issues and make
decisions.
0
Not Present
1
Needs Improvement
2
Meets Expectations
LO1: Identify and locate
credible sources
No sources or non-
credible sources are
present.
Sources are inconsistently
credible, appropriate, and
relevant to the topic and/or
assessment.

Sources are mostly credible,
appropriate, and relevant to the
topic and/or assessment.
LO2: Analyze
information sources
Analysis is not
present.
Analysis superficially applies
aspects of sources that are
most relevant to the topic
and/or assessment and/or
analysis is unclear.
Analysis thoroughly and clearly
applies aspects of sources that are
most relevant to the topic and/or
assessment.
Inquiry and Analysis: Apply strategies to identify, frame, and
evaluate issues and problems.
0
Not Present
1
Needs Improvement
2
Meets Expectations
LO1: Identify a problem

or question in a selected
area of study
No problem or
question is presented.
The problem or question is
vague or inappropriate to the
selected field of study.
The problem or question is clearly
stated in a form appropriate to the
selected field of study.
LO4: Apply organizing
principles and theoretical
approaches to identify
solutions to a problem
No attempt is made to
connect theories or
organizing principles
Connections between theories
or organizing principles
solutions to the problem are
vague.
Theories and organizing principles
are used to make connections,
identify gaps and/or provide

to solutions to the
problem.
evidence for showing solutions to
the problem or questions.

©2014 Walden University 1 Academic Writing Expectations

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to ©2014 Walden University 1 Academic Writing Expectations

Similar to ©2014 Walden University 1 Academic Writing Expectations (11)

More from LesleyWhitesidefv

More from LesleyWhitesidefv (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

©2014 Walden University 1 Academic Writing Expectations