Date: 19.11.2017 / Article Rating: 4 / Votes: 682
Glb.cheapwritinghelp.changeip.org #Adjusting journal entries examples

Recent Posts

Home >> Uncategorized >> Adjusting journal entries examples

Write My Essay Online for Cheap - adjusting journal entries examples

Nov/Sun/2017 | Uncategorized








Four Types of Adjusting Journal Entries | Chron com

Adjusting journal entries examples

Order Custom Written Essays Online -
Adjusting entries — AccountingTools

Nov 12, 2017 Adjusting journal entries examples, pay for essay writing service -
Adjusting Entries | Types | Example | How to Record Explanation
Modern Love College Essay Contest. We’re inviting college students nationwide to open their hearts and laptops and write an essay that tells the journal entries, truth about what love is like for them today. A book of collected columns — “Modern Love: 50 True and Extraordinary Tales of Desire, Deceit and Devotion” — is available in paperback and e-book at online booksellers. In early February we asked college students nationwide to send us their personal stories of modern love. Five weeks later, nearly 2000 students from some 500 colleges and adjusting examples universities nationwide had answered our call. We are pleased to feature the writing of the winner and four finalists in leicester, the Modern Love column on the last Sunday of April and throughout May. Leading off is our winning entry by Malcolm Conner, a junior at journal entries, Trinity University in james wright, San Antonio, Texas. Many writers tackled politically charged subjects during this very political year. And Malcolm's essay did as well, exploring the complications and examples fears of a love between a transgender man and an immigrant Indian woman in Texas. Subjects tackled by other top finishers cover a broad range, from being gay in the Mormon church to playing the online dating game and from an Instagram-fueled identity to 3 tesco dealing with demisexuality. Congratulations to Mr. Conner and our other winners, and journal thank you to all who participated. — Daniel Jones. San Antonio, TX, Class of which was a in the reformation 2018. Elon, NC, Class of 2018. New York University. New York, NY, Class of adjusting journal 2017. New York, NY, Class of Our Individual Social 2017. University of Chicago. Chicago, IL, Class of 2017. Nick Rowan Bassman. Oberlin, OH, Class of 2017. Johnson County Community College. Overland Park, KS, Class of 2021. Penn State University. University Park, PA, Class of 2018. Middletown, CT, Class of 2020. Hanover, NH, Class of journal 2018. Previous Finalists’ Essays The 10 Best Modern Love Columns Ever » View all Modern Love columns » After a First Time, Many Second Thoughts. Learning to Embrace Sexuality’s Gray Areas. Swiping Right on da vinci's inventions, Tinder, but Staying Put. Even in Real Life There Were Screens Between Us. Eating the journal, Forbidden Ham Sandwich. A Love for the Ages but Which One? Stuck at the Border Between the Sexes. Want to Be My Boyfriend? Please Define. Instant Message Instant Girlfriend. My Dropout Boyfriend Kept Dropping In. Let’s Not Get to Know Each Other Better. The New York Times Modern Love College Essay Contest. NO PURCHASE NECESSARY. A PURCHASE OR PAYMENT OF ANY KIND WILL NOT INCREASE YOUR CHANCES OF WINNING. The “Sponsor” is The New York Times Company, 620 8th Avenue, New York, NY 10018. The New York Times Modern Love College Essay Contest (“the Contest”) is a skillbased competition in which participants will compete to be selected as author of the top essay, as selected by Sponsor. The author of the winning entry will be awarded $1,000.00 and his/her top essay will be published in The New York Times Sunday Styles section and on nytimes.com. Participants will be invited to submit essays, which will be voted on and rated by james, Sponsor. The Contest begins at adjusting journal entries, 10 AM Eastern on Friday, February 10, 2017 and ends at of the was a in the reformation, 11:59 PM Eastern on Sunday, March 19, 2017. The Contest will be conducted in two phases. During the first phase of the Contest (Phase One) contestants will be invited to submit their essays. The deadline for essay submissions is 11:59 PM Eastern on Sunday, March 19, 2017. During the second phase of the Contest (Phase Two) the submissions will be voted on and rated by the Judge. The voting will begin at 10 AM Eastern on Monday, March 20, 2017 and end at 11:59 PM Eastern on Monday, April 18, 2017. Daniel Jones, Editor, Modern Love, will serve as judge (“Judge”). Judge will select the Winner (as defined below) based on talent, writing ability, style, creativity and originality of adjusting entry. Deciding factors may include clear composition and relevant subject matter. The essay selected by Judge as the top essay will be the grand prize winner (“Winner”). Whether any essay is eligible at any stage shall be at Sponsor’s sole and absolute discretion at Comparing the Book Frankenstein, all times, including, without limitation, whether any such essay meets Sponsor’s standards of overall quality, as such quality standards are determined by Sponsor, in its sole and absolute discretion. The name of the entries examples, winner will be published on or around April 28th, 2017, in The New York Times Sunday Styles section and on nytimes.com. Odds of winning depend on the number of eligible entries received. As a condition of Contest entry, each Contest Entrant (as defined below) acknowledges and agrees that: (a) Sponsor has access to and/or may create or have created literary, visual and/or other materials, ideas and concepts which may be similar or identical to the Contest Entry Materials in adjusting, theme and/or other respects; (b) the Contest Entrant will not be entitled to any compensation or other consideration because of the use by Sponsor of any such similar or identical material, ideas and/or concepts; and (c) Sponsor’s use of material containing elements similar to or identical with those contained in french leicester, the Contest Entry Materials or any essay shall not obligate Sponsor to negotiate with nor entitle Contest Entrant to any compensation or other claim. Potential winner will be tallied by or about Monday, April 18, 2017. Potential Winner will be sent his/her prize-winning notification via electronic mail (e-mail) or by phone. A potential Winner has seven (7) days from receipt of notification to claim his/her prize by responding via electronic mail (e-mail) or an alternate Winner will be selected. Noncompliance with these official rules or, if a selected potential Winner cannot be contacted, provides incorrect e-mail or mailing address, is examples, ineligible, fails to claim a prize or if the prize notification or prize is returned as undeliverable, an alternate Winner will be selected. Acceptance of a prize constitutes permission for Sponsor to use Winner's essay, name and likeness for advertising and promotional purposes without compensation, unless otherwise prohibited by law. This Contest is open to legal residents of the 50 United States ([including] D.C.) who are current undergraduate students at least 18 years of age and older, residing in the United States and enrolled in an American college or university. Employees and agents of Sponsor, its affiliates, subsidiaries, advertising and promotion agencies, any other prize sponsor, and a blessing wright any entity involved in the development, production, implementation, administration or fulfillment of the Contest and their immediate family members and/or close personal friends and/or those living in the same household of such persons, whether related or not, are not eligible to enter the Contest. Employees, officers and directors of Sponsor (including Sponsor’s parent company, The New York Times Company (“NYTCO”)), their respective affiliates, subsidiaries, distributors, advertising, promotion, fulfillment and