Name: Case Study Title: Briefly What happened? Provide the article title, URL and a one sentence summary of the case. Key Stakeholders and how were they negatively impacted: [This does not need to be a complete list, just several major stakeholders (not stockholders, though the stockholders may be stakeholders). Briefly explain the relationship with the company – why they are stakeholders What was the final outcome? [prison, fines, termination, and for how many individuals] Describe why you feel the actions were morally wrong? [Be sure to use keywords describing your moral base (consequentialist, care, duty, act utilitarian, prima facie duties, etc.) and why your compass would justify classifying the action as morally wrong. Alternatively, discuss why you may feel the action was morally acceptable.] Put yourself in a position of leadership and describe what you would put in place that would have prevented this in the first place or keep it from happening again. Or, alternatively what rules would you implement to justify the action: Criteria Ratings Points Scholarly Tone and literature 35 to >32.0 pts Advanced Level one and two headings are coherently aligned with the theory and research and are supported throughout the body of the paper using scholarly literature and written in a scholarly tone. 32 to >22.0 pts Proficient Level one and two headings are coherently aligned with the theory and research and are mostly supported throughout the body of the paper using scholarly literature and somewhat written in a scholarly tone. 22 to >0.0 pts Developing Some headings are missing or are not coherently aligned with the theory and research and are not well supported throughout the body of the paper using scholarly literature. Lacks scholarly tone. 0 pts Not Present 35 pts Content 70 to >63.0 pts Advanced The theory and theorist are included. One theory is well-developed. An explanation for how the theory is appropriate for the research is clearly described. The author’s voice is heard throughout the paper. 63 to >58.0 pts Proficient The theory and theorist are included. One theory is mostly well-developed. An explanation for how the theory is appropriate for the research is mostly described. The author’s voice is somewhat heard throughout the paper. 58 to >0.0 pts Developing The theory and/or theorist are missing. The theory lacks development. An explanation for how the theory is appropriate for the research is vaguely described or missing. The author’s voice is vaguely heard throughout the paper. 0 pts Not Present 70 pts Current APA, Mechanics, Format & Length 45 to >38.0 pts Advanced Paper is free of mechanical and current APA errors. 100% of the length requirement is met. All five sources are peer-reviewed and clearly related to the topic. One source may be non-peer reviewed to account for the original theorist. 38 to >36.0 pts Proficient Few mechanical and ...

1. Name:
Case Study Title:
Briefly What happened? Provide the article title, URL and a one
sentence summary of the case.
Key Stakeholders and how were they negatively impacted: [This
does not need to be a complete list, just several major
stakeholders (not stockholders, though the stockholders may be
stakeholders). Briefly explain the relationship with the company
– why they are stakeholders
What was the final outcome? [prison, fines, termination, and for
how many individuals]
Describe why you feel the actions were morally wrong? [Be
sure to use keywords describing your moral base
(consequentialist, care, duty, act utilitarian, prima facie duties,
etc.) and why your compass would justify classifying the action
as morally wrong. Alternatively, discuss why you may feel the
action was morally acceptable.]
Put yourself in a position of leadership and describe what you
would put in place that would have prevented this in the first
place or keep it from happening again. Or, alternatively what
rules would you implement to justify the action:

2. Criteria Ratings Points
Scholarly
Tone and
literature
35 to >32.0 pts
Advanced
Level one and two
headings are coherently
aligned with the theory
and research and are
supported throughout the
body of the paper using
scholarly literature and
written in a scholarly
tone.
32 to >22.0 pts
Proficient
Level one and two
headings are coherently
aligned with the theory
and research and are
mostly supported
throughout the body of
the paper using scholarly
literature and somewhat
written in a scholarly
tone.

3. 22 to >0.0 pts
Developing
Some headings are missing
or are not coherently aligned
with the theory and research
and are not well supported
throughout the body of the
paper using scholarly
literature. Lacks scholarly
tone.
0 pts
Not
Present
35 pts
Content 70 to >63.0 pts
Advanced
The theory and theorist
are included. One theory
is well-developed. An
explanation for how the
theory is appropriate for
the research is clearly
described. The author’s
voice is heard throughout
the paper.
63 to >58.0 pts

4. Proficient
The theory and theorist
are included. One theory
is mostly well-developed.
An explanation for how
the theory is appropriate
for the research is mostly
described. The author’s
voice is somewhat heard
throughout the paper.
58 to >0.0 pts
Developing
The theory and/or theorist are
missing. The theory lacks
development. An explanation
for how the theory is
appropriate for the research
is vaguely described or
missing. The author’s voice is
vaguely heard throughout the
paper.
0 pts
Not
Present
70 pts
Current
APA,
Mechanics,

5. Format &
Length
45 to >38.0 pts
Advanced
Paper is free of
mechanical and current
APA errors. 100% of the
length requirement is
met. All five sources are
peer-reviewed and clearly
related to the topic. One
source may be non-peer
reviewed to account for
the original theorist.
38 to >36.0 pts
Proficient
Few mechanical and/or
current APA errors exist.
Length of the paper is
met by 90% to 99%. Four
sources are
peer-reviewed and
clearly related to the
topic. One source may be
non-peer reviewed to
account for the original
theorist.
36 to >0.0 pts

