Data Collection Procedures. 4.1 The following are minimal site recording guidelines. Forest HPMs or qualified Heritage Program staff shall determine appropriate data collection procedures commensurate with the historical remains identified.
4.2 Based on HPM or qualified Heritage Program staff recommendations, use metal detectors, augers, shovel probes, or other means to minimally test (i.e., generally < 1 cubic meter of soil removed) for buried materials more extensive than are visible and/or verify likely absence of buried deposits.
4.3 Record isolated historic refuse deposits on Region 5 Cultural Resource Records (CRRs) or update existing records to current standards.
(a) In California: complete the USDA-Forest Service (Region 5) Primary Record (comparable to DPR 523A Primary Record and DPR 523C Archaeological Site Record).
(b) In Nevada: complete the IMACS Site Form, Part A Administrative and Environmental Data, and Part C Historic Sites records.
Data Collection Procedures. After obtaining approval from the NUGSE Research Committee to conduct the study, the researcher started the data collection process. At first, “gatekeepers,” people who can help the researcher to approach the target (Xxxxx et al., 2011), were contacted by mid-November to discuss the purpose of the study and the rationale of the researcher to conduct the study in non- academic language. The researcher refers to the gatekeeper in the plural since three research sites require gatekeeper at each of these sites. After obtaining permission to visit the sites, in order to recruit participants, the researcher asked for permission to post recruitment letters (See Appendix A) at schools’ entrances and teachers’ rooms with the researcher’s contact information. Additionally, the researcher posted the recruitment letter to her Instagram page too. After receiving voluntary involvement from teachers that meet the study criteria to participate in the study, the researcher sent the informed consent forms (See Appendix B) via email and messenger (WhatsApp, Telegram) to ensure that the participants were aware of the aim of the project, the possible risks, the ways to minimize their risks, and their right to withdraw from the study at any point. Consent forms were provided in three languages (Kazakh, Russian, and English) to ensure that the study participants fully understand what is expected of them during the interview in convenient language to them. The interview questions were also shared with the participants beforehand in three languages to let them know what questions to expect from the interview and make their responses more meaningful (Xxxxxxxx, 2012). The interview process was conducted face-to-face in a quiet public place of the participants’ choices, except the school. Every interview took about 30-50 minutes. As the interviews were conducted only once, the researcher could benefit by receiving rich answers within a minimum of 30 minutes (DiCicco-Bloom & Xxxxxxxx, 2006). On the agreed interview day with each of the participant, the researcher asked them to reread and sign two copies of the consent forms, one for the researcher and the other to be kept by the interviewee. In addition, the researcher orally introduced the consent form to ensure that the participants know about their rights not to answer questions if they find them sensitive and withdraw from the study at any stage without loss of benefits, also about the issues of confidentiality and anonymity. The ...
Data Collection Procedures. Data collection procedures started with the process of ethics application submission, and then, in a month continued with getting ethics approval (see Appendix B for timeline of the study). After getting the approval to conduct the research on November 7, 2018, an introductory letter was sent from NUGSE to a gatekeeper (a school principal of the selected NIS school) on asking a permission to conduct a research in the selected research site. The letter mentioned the details concerning the research purpose, the role of participants, possible risks and benefits of the present research. Then, I met the principal of this NIS school to introduce the details of the research questions. The next, after receiving the permission from a gatekeeper I started recruiting the participants according to the criteria which were developed in advance. Thus, I selected the participants who met the criteria and invited teachers for individual interviews and focus group discussions. The participants were informed about their voluntary participation and all details, rules and procedures of the research through the informed consent letter. The time and place for both individual and focus group interviews were negotiated in advance. In addition, the interviews were conducted when it was comfortable for participants for the sake of creating the atmosphere of trust and relieve stress. Finally, the interviews were recorded and transcribed manually in order not to lose or confuse any details of collected data. Lesson observations were conducted after interviews with the main participants in order to get accustomed to participate in this research and feel comfortable with the researcher. Moreover, I got permission from the main participants in advance to observe their lessons in compliance with their availability, and when it was comfortable for them. Thus, I have conducted one lesson observation of each main participant’s lessons. I was a non-participant observer and sat at the end of the classroom in order not to distract both teacher and students. During both lessons I observed what approaches to assessment newly hired teachers apply in their assessment practices, and whether the information from the interviews correspond with what I saw on practice.