marketing agencies, their immediate families, (defined as spouse, child, sibling, parent, or grandparent) and those living in adjusting journal examples, their same households are NOT eligible to a blessing james wright participate in the Promotion. Each Winner will be required to execute a declaration of eligibility and adjusting journal examples liability release attesting that the Winner has complied with all the rules and that the Winner releases Sponsor(s) and all prize-supplier companies from all liability for damages or personal injury in connection with the Winner's use of the james wright, prize, and a publicity release consenting that the Sponsor and anyone they may authorize may, without compensation, use Winner's name, essay, photograph or other likeness, biographical information and adjusting examples statements concerning the Contest or the Sponsor for purposes of advertising and promotion. Any individual wishing to compete in the Contest must submit an essay of no more than 1700 words illustrating the current state of love and relationships, to essaycontest@nytimes.com (participants submitting essays are referred to as “Contest Entrants”). Submissions must include: Contest Entrant’s essay and adjusting journal entries contact information, including name, college or university name, home address, e-mail address and phone number. Each Contest Entrant may submit one essay during the Contest (an “Essay”). Essays must be received no later than 11:59 Eastern on entries, Sunday, March 19, 2017. Any elements appearing in submitted Essays must be entirely original, created by Contest Entrant, and must not have been altered in adjusting entries, any way from the original. Submitted Essays must not have been previously published nor can they be professional essays, or essays copied from the Internet. Use of a blessing any elements or other materials that are not original, or in the public domain may result in disqualification of adjusting journal entries examples Essay in Sponsor’s sole discretion. By entering, Contest Entrants accept and agree to be bound by journal examples, these Official Rules, including the decisions of the Sponsor, which are final and binding in which was a leader protestant, all respects. Limit one (1) entry per Contest Entrant and per email address. Any individual who attempts to Our Individual Social Responsibility Essay enter, or in the sole discretion of Sponsor is suspected of adjusting journal entries entering more than once, by any means, including but not limited to submitting multiple Essays, will be disqualified from the Contest. In addition Sponsor reserves the right to reject any submission without explanation. As conditions of entry into journal the Contest, each Contest Entrant: WARRANTS AND REPRESENTS THAT THE CONTEST ENTRANT OWNS ALL RIGHTS TO THE ESSAY HE/SHE IS SUBMITTING (COLLECTIVELY, THE “CONTEST ENTRY MATERIALS”). WARRANTS AND REPRESENTS THAT THE CONTEST ENTRANT HAS OBTAINED PERMISSION FROM EACH PERSON WHO APPEARS IN THE CONTEST ENTRY MATERIALS TO GRANT THE RIGHTS TO THE SPONSOR DESCRIBED IN THESE RULES, AND CAN MAKE SUCH PERMISSIONS AVAILABLE TO SPONSOR UPON REQUEST. WARRANTS AND REPRESENTS THAT HIS/HER CONTEST ENTRY MATERIALS ARE ORIGINAL AND HAVE BEEN LEGALLY OBTAINED AND CREATED, AND DO NOT INFRINGE THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS OR ANY OTHER LEGAL OR MORAL RIGHTS OF ANY THIRD PARTY. Irrevocably grants to Sponsor and its affiliates, legal representatives, assigns, agents and journal examples licensees, the worldwide, royalty-free, non-exclusive, sub licensable, unconditional, perpetual and transferable right and license to copyright (only as applicable), reproduce, encode, store, modify, copy, transmit, publish, post, broadcast, display, edit for length and content, publicly perform, adapt, exhibit and/or otherwise use or reuse (without limitation as to journal when or to the number of times used), the Contest Entrant’s name, address, image, likeness, statements, biographical material and adjusting entries Contest Entry Materials, including, but not limited to, the and Contrasting the Book and Play of Shelley's Frankenstein, Essays contained in any of the adjusting entries examples, above items, as well as any additional photographic images and other materials relating to the Contest Entrant and arising out of his/her participation in this Contest (with or without using the Contest Entrant’s name) (collectively, the “Additional Materials”) (in each case, as submitted or as edited/modified in any way, whether by the Sponsor, its Licensees, or assigns, in Social, the Sponsor’s sole discretion) in journal, any media throughout the world for any purpose, without limitation, and restaurant without additional review, compensation, or approval from the Contest Entrant or any other party. Irrevocably grants to adjusting journal entries examples Sponsor and its affiliates, legal representatives, assigns, agents and licensees, the worldwide, royalty-free, non-exclusive, sub licensable, unconditional, perpetual and wright transferable right and license to use the Contest Entry Materials for advertising, promotional or commercial purposes, including without limitation, the examples, right to publicly display, reproduce and distribute the Our Individual Social, Contest Entry Materials in any media format or medium and through any media channels. Contest Entrant’s name, essay and city of adjusting residence may be published on any NYTCO-owned website. Forever waives any rights of privacy, intellectual property rights, and any other legal or moral rights that may preclude Sponsor’s use of the of the following was a reformation, Contest Entrant’s Contest Entry Materials or Additional Materials, or require the Contest Entrant’s permission for Sponsor to use them for promotional purposes, and agrees to journal never sue or assert any claim against the Sponsor’s use of french restaurant those Materials. Acknowledges and adjusting journal agrees that: (a) Sponsor has access to and/or may create or have created literary, visual and/or materials, ideas and concepts which may be similar or identical to the Contest Entry Materials in theme and/or other respects; (b) the Contest Entrant will not be entitled to Comparing the Book and Play Version of Shelley's any compensation or other consideration because of the use by Sponsor of any such similar or identical material, ideas and/or concepts; and (c) Sponsor’s use of material containing elements similar to adjusting journal examples or identical with those contained in the Contest Entry Materials or any Essay shall not obligate Sponsor to negotiate with nor entitle Entrant to of the was a protestant any compensation or other claim. Agrees to indemnify and hold the adjusting entries, Sponsor and its affiliates, officers, directors, agents, co-branders or other partners, and french leicester any of their employees (collectively, the “Promotion Indemnitees”), harmless from adjusting journal entries any and which following leader in the protestant reformation all claims, damages, expenses, costs (including reasonable attorneys’ fees) and liabilities (including settlements), brought or asserted by any third party against journal any of the inventions, Promotion Indemnitees arising out of or in connection with: (a) any Contest Entry Materials or Additional Materials (including, but not limited to, any and all claims of adjusting entries third parties, whether or not groundless, based on the submission of such other material); (b) any breach by Contest Entrant of any warranty, agreement or representation contained in the Official Rules or terms of which was a leader in the service or in any documentation submitted by Contest Entrant; (c) the Contest Entrant’s conduct during and in connection with this Contest, including but not limited to trademark, copyright, or other intellectual property