6. Developing
Several mechanical and/or
current APA errors exist.
Length of the paper is met by
less than 90%. Fewer than
four sources are
peer-reviewed. One source
may be non-peer reviewed to
account for the original
theorist. Some sources are
not clearly related to the
topic.
0 pts
Not
Present
45 pts
Total Points: 150
Theoretical Framework Grading Rubric |
EDUC850_B10_202240
1
IMPROVING STUDENT TEST SCORES
Recommendations for Solving the Problem of Low Test Scores

7. on the Ohio Educational Assessment for Science at Hampton
High School
Liberty Student
School of Education, Liberty University
In partial fulfillment of EDUC 850
Author Note
I have no known conflict of interest to disclose.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to
Student Name, 1971 University Boulevard, Lynchburg, VA
24515. Email: [email protected]
Theoretical Framework
The main purpose of the theoretical framework is to guide the
research and allow the researcher to focus on a specific goal
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). In addition, a solid theoretical
framework is used to identify the problem related to the
research topic, guide the development of the research questions,
and determine the best type of research method for answering
those questions. The theory used to explain this research was
the measurement of intelligence theory by Binet and Simon
(1916).
The measurement of intelligence theory by Binet and Simon
(1916) provides a framework and foundation for modern
standardized tests. The theory posits that intelligence cannot be
measured through a singular tool; rather, the broad nature of
one’s intelligence can only be fairly measured when compared
to others of similar backgrounds. In France, Binet was tasked

8. with identifying students that needed additional assistance in
their educational journey as compulsory attendance became
mandatory (Cherry, 2019). This led to the creation of the Binet-
Simon scale, which later became known as the Stanford-Binet
Intelligence Scale when it was standardized by Stanford
University psychologist, Lewis Terman (United States
Congress, Office of Technology Assessment, 1992). Because
many modern standardized tests are based on Binet and Simon’s
measure of intelligence theory and, likewise, the Stanford-Binet
Intelligence Scale, this theory is an appropriate choice for this
study which seeks to improve standardized assessment scores.
According to Bertolini et al. (2012), several factors impact
students’ performance on standardized tests. There are also
several strategies that may be implemented at various levels
within the structure of a school to help improve students’
performance on standardized tests (Education World, 2019;
Garcia & Thornton, 2014; National Association of Elementary
School Principals, 2011). This research sought to identify
themes related to the problem of students’ low-test scores on
the OEA for Science, which is a standardized test; thus, Binet
and Simon’s (1916) Measurement of Intelligence Theory is a
logical choice for this research.
References
Bertolini, K., Stremmel, A., & Thorngren, J. (2012).
Student achievement factors (ED569687)
. ERIC.
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED568687.pdf
Binet, A., & Simon, T. (1916).
The development of intelligence in children: The Binet-
Simon scale. Williams & Wilkins, Co.
https://doi.org/10.1037/11069-000
Cherry, K. (2019).
Alfred Binet and the history of IQ testing. Very Well

9. Mind. https://www.verywellmind.com/history-of-intelligence-
testing-2795581
Education World. (2019).
Boosting test scores: Principal strategies that work.
https://www.educationworld.com/a_admin/admin/admin366.sht
ml
Garcia, L. E., & Thornton, O. (2014, November 18). The
enduring importance of parental involvement.
NEA Today. http://neatoday.org/2014/11/18/the-
enduring-importance-of-parental-involvement-2/
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016).
Qualitative research: A guide to design an
implementation (4th ed.). Wiley Publishing.
National Association of Elementary School Principles. (2011).
Using student achievement data to support instructional
decision making.
http://www.naesp.org/sites/default/files/Student_Data_0.pdf
U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment. (1992).
Testing in American schools: Asking the right
questions. U.S. Government Printing Office.
EDUC 850
Theoretical Framework Assignment Instructions
Overview
Research is typically explained, or supported, by a theoretical
framework. The question to ask when writing the theoretical
framework is “how does the theory inform the problem?” The
information in the theoretical framework must present the
theory and theorist, coordinating concepts, and rationale for

10. utilizing the theory for the research with a clear connection
drawn between the theory and the proposed research.
Instructions
For this assignment, you will use the information from the
textbook reading to write a 1-2-page theoretical framework for
your research. Choose one theory to explain your research.
· The first page should be a correctly APA formatted title page
that includes the title of your study written as required in the
textbook and the applied research report. Do not title this
assignment “Theoretical Framework Assignment.”
· The second and third pages should be a well-written
theoretical framework for your research. This paper must have
level one and two headings. Include at least five peer -reviewed
scholarly articles using citations. You may not go over the two-
page limit, and you must meet the 1-2-page limit (within ¼ of a
page either direction). Your voice, as the researcher, must be
evident in the explanation of how this theory is appropriate for
your research. This must be submitted as one Word document.
· The last page must be the Reference page.
You must use the information from the textbook reading this
week to be successful on this assignment.
Note: Your assignment will be checked for originality via the
Turnitin plagiarism tool.