Evaluating Data | Instant Homework Solutions

NOTE: Please use APA 7th ed. for referencing and in-text citations please!! (NO .com references! Only scholarly and peer-reviewed!!!) If you do not have a completed reference (where you retrieved it from if no doi…..), I will cancel the order!! All references need to be in alphabetical order, as 7th ed. APA requires! To be used as guidance: 1. Caldwell, B. W., & Halupa, C. (2014, June). A pilot study of an online accelerated statics course with intensive video delivery. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) Annual Conference, Indianapolis, IN. Retrieved from https://www.asee.org/public/conferences/32/papers/9090/ viewThis article is the final published version of the raw interview field notes that was presented in Learning Activity 2. This is provided to you as an example of how this type of data is analyzed for peer-reviewed presentations and journals. This paper was presented in 2014 and published in a journal in 2015 as well.] 2. O’Connor, H., & Gibson, N. (n.d.). A step-by-step guide to qualitative data analysis. Community Associates Training Workshop. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/292432218_A_Step-By- Step_Guide_To_Qualitative_Data_Analysis Directions: Review The Steps at the New York Public Library qualitative field notes (attached), analyze the data and report the results in an acceptable form for qualitative research results. The overall length of this assignment should be approximately 3 pages. Please see the example provided in this module for guidance.(given above, only as guidance) Some hints: Compare and contrast the data, and identify similarities and differences among participants. Was there a common theme across all or most of the participants (that all or most participants did during your responses)? Who did something different compared to everyone else? Provide descriptive statistics for your observations. Descriptive statistics in the context of this paper refers to percentages (e.g., three out of five participants used…or 100% of the participants didn’t…).Were there any outliers?