rights, right of publicity, right of privacy or defamation; or (d) the acceptance of any prize. All entries become the property of Sponsor and will not be acknowledged or returned. At any time during the Contest, Sponsor reserves the right, in its sole and unfettered discretion, to disqualify and journal examples remove any Essay that it believes does not meet the spirit or requirements of the james, Official Rules. The decisions of the Sponsor on this and all matter relating to journal entries examples the Contest are final and binding. Entries will be rated from March 20, 2017 to April 18, 2017. Daniel Jones, Editor, Modern Love, will serve as judge (“Judge”). Judge will select the Winner based on talent, writing ability, style, creativity and originality of entry. Deciding factors may include clear composition and relevant subject matter. The essay selected by Judge as the best essay will be the grand prize winner (“Winner”). The author of the Essay selected by adjusting, Judge as the top essay will receive $1,000.00 and restaurant his/her top essay will be published in The New York Times Sunday Styles section and on nytimes.com. Estimated value of a blessing james wright first place prize and the total prize package is $1,000.00. Four runners-up will also be selected. Select runners-up may also have their essays published in Comparing and Contrasting and Play Version of Shelley's, print and/or on nytimes.com. If Winner is unable to journal examples fulfill prize during time period specified, Winner forfeits the prize package. Winner must be 18 years of age or older. Prizes are non-transferable and shall be deemed to have no cash value. All unclaimed and/or unused prize packages may not be used as sales or trade incentives for employees of Sponsor, their agencies or clients. No prize substitution is 3 tesco, permitted, except by Sponsor, which reserves the right to substitute any prize of equal or comparable value including cash in the event of prize unavailability. Prizes are non-transferable. Prize consists of only the item specifically listed above. No substitution or transfer of prize is permitted, except that Sponsor reserves the right to substitute a prize of equal or greater value in the event that an offered prize is unavailable. All federal, state and local taxes on prizes are the sole responsibility of the Winner. Contest Entrant acknowledges and agrees that as a condition of adjusting journal entries being awarded a prize, Winner must sign and return, within seven (7) days following attempted notification, a standard release form. Noncompliance within this time period may result in , disqualification and an alternate Winner may be selected. Sponsor and its officers, directors, affiliates, related entities, partners, partnerships, principals, representatives, agents, licensees, sponsors, successors and assigns: (a) make no warranty, guaranty or representation of any kind concerning any prize; (b) disclaim any implied warranty; and (c) are not liable for injury, loss, or damage of any kind resulting from the acceptance or use of examples any prize, travel related thereto or from participation in this Contest. If any activity relating to restaurant any prize is adjusting examples, canceled or postponed for any reason, the balance of that prize will be awarded in full satisfaction of restaurant leicester prize award. All taxes, fees and surcharges on prizes won are the sole responsibility of the Winner. The Contest is governed by and subject to the laws of the United States. All federal, state and french restaurant local laws and regulations apply. Void where prohibited by law. All Winners will receive an IRS 1099 for the value of their prizes. By participating in the Contest and/or accepting any prize, Contest Entrants grant permission to Sponsor and its advertising and promotion agencies to 3 tesco use their name(s), likeness(es), essays and any other material submitted in connection with the Contest for purposes of advertising, publicity and promotion purposes, without further compensation to Contest Entrant, unless prohibited by law. By entering, the Contest Entrants agree to be bound by Our Individual Social Responsibility Essay, the Official Rules and the decisions of the Sponsor, which are final and binding on all matters relating to the Contest. Sponsor is not responsible for any typographical or other errors in the printing of the offer, administration of the Contest or the announcement of the prizes, or for lost, late, misdirected, damaged, incomplete or illegal entries. Sponsor reserves the adjusting journal examples, right at its sole discretion to disqualify the the witcher, Contest Entry of any individual found to be: (a) tampering or attempting to tamper with the entry process or the adjusting entries examples, operation of the Contest or any Sponsor website; (b) violating the Official Rules; (c) violating the da vinci's, terms of service, conditions of use and/or general rules or guidelines of any Sponsor property or service; or (d) acting in an unsportsmanlike or disruptive manner, or with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten or harass any other person. Further, Sponsor reserves the right to disqualify any entry which, in Sponsor’s sole opinion, is deemed to be offensive, libelous, slanderous, inflammatory, or otherwise inappropriate in any way for this Contest. CAUTION ANY ATTEMPT BY A CONTEST ENTRANT OR ANY OTHER INDIVIDUAL TO DELIBERATELY DAMAGE ANY WEBSITE OR UNDERMINE THE LEGITIMATE OPERATION OF THE CONTEST MAY BE A VIOLATION OF CRIMINAL AND CIVIL LAWS. SHOULD SUCH AN ATTEMPT BE MADE, SPONSOR RESERVES THE RIGHT TO SEEK DAMAGES FROM ANY SUCH PERSON TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW. Sponsor assumes no responsibility for any computer, online, telephone transmission or technical malfunctions that may occur during participation in the Contest (including, without limitation, the voting phases of the Contest), or theft, destruction or unauthorized access to, or alteration of, Contest Entry Materials. Sponsor is not responsible for any incorrect or inaccurate information, whether caused by website users, Contest Entrants, or any of the journal entries, equipment or programming associated with or utilized in the Contest, or for any technical or human error which may occur in a blessing, the processing of adjusting journal submissions or votes in the Contest. Sponsor assumes no responsibility for any error, omission, interruption, deletion, defect, delay in operation of adjusting entries transmission, failures or technical malfunction of any telephone network or lines, computer online systems, servers, providers, computer equipment, software, email, players or browsers, whether on account of technical problems, traffic congestion on leicester, the Internet or at any website, or on journal, account of any combination of the foregoing (including but not limited to any such problems which may result in the inability to access the Contest website or to submit Contest Entry Materials in connection with the Contest). Sponsor is not responsible for any injury or damage to participants or to any computer related to or resulting from participating or downloading materials in this Contest. If, for any reason, the Contest is not capable of running as planned, including infection by computer virus, bugs, tampering, unauthorized intervention, fraud, technical failures, or any other causes beyond the control of Sponsor which corrupt or affect the administration, security, fairness, integrity or proper conduct of this Contest, Sponsor reserves the Our Individual Social Responsibility Essay, right at its sole discretion to cancel, terminate, modify or suspend the Contest and select Winners from among that portion of the Contest that has not been compromised, if any. Sponsor reserves the right to cancel this Contest at any time without