Data Collection Procedures. After GSE Ethics Committee granted permission to start data collection, the researcher prepared a list of potential participants from people he/she knows (colleagues, friends, groupmates, neighbors, relatives, parents of children’s classmates) who fit the purpose of the research. The list included participants who differ in their backgrounds, since heterogenous sampling approach implies presenting multiple perspectives of individuals. The researcher made the initial contact to invite them to participate in this research. With those agreed, the time and place for the interview was arranged. The consent form was sent to their emails. On the interview day, the researcher made a call to confirm the meeting (either offline or online) with the participant. Before giving a consent form to an interviewee, the researcher explained the details and emphasized that participation in the study was voluntary and participants might withdraw from the study at any time. After signing and collecting the consent form, the researcher asked permission to digitally record the interview. All the participants agreed. The time of start and finish of the interview was also noted. The researcher contacted the participant two days before the interview to remind the interview and to arrange a time and location. The interview schedule was sent to the participants prior to the interview in order to afford enough time for consideration. In four cases, the interviews were postponed because of the participants. Each participant had one- on-one interviews in Kazakh, Russian or English, with a follow-up interview, if necessary, in an environment and at a time convenient to the interviewees. According to Xxxxxxxx (2002), it is crucial to conduct the interviews at a neutral or known venue, so participants feel secure and are not terrified of any perceived dangers. The researcher chose small peaceful cafes, offices, or libraries. Each interview lasted for one hour at least, with replies noted and audio recorded, later transcribed and translated into English if necessary. According to ethical considerations to ensure anonymity, pseudonyms P1, P2, etc. were assigned to all interviewees in order to provide anonymity. With the participants' permission, all data was collected and reflective notes were taken throughout the interview process for use during the analysis. From October 25th to November 25th, 2023, the researcher conducted nine semi-structured interviews. The gathered interview data was st...
Data Collection Procedures. After obtaining signed clearance from the principal to conduct the study at Delta Middle School (Appendix A) and approval from the International Review Board (Appendix B), this researcher carried out data collection from November 2019 to January 2020. The process included surveys and semi-structured interviews with 10 parent-participants to gather demographic information and gain insight into perceptions about parenting skills and impact their sons' success in school. A similar format was used with the five school counselors to learn about their professional background and observations of the Latino parent population's parenting skills. The interviews were conducted in their chosen language, Spanish or English, and recorded with their prior approval (Appendix G, H). Each completed interview transcribed and translated into English, when applicable. The process for school counselors was similar. The sessions were conducted only in the English language and recorded with their prior approval (see Appendix G). Afterward, each recording was transcribed.
Data Collection Procedures. After receiving ethical approval from Nazarbayev University Graduate School of Education Research Ethics Committee the process of data collection started. The letter of ethics approval is included on p.iii. Institutional ethical permission from a research review board is essential (Xxxxxxxx, 2012). The process of data collection started with gaining access to the research sites through providing a letter of invitation and organizing explanatory meetings with school principals. A copy of the letter of invitation to the principal, in English, and Russian are included in Appendix
Data Collection Procedures. As soon as the Nazarbayev Universty Graduate School of Education (NUGSE) Ethics Committee sent approval to conduct the study, the researcher contacted the participants via telephone and sent an informed consent form via WhatsApp messenger. The consent detailed the main features of the study: its topic and purpose, expected duration of the interview, the risks and benefits, the rights of participants, and contact information in case participants have any questions, concerns or complaints about the interview (see Appendix 2). The informed consent forms are important because, as Xxxxx et al. (2007) defined, the information included in the consent form influences the decision of participants whether to participate in the research or not. After reviewing the consent forms and agreeing to take part in the interviews, the participants were contacted again to schedule a convenient day, time, and place to be interviewed. Prior to the interview, each respondent signed two copies of the consent form and returned one copy to the researcher. Before the interview, the participants were reminded about the purpose of the research; the measures taken to ensure anonymity and confidentiality of the interviewee, and that interviews would be recorded. Each interview was conducted individually in the places preferred by the participants for their convenience and comfort. The interviews were audio-recorded All interviewees preferred to converse in Russian. Along with recording, the researcher took notes in the provided spaces in the interview protocol. Following the interview, the respondents were shown these notes to ensure their reliability. The participants interviewed via telephone followed the same procedure as described. The researcher used a Cube ACR recorder on a smartphone to record the telephone interview. All audio-recorded interviews were transcribed. Two of them were transcribed using online software Trint and Sonix, while the researcher transcribed the remaining four manually. Then the transcribed data was translated into English for further data analysis.