obligation or prior notice. Except where prohibited, as a condition of participating in this Contest, Contest Entrants agree that any and all disputes which cannot be resolved between the parties, claims and causes of adjusting entries action arising out of or connected with this Contest, any prize awarded, or the determination of which of the following was a leader in the protestant Winners shall be resolved individually, without resort to adjusting journal entries any form of class action. Further, in any such dispute, under no circumstances will Contest Entrant be permitted to obtain awards for, and hereby waives all rights to 3 tesco claim punitive, incidental or consequential damages, or any other damages, including attorneys’ fees, other than Contest Entrant’s actual out-of-pocket expenses (e.g. costs associated with entering this Contest), and Contest Entrant further waives all rights to have damages multiplied or increased. In the event of a dispute as to the identity of a Winner based on email address, the winning entry will be declared made by , the Authorized Account Holder of the email address submitted at time of entry. For purposes of these Official Rules, “Authorized Account Holder” is defined as the natural person who is assigned to journal entries examples an email address by an Internet access provider, online service provider or other organization (e.g. business, educational, institution, etc.) that is inventions, responsible for assigning email addresses for the domain associated with the submitted email address. All issues and examples questions regarding rights and obligations of Contest Entrants in connection with this Contest shall be governed by, and construed in accordance with, the laws of the 3 tesco, State of New York, U.S.A., without giving effect to the conflict of laws and rules thereof and any matters or proceedings which are not subject to arbitration as set forth in adjusting, these Official Rules and/or for entering any judgment on an arbitration award, shall take place in the State of New York. The parties waive rights to trial by restaurant, jury in adjusting entries, any action or proceeding instituted in connection with these Official Rules and/or this Contest. Any controversy or claim arising out of or relating to and Contrasting and Play Version of Shelley's Frankenstein these Official Rules and/or this Contest shall be settled by binding arbitration in journal entries, accordance with the commercial arbitration rules of the 3 tesco, American Arbitration Association. Any such controversy or claim shall be arbitrated on an individual basis, and shall not be consolidated in any arbitration with any claim or controversy of any other party. The arbitration shall be conducted in adjusting entries examples, the State of which of the leader reformation New York and judgment on the arbitration award may be entered into any court having jurisdiction thereof. By entering the Contest, you agree to Sponsor’s use of adjusting your personal information, as described in the Sponsor’s Privacy Policy, located at www.nytimes.com. For a copy of the Official Rules or the Our Individual, Winners’ names, send a separate, stamped, selfaddressed envelope to: The New York Times Modern Love College Essay Contest, 620 8th Avenue, New York, NY 10018. Requests received after June 1, 2017 may not be honored.

Write my essay for me with Professional Academic Writers -
Adjusting Entries Examples - YouTube

Nov 12, 2017 Adjusting journal entries examples, buy essays cheap -
Adjusting Journal Entries – Accounting In Focus
Peer Editing Worksheet Narrative Essay. NARRATIVE PEER EDITING WORKSHEET – SUNY OneontaNARRATIVE PEER EDITING WORKSHEET Reviewer’s Name Reread the rest of the adjusting journal, essay . Does the narrative focus on one main problem or event or incident? Peer Editing Worksheet II for restaurant leicester Narrative Common Task · DOC file · Web viewNarrative Essay Peer Editing Checklist The writer of the essay will turn this in adjusting journal examples, with his/her final Peer Editing Worksheet II for Narrative Common Task Personal Narrative Peer Editing Sheet – Weebly · DOC file · Web viewRead a partner’s Personal Essay rough draft and Social Responsibility Essay answer the entries, following questions to the witcher 3 tesco help your partner make necessary Personal Narrative Peer Editing Sheet PEER EDITING WORKSHEET: Narration · PDF fileList some details that enrich the narrative. Journal Examples! PEER EDITING WORKSHEET: Description 1. A Blessing James Wright! What is the essay ’s dominant impression or PEER EDITING WORKSHEET: NARRATIVE PEER EDITING WORKSHEET – Collin CollegeNARRATIVE PEER EDITING WORKSHEET . Journal Entries Examples! Your Name Author’s Name Date . Of The Was A Leader Protestant! Read your classmate’s essay through once quickly. … Peer-Editing Worksheet – La JollaPeer-Editing Worksheet: Classification and examples Division. Make an informal outline of the essay in the space below, and james wright consult it as you answer the adjusting examples, questions that follow. Peer Editing checklist for Narrative OR descriptive essay · PDF filePeer Editing checklist for of the in the Narrative OR descriptive essay Exchange papers with a partner to adjusting journal entries answer the following questions. Be generousPersonal Narrative – Peer Editing Checklist · DOC file · Web viewReturn the Social, paper and revise your own essay – it can always be improved! Title: Personal Narrative Personal Narrative – Peer Editing Checklist Narrative Essay Peer Editing Worksheet – zumbee.co.uk · PDF fileDownload and Read Narrative Essay Peer Editing Worksheet. writing sample answers atomic structure skills practice the journal entries, troupe kindle edition robert jackson bennett Narrative Essay Peer Editing Worksheet – mikkom.co.uk · PDF fileDownload Narrative Essay Peer Editing Worksheet Narrative Essay Peer Editing Worksheet Why should wait for Our Individual Responsibility Essay some days to adjusting journal examples get or receive the narrative essay peer. · DOC file · Web viewReturn the Our Individual Social Essay, paper and revise your own essay – it can always be improved! Title: Personal Narrative Personal Narrative – Peer Editing Checklist Peer-Editing Worksheet – La Jolla Peer-Editing Worksheet : Classification and Division. Entries! Make an and Contrasting the Book and Play of Shelley's Frankenstein, informal outline of the entries examples, essay in the space below, and of the following was a protestant reformation consult it as you answer the adjusting journal entries, questions that follow. Peer Editing checklist – Jimmie’s Collage · PDF file Peer Editing checklist name _____ essay topic _____ 1. A Blessing! Organization Introduction Introduction begins with an attention grabber Peer editing sheet for expository essay introduction and journal examples writing assignment or a narrative essay , a peer review sheet can be class just Editing Worksheet Informative Essay Peer Editing Worksheet Peer Edit Sheet for french restaurant leicester Personal Narrative Essay – Wikispaces · DOC file · Web view Peer Edit Sheet for adjusting entries Personal Narrative Essay . Author_____ Editor_____ Mechanics, Voice and leader in the protestant reformation Organization: Circle all spelling errors, run-on sentences Expository Essay Peer Editing Sheet – Shelby County … · DOC file · Web view Expository Essay Peer Editing Sheet Narrative essay peer editing worksheet – Lotus Blu HotelVocabulary the presence of racism in journal entries examples, hemingways novel e-classroom 2015 www narrative essay peer editing worksheet e-classroom co za Unit 1: A New Year – … College Essay Peer Editing – Montgomery County Schools · DOC file · Web view College Essay Peer Editing . Does the opening hook the james, reader? 5. Is there a smooth shift from the adjusting entries examples, narrative /opening idea and inventions the “leap”? 6. PEER EDITING WORKSHEETS – ROWENA’S WORLD · PDF file PEER EDITING WORKSHEETS What point is the writer making about the journal examples, essay ’s subject? PEER EDITING WORKSHEET : Argumentation 1. Peer editing sheet for narrative essay – sabahnp.orgDissertation binding zeros thesis quote essay reference apa format books sat essay outline pdf unlocked descriptive essay peer editing worksheet narrative Narrative essay peer editing worksheet – Lotus Blu HotelVocabulary the Our Individual, presence of racism in adjusting entries examples, hemingways novel e-classroom 2015 www narrative essay peer editing worksheet e-classroom co za Unit 1: A New Year – … Peer Editing checklist – Jimmie’s Collage. · PDF file Peer Editing checklist name _____ essay topic _____ 1. 3 Tesco! Organization Introduction Introduction begins with an adjusting, attention grabber Peer editing sheet for narrative essay – Valon ShqipjaPersuasive essay worksheet high school vocabulary georgetown supplement essay 2016 Our certified resume Related Post of of the following was a leader in the protestant reformation Peer editing sheet for journal entries narrative essay ; Peer Editing Worksheet II for of Shelley's Narrative Common Task · DOC file · Web view Narrative Essay Peer Editing Checklist **Note: Editing a writer’s work is a time consuming but important job. Please take your time with each of the following steps. Narrative Essay Peer Editing Worksheet – reedez.co.uk · PDF fileDownload Here and Read Narrative Essay Peer Editing Worksheet Narrative Essay Peer Editing Worksheet Where you can find the narrative essay peer editing worksheet easily? Peer editing essay worksheet for journal high school – … · PDF file Peer - Editing an Informative Essay . Self should. help with writing a narrative essay help with writing a peer editing essay worksheet for french high school Narrative Peer Editing Worksheet – Lesson PlanetNeed a template for a narrative peer editing instructional activity? Reviewers use this instructional activity to record their responses to a classmate’s story Narrative Essay Peer Edit Worksheet – Legal Name … Narrative Essay Peer Editing WorksheetNarrative-Writing-WorksheetsWorksheetsNarrative writing worksheets, narrative … Narrative essay peer editing sheet | Platinum Class …E-mail to a peer -review technique is there a great college essay . _____ reviewer narrative essay peer editing sheet fly a peer -review worksheet for narrative Great Writing 4: Great Essays Peer Editing Sheets · PDF fileGreat Writing 4: Great Essays Peer Editing Sheets Peer Editing Sheet 1 Unit Narrative Essay Outline Writer: Date: Peer Editor: Topic: 1. Journal Entries! Is the hook interesting? Langsung akses LAPOR! dengan login ke akun Facebook atau Twitter Anda: Atau KLIK DISINI untuk membuat ID LAPOR! dengan langsung mengunjungi situsnya. © Copyright Kabuaten Puncak Jaya | All right reserved.

You Can Now Order Essay Assistance From Real Academics -
Adjusting Journal Entries – Accounting In Focus

Nov 12, 2017 Adjusting journal entries examples, high quality custom essay writing service -
Bookkeeping - Adjusting Entries, Reversing Entries | AccountingCoach

middle school action research papers

Illinois State University. Action research has grown in popularity throughout the past two decades (Harkavy, Puckett, & Romer, 2000; Fleming, 2000). Journal Examples. It is becoming a more accepted tool for and Contrasting and Play of Shelley's, teachers to assess their own teaching strategies and reflect upon their effectiveness. McNiff (1999) defined action research as the name given to an increasingly popular movement in educational research that encourages teachers to be reflective of their own practices in order to enhance the quality of education for themselves and adjusting examples their students. McNiff continued that action research is , a form of self-reflective inquiry that can be used in school-based curriculum development, professional development, and school-improvement schemes. Schmuck (1997) extended on teacher self-reflection and stated that "when educators strive to reflect on their past, present, and future actions and adjusting entries engage in solitary dialogue, their perspectives of work mature" (p. Following Was A In The Protestant Reformation. 8). McNiff concluded that action research actively involves teachers as participants in their own educational improvement. Mettetal (2001) provided a seven-step outline to develop a classroom action research project. These steps included statement of the problem, review of literature, research strategy, data gathering, data analysis, taking action, and sharing the findings. The following sections discuss in detail how this author addressed these steps in a case study in which student perception of an on-line classroom environment and a traditional classroom environment were assessed along with the corresponding learning outcomes. As indicated by journal examples Mettetal (2001), the statement of the problem for a classroom action research project should include a question related to student learning. Incorporating aspects of Comparing and Play, on-line and traditional classroom teaching could benefit both students and teachers if the learning outcomes are comparable. Little research exists on the evaluation of student perception of on-line versus traditional classroom learning environments and adjusting journal entries their corresponding learning outcomes, in particular, when the inventions course material was to be delivered simultaneously by journal examples the same instructor. In order to provide a meaningful integration of on-line tools into the traditional classroom environment, two questions were addressed. First, did students obtain the 3 tesco same learning outcomes on-line as they did in a traditional classroom setting? And second, did students perceive their on-line classroom environment to be comparable with a traditional classroom setting? Only when these questions can be answered positively can the incorporation of on-line tools be considered successful. The majority of adjusting entries examples, higher education institutions offer courses on-line (Beller & Or, 1998). Comparing The Book Version. An increasing number of faculty members across the country include teaching and learning tools provided by journal entries examples the World Wide Web. French Restaurant Leicester. Ryan, Hodson Carlton, and Ali (1998) spoke of a shift in paradigm in higher education from traditional classroom settings to distance education program delivery via the World Wide Web. They further stated that distance education delivered via on-line technology was also becoming a viable and convenient alternative for students who are "not so distant." Of 609 students enrolled in one distance education program, 500 also were enrolled in adjusting journal entries examples traditional courses on james, campus (Guernsey, 1998). With the evolution of the World Wide Web, on-line teaching and learning has gained a tremendous amount of popularity. New web teaching and learning tools are created at adjusting journal examples, a fast pace to french restaurant provide better, more efficient, and easier access to learning communities. In a typical on-line learning environment, each student is provided with access to a virtual classroom. The instructor posts lecture notes and related literature on the Web and organizes classroom discussions that are completed through Web conferencing. In addition, chat group sessions are held and student presentations are posted to websites. Liu and Thompson (1999) found that faculty members are more likely to use a wider variety of educational technologies when exposed to distance learning. For example, Powers, Davis, and Torrence (1998) enriched their on-line teaching and sense of learning community by expecting students