Data Collection Procedures. Each individual was screened to assess his or her eligibility for participation in the study. Additionally, cognitive capacity was assessed with the Blessed dementia screening index (Xxxxxxx et al., 1983); individuals with a score of greater than or equal to 11 (indicating cognitive impairment) were excluded. Individuals who were eligible and consented to participate in the study were given a packet of questionnaires (demographic and psychosocial) to complete and bring them to their first evaluation. Each individual was scheduled for an outpatient visit at the General Clinical Research Center (GCRC) at Emory Hospital. The participants first participated in an exercise treadmill test. The data collector was blinded to the group assignment and met with each participant in the GCRC to verify that they had fasted for the past 12 hours, reviewed all materials, examined skipped or omitted items on the forms, and clarified any responses. The GCRC staff performed a brief health history and physical with all participants. Furthermore, venipuncture for biomarkers (adiponectin, hsCRP, PAI-1, Il-6, lipids) was performed. After all assessments were completed, participants were given scheduling information related to their group assignments (psychoeducation and exercise, exercise, or usual-care groups); the exercise specialist contacted participants in the exercise group. Data entry was completed using REDCap. This program has multiple checks and balances built in internally for researchers to clean data as it is entered. Once researchers enter information into the system, REDCap will label the data as “incomplete,” “unverified,” or “complete.” After the researcher verifies the data entered is complete, the researcher will check that the data is complete. After the data is deemed complete, the research team also went back and cleaned and verified the data further. If data were missing, the research team worked to track down the data or contacted the participants to receive the data. This process was only done for demographic variables. If data were missing for psychosocial scales, a mean substitution of up to 10% was incorporated into the final score. After cleaning the data, the data was transferred into the SPSS, where all statistical analyses were completed. First, descriptive statistics of the population demographic characteristics were conducted. Socio-demographic variables consisted of: age, education, gender, marital status, ethnicity, co-residence, compound care...
Data Collection Procedures. Ethical principles and standards are important components of research. First, the description of the research procedure was provided to the review board of Nazarbayev University and approval was gained to conduct fieldwork (Xxxxxxxx, 2014). Furthermore, permission to conduct the research was obtained from the principals first and then gatekeepers who helped to contact the participants. I called the principal of two schools and told them about my research and obtained permission. Then my gatekeepers were head teachers for scientific and methodological work who gave me teachers’ telephone numbers and organized a meeting with them. I held a meeting with teachers to explain my research and invited them to be my participants. They were acquainted with the purpose of the study, their rights, potential benefits, and possible risks.The selection of participants was on a voluntary basis and they were provided with a consent form prior to the interview which the participants signed on the day of the interview. The teachers were interviewed in the online and in school (four online, one in an empty classroom). Furthermore, the time and location were agreed upon. All interviews were conducted in Kazakh, according to the participants’ preference; the shortest interview lasted 30 minutes, the longest interview lasted 110 minutes. An audio recorder was used, with the participants’ permission, to tape the interview. Afterwards, I transcribed the audio data and translated the transcripts into English. All five interviews were conducted between the 22nd of December and the 7th of February, 2022.
Data Collection Procedures. Evidence of meeting Teacher goals and the overall quality of a Teacher's professional performance may be gathered by means of several valid and objective procedures. However, the means used must be appropriate and understood by the participants. Because Teacher goals and the Criteria of Effective Teaching can be stated in observable terms, it is assumed that objective observation of Teacher skills will provide valid data for self- assessment and for the review and evaluation of the Teacher's performance. Supplemental duties performed by Teachers are voluntary. The effectiveness of Teachers performing such duties should be monitored to provide feedback to those performing successfully, to assist those whose performance can improve, and to ensure a positive and fair assessment of each Teacher's performance.
Step 1 Initial conference Teachers with a Supplemental Duty contract:* No later than one month after month after the start of the 1a) as a head coach/director** season/activity: 1b) in first year of employment - review job expectations in the activity/duty 1c) if identified as needing assistance 1d) others periodically every three to five years Initial Teachers with a Supplemental No later than one month after conference and goal Duty contract: 2a) coordinators of instruction the start of the school year: - review job expectations setting and subject coordinators - set goals (form P/EV-11:1990, 2b) coordinators of athletics Supplemental Duty Goals) and events managers Step 2 Monitoring All On-going Step 3 Progress conference Any As needed - can be requested by Teacher or administrator Step 4 Final conference A final conference will be held for: all coaches/directors listed Final Conference at the end of the season/ activity/school year in 1a, 1b, 1c, and 1d above; and using form P/EV-3: 1990, all coordinators and others listed Supplemental Duty Contract- in 2a and 2b above Evaluation/ Development Plan The RRTA and the board of education believe it is important for head coaches/directors* to provide the leadership and accept the responsibility for the direction, development, and growth of their program including the professional development of their staffs. To accomplish this purpose each head coach/ director will meet with the appropriate administrator prior to the start of the season to discuss program direction and expectations. This process will include reviewing consistency throughout all grade levels of the affected programs. This process will furthe...