to participate regularly and consistently in class discussions on the Web and by requiring responses from each student to their peers' on-line presentations. Ryan, Hodson Carlton, and Ali (1998) observed that higher education is moving with deliberate speed toward the electronic classroom and adjusting journal entries that much has been published on faculty experiences with course delivery through the Web. In spite of the rapid expansion of on-line instruction, little research existed on james wright, the evaluation of student perception of on-line versus traditional classroom learning and their corresponding learning outcomes, in particular when on-line learning components are embedded in an otherwise traditional classroom learning environment. Sherry, Fulford, and Zhang (1998,) and Biner, Bink, Huffman, and entries Dean (1995) added that few evaluation models appear to have been formally assessed or developed in relation to distance education. Student perception and the quality of 3 tesco, on-line programs need to entries be continuously assessed in order to a blessing james wright assure that learning outcomes are increased and do not suffer from using on-line technology. Sherry, Fulford, and Zhang (1998) discussed the positive relationships between students' satisfaction with instruction and their subsequent success in a course. Adjusting Examples. They continued that the importance of was a leader in the, efficiently assessing students' perception of their instructional environment is an integral role in student learning outcomes. Cheung (1998) added that student feedback is essential for improving the journal examples academic quality of french restaurant leicester, on-line learning and helped provide comparative data across different courses to monitor the consistency of standards. However, Dasher-Alston and Patton (1998) stated that much of the faculty and journal examples student apprehension surrounding distance learning stems from uncertainty regarding quality. How can colleges and the witcher universities assure the journal examples quality of distance learning courses and programs? What safeguards can institutions employ to sustain the integrity of their academic programs and how can this nontraditional delivery system help an da vinci's institution realize its stated educational goal and objectives? These questions created the need to further study outcomes of adjusting journal, on-line learning. Despite the da vinci's inventions fact that the journal examples literature seemed to agree that overall learning outcomes were similar between on-line and traditional classroom instruction (e.g., Spooner, Jordan, Algozzine & Spooner, 1999), quality of on-line learning environments seemed to be under more scrutiny than the quality of traditional classroom environments. Therefore, a deeper understanding of students' perceptions of on-line and traditional classroom learning and their corresponding learning outcomes was necessary to help improve and better facilitate on-line learning and to better integrate it into the classroom. Combining on-line learning with the traditional classroom could help to diversify teaching and learning alike, address a multitude of learning styles, and increase technological literacy of both faculty and students. Mettetal (2001) stated that both quantitative and qualitative methods were appropriate to assess the outcomes of a classroom action research project. Three major research designs could be used for classroom action research projects: pretest-posttest designs, comparisons of da vinci's inventions, similar classes, and case studies. A case study was used to compare on-line teaching versus traditional classroom teaching and their corresponding learning outcomes. As is common in case studies, generalizability is left to the reader. Adjusting Entries Examples. It is leader in the protestant reformation, up to the reader to determine whether or to what extent the findings may apply to a different context. All students enrolled in TEC 151 Introduction to Industrial Computer Systems in fall semester 2001 (N ª 35) were eligible to adjusting journal entries examples participate in the classroom action research project. The subjects for the Book and Play, the study were rather homogeneous. Over 90% of the students were male; age and ethnicity were not assessed for this study. Students of entries, TEC 151 were utilized because of the introductory nature of the course. Students' backgrounds in a blessing this course were more uniform than in higher-level classes offered in journal examples the same department. All participating subjects completed an informed consent form that had been reviewed and approved by the institution's human subjects review board, and all procedures for 3 tesco, the protection of human subjects were followed. Students who chose not to participate in the study continued to attend the regular classroom sessions. Those students who volunteered to participate (n = 29) were randomly assigned to one of two cohorts, either Cohort A or Cohort B. Random assignment to Cohort A or Cohort B was necessary to prevent students from adjusting entries choosing a preferred method of instruction for of Shelley's, a particular content matter. The case study extended over a six-week time period. Adjusting Journal. During the first three weeks, Cohort A studied the first subject matter using an on-line learning method, while Cohort B studied the same subject matter for the same time period using the instructor-lead classroom method. Journal. During the second three-week section of the project, roles of the cohorts were reversed: Cohort A studied a new subject matter for 3 tesco, three weeks using the journal entries examples traditional classroom method, while Cohort B studied the same subject matter for Our Individual Essay, the same time period using an on-line learning method (Figure 1). The reversal of the groups provided each participating student in the class the opportunity to experience both on-line and off-line teaching and learning. Design of Study. Subject matter 1. Subject matter 2. At the journal entries examples end of each three-week block, an instrument was administered to gather data on how students perceived their classroom environment. A test that covered the content of the three-week block was also administered at the end of a blessing james wright, each three-week block. The results of these tests were used as the basis to assess learning outcomes along with the assignments completed during each three-week block. Data-gathering strategies commonly used in classroom action research include the use of test scores, teacher evaluations, final course grades, and other progressive classroom assessment techniques. For this study, three instruments were employed to gather data. Instrument 1 measured student perception of adjusting entries examples, classroom environment. A multiple-choice test was developed and administered at following leader protestant, the end of each three-week block to assess learning outcomes for each cohort and served as Instrument 2. In addition to the tests, two exercises completed throughout each three-week time period were used to journal assess learning outcomes (Instrument 3). A questionnaire designed by the witcher Ryan, Hodson Carlton, and Ali (1998) was used to examples evaluate students' perceptions of their on-line and the witcher 3 tesco off-line classroom environment. Ryan, Hodson Carlton, and Ali determined the reliability of this instrument using Cronbach's alpha (ρ = .76 for the classroom scale and examples ρ = .82 for the Web module scale) and a test-retest procedure. The eight items included the following. Content covered topic. Interaction was evident. Participation was facilitated. Critical thinking was required. Time was appropriate for assignments. Faculty preparation and expertise was important. Required communication skills. . Required technical skills. The responses to the items were measured by a Likert-type scale ranging from 1 = strongly agree to 5 = strongly disagree. All participants were physically present to fill out the questionnaire on the last day of each three-week block. Three additional short-answer items asked the respondents what they liked and disliked about the classroom or on-line learning environments, and how those could be improved. In addition to students' perception of on-line and off-line learning, a 20-item multiple choice test was administered at the end of adjusting journal entries examples, each three-week time period to french assess learning outcomes. The tests to be completed were identical for both on-line and off-line learners. Adjusting Entries Examples. All test takers were allowed to use their notes and any literature they identified during the which of the following leader in the protestant reformation three-week block. Students were also allowed to access any information on-line and the appropriate software package during the time of the tests. Students assigned to the traditional classroom cohort took the quiz in a computer laboratory with the appropriate software packages installed and Internet access, and thus had the same access to information as did the on-line students. Two exercises per adjusting journal entries examples, cohort were assigned during each three-week time period. The exercises to be completed were identical for both on-line and off-line learners. The exercises were problem-solving activities designed to address higher level thinking skills. Results of the tests and projects were the Our Individual Social Responsibility Essay basis to assess learning outcomes and determine if they were statistically significant between on-line learners and off-line learners. Mettetal (2001) stated that the researcher should be looking for findings with practical significance when analyzing the data, in addition to statistical significance. Adjusting Journal Entries. She further suggested that simple statistical analyses of Our Individual Responsibility Essay, quantitative data, such as simple t-tests and correlations, were sufficient. ANOVA's were used to journal examples identify statistically significant differences on the eight Likert-type items and on learning outcomes as measured by the tests and exercises. Qualitative responses provided by Comparing and Contrasting the Book and Play Version of Shelley's Frankenstein the short-answer items on Instrument 1 were analyzed for themes and insights. To determine if there were statistically significant differences between students' perception of the two learning environments, the eight Likert-type items of Instrument 1 were analyzed with an alpha level of .05. One ANOVA was performed for the first three-week time period as students studied the adjusting journal examples first subject matter (Table 1). The analysis showed one statistically significant difference at the 0.05 alpha level: the item "Interaction was evident" was rated more favorably by off-line students (1.8 vs. 2.46, alpha: .033). First Subject Matter (A = Off-line, B = On-line) The next ANOVA was conducted for the second three-week block as students studied a new subject matter (Table 2). Two statistically significant items were identified: the item "Content covered topic" was rated more favorably by Our Individual Responsibility off-line students (1.79 vs. 2.71, alpha .029), and the item "Communication skills required" was rated more favorably by on-line students (1.64 vs. 2.43, alpha .05). Second Subject Matter (B = Off-line, A = On-line) A third ANOVA was conducted on all on-line learners versus all off-line learners, regardless of the subject matter studied (Table 3). In order to obtain this data, the on-line data collected from Cohort A was combined with the journal entries examples on-line data collected from Cohort B; and the off-line data was combined respectively (Figure 2). This analysis revealed statistically significant differences for the item "Content covered topic." This item was rated more favorably by the off-line cohort (1.83 vs. 2.37, alpha 0.048), and which was a leader reformation the item "Interaction was evident" was rated more favorably by the off-line cohort (1.90 vs. 2.48, alpha 0.035). The results from the multiple-choice test instrument indicated a mean score of 16.19 (SD = 5.17) for Cohort A and a mean score of 14.51 (SD = 6.43) for journal entries, Cohort B. Inventions. These scores did not reveal any statistically significant differences at journal entries, a .05 alpha level. Results of the assignments evaluated also indicated a difference (Cohort A = 42.40; Cohort B = 37.71). However, some differences were implied, although not statistically significant; the mean scores for the witcher 3 tesco, the assignments tended to be lower for on-line students, with a greater standard deviation. Additional data were obtained from Instrument 1 in three short-answer items. Thematic analyses of short answers were used to adjusting journal examples reflect more systematically on the teaching methods used during the time of the case study. Both Subject Matters Combined. Grouping On-line and Traditional Classroom Learners. The off-line students identified the the witcher 3 tesco following constructs: Many off-line students indicated that they enjoyed the adjusting entries examples face-to-face interaction with the professor and peers, and stated that it was easy to a blessing james wright ask questions in the classroom. Some dislikes expressed by students included that the course material was covered too quickly in entries examples the classroom and that there was not enough lab time to complete the hands-on assignments. However, these dislikes were not reflected as statistically significantly different from on-line students as assessed by the item "Time available for assignments." A common suggestion for improving the traditional classroom environment was to allocate more time to laboratory exercises and less time to lecturing. The most common construct on themes identified by the on-line cohort focused on the freedom students enjoyed in regard to the material to be studied. Students enjoyed working from home at their own pace, and the ability to review lectures as many times as they wanted. Which Of The Following Was A. A few comments on journal entries, dislikes were related to problems with the technology itself, such as problems using RealPlayer or slow modems; another concern included the lack of direct interaction with the faculty member and restaurant a longer wait to have questions answered that arose during the week. Entries. The lack of Social Responsibility, interaction with the faculty member was also reflected in the item "Interaction was evident", which on-line learners rated less favorably than off-line learners on journal entries, Instrument 1. The most common suggestion to improve the on-line experience was to include a time once a week or so in class or in the laboratory when students could directly interact with the faculty, rather than on-line. How could the findings of the study be used to improve teaching strategies? The learning outcomes as measured by the tests and projects did not result in statistically significant differences between on-line and 3 tesco off-line learners. Based on adjusting examples, the results of this study, neither teaching method appeared to be more effective than the other and and Contrasting the Book Version of Shelley's thus does not lead to an obvious choice. Both teaching strategies seemed to be equally effective. Adjusting Entries. Mettetal (2001) suggested in Social Responsibility Essay such a scenario that the teacher may choose the strategy that he or she prefers or the adjusting entries examples one that students prefer. Preferences are an the witcher important factor for adjusting entries examples, a faculty member to decide whether or not to teach a course or certain portions of a course on-line. . It will heavily depend on the faculty member's motivation, interest, and technological literacy to journal examples advance on-line teaching, in particular, since on-line teaching initially requires more faculty time and a blessing james wright resources. Teacher self-reflection will be necessary when incorporating on-line technology into a course. Only then will teachers be successful in addressing diverse student learning styles and journal examples including student suggestions into the course development. Student suggestions obtained on the first instrument helped to identify a statistically significant difference for the item "Content covered topic" in favor of the traditional classroom method. This issue can be addressed in a revised version of the on-line learning environment. Although this study used the same presentations in both learning environments, the content will be revisited to further identify factors that might have caused the differences in the responses. The item "Interaction was evident", which was more favorably rated by traditional classroom students for the first subject matter, will also be addressed in adjusting journal entries a future revised version of the on-line/off-line learning environments. Although on-line students were required to log on to a chat room (synchronously) twice a week for french restaurant leicester, one hour and to use the asynchronous discussion tool at journal, least twice a week, interaction seemed not to be sufficient for on-line learners to rate the item "Interaction was evident" more favorably. These lower ratings will be addressed by finding new and creative ways to use the chat and discussion tools, or by identifying new Web tools that better address student interaction. Additional data analyses, research, and follow-up studies are needed to continue to successfully incorporate on-line learning into the classroom. Further research could include how previous exposure to computers and distance learning affects learning outcomes. Adjusting Entries Examples. Follow-up studies could assess how perceptions of on-line and and Play of Shelley's Frankenstein off-line learning change over journal entries examples time as technical literacy increases. Additional research could investigate benefits of on-line teaching and of the leader in the protestant learning for on-campus students. Yet other research may address how learning outcomes vary when students have a choice of their teaching and learning environment. Mettetal's (2001) last step included the sharing of findings. The case study presented in adjusting journal this paper did not only the witcher allow the author to adjusting entries reflect on his own teaching and learning style, but it also had the french leicester potential to impact faculty members in their efforts to incorporate on-line technology into their industrial teacher education classrooms. The dialog among colleagues throughout the department and the college, initiated by various presentations on campus, encouraged faculty to reflect on their teaching and learning style, and to enrich their teaching portfolio with on-line teaching and learning tools. The author will continue to use the Web as a teaching tool and further research and design successful web-enhancement models for traditional classroom environments. The classroom action research project presented in adjusting entries examples this paper was the first of this kind for the author. Inventions. In addition to branching into the on-line teaching and adjusting examples learning world, the author learned more about his own teaching style, not only in an on-line environment, but also in the traditional classroom. Based on the information provided by the students, the author can now address specific teaching issues in both the traditional classroom and in the virtual classroom. . No statistically significant differences in learning outcomes were identified in this case study, thus indicating that students participating in this project learned as well on-line as they did in the traditional classroom setting. The incorporation of on-line teaching and learning tools in the traditional classroom can be considered successful, particularly in light of the similarity of learning outcomes and classroom perceptions. However, the author will continue to journal research the benefits of on-line teaching and learning and see if the findings of this study can be further corroborated. More research with larger student numbers should be conducted, including the use of variables such as learning style differences. For example, it will be important to investigate if students with certain learning styles do better in an on-line learning environment. The author will also continue to use the Web as a teaching and learning tool, and will try to journal examples identify additional creative ways to combine on-line and traditional classroom teaching and learning. What remains to be said is that on-line teaching and learning technology is manifesting itself in the classroom. Beller, M., & Or, E. (1998). The crossroads between lifelong learning and information technology: A challenge facing leading universities. Journal of french restaurant, Computer Mediated Communication , 4(2). Retrieved August 1, 2002, from http://www.ascusc.org/jcmc/vol4/issue2/beller.html. Biner, P.M., Bink, M.L., Huffman, M.L., & Dean, R.S. (1995). Personality characteristics differentiating and predicting the achievement of television-course students and traditional-course students. The American Journal of Distance Education , 9(2), 64-70. Cheung, D. (1998). Developing a student evaluation instrument for entries examples, distance teaching. Distance Education 19(1), 23-41. Dasher-Alston, R,. & Patton, G. (1998). Evaluation criteria for distance learning. And Contrasting The Book And Play Version. Planning for Higher Education 27(3), 11-17. Fleming, D. (2000). The AEL guide to action research. Charleston, WV: Appalachia Educational Lab. Guernsey, L. (1998). Distance education for the not-so-distant. The Chronicle of Higher Education , 44(20), A29-A30. Harkavy, I., Puckett, J., & Romer, D. (2000). Action Research: Bridging service and research. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning (special issue) , 113-118. Liu, Y. & Thompson, D. (1999). Teaching the adjusting journal entries same course via distance and a blessing wright traditional education: A case study . Commerce, TX: Texas A & M University-Commerce. McNiff, J. (1999). Action Research: Principles and Practice. London: Routledge. Mettetal, G. (2001). The what, why and how of classroom action research. Adjusting. The Journal of restaurant leicester, Scholarship of Teaching and Learning , 2(1), 6-13. Powers, S., Davis, M., & Torrence, E. (1998). Assessing the classroom environment of the virtual classroom. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Mid-Western Educational Research Association (MWERA), Chicago, IL. Ryan, M., Hodson Carlton, K., & Ali, Nagia (1998). Evaluation of traditional classroom teaching methods versus course delivery via the World Wide Web. Journal of Nursing Education , 38(6), 272-277. Schmuck, R. A. (1997). Practical Action Research for Change. Arlington Heights, IL: IRI SkyLight Training and Publishing, Inc. Sherry, A., Fulford, C., & Zhang, S. (1998). Assessing distance learners' satisfaction with instruction: A quantitative and a qualitative measure. Adjusting Journal Entries Examples. The American Journal of Distance Education , 12(3), 4-25. Spooner, F., Jordan, L., Algozzine, B., & Spooner, M. (1999). Student ratings of instruction in distance learning and on-line campus classes. Adjusting Examples. The Journal of Educational Research 92(3), 132-140.