national/international issue

Paper instructions:

This paper should be approximately 8-10 pages long using APA formatting, citations and references. This includes the questions for both your journalistic/probing and your survey interviews as well as your commentary. The paper is worth 60 points. You may complete the paper by yourself or with one other member of the class. If you do your paper as a team with another person, you will both receive the same grade for the paper. Your main goal in the paper is to use the results of a journalistic/probing interview to help you develop the questions for a survey interview. The topic on which you focus can vary and be based on your interests. For example, you could focus on College Student issues like residence halls, social life/extracurricular activities, student support services, fund raising, etc. You could also focus on state/local issues like attracting business to Omaha/Nebraska, taxation, community involvement/citizenship, development now and in the future, protecting our natural resources, etc. Or a national/international issue might be your focus such as our educational system, environmental policy, politics/political reform, the media and society, health care, civility in society, investing for the future, issues in raising children, etc. The examples mentioned are rather broad and would have to be narrowed down more to be the focus of your final paper.

Once you have selected a topic and narrowed it down appropriately, you should develop and conduct a moderately scheduled probing/journalistic interview in which you employ some pre-prepared primary questions as well as some probes to gather information from one interviewee who is likely to have some knowledge/relevant information regarding your chosen topic (each person should conduct a probing/journalistic interview with one person if the final paper is done in a two-person team). Your primary/prepared questions can be based on logic and/or some background research into your chosen topic. Probes should be employed as needed during the interview(s).

Based on the results of your one (two) probing/journalistic interview(s), I would like you to develop a highly scheduled, a highly scheduled standardized or a combination survey interview instrument that contains 10-15 issue items (at least half of these should come from the results of your probing/journalistic interview(s); the rest can be based on logic/background research) and 3-5 demographic items. The questions should be worded so that they are understandable to the average person on the street. The survey should be in professional form with questions numbered, the introduction and conclusion included, and appropriate directions provided so that any interviewer would be able to conduct the survey face-to-face with a minimum of training. You should dry-run your survey instrument by administering it to one interviewee (each person should conduct a survey interview if the final paper is done in a two-person team). The dry-run interview(s) can help you determine any strengths and/or weaknesses with your survey interview instrument so that you can make revisions if necessary.

I would suggest the following organizational approach in arranging the sections of your paper:

(1) the probing/journalistic interview–this section should include the introduction, conclusion, pre-prepared primary questions and key probes that you used during the interview(s),

(2) the survey interview–this section should include, in professional form, the introduction, conclusion, demographic questions, issue questions, and any directions for conducting the survey, and

(3) Discussion of the process–this section should address questions such as: how did you select and narrow down your topic, how did you decide on your questions and probes for the journalistic/probing interview, who did you interview for the probing/journalistic interview and why (it is not necessary for you to use a person’s real name here if they or you are uncomfortable with this), how specifically did you use the answers from the journalistic/probing interview(s) in constructing questions for the survey interview, were there any weaknesses identified based on the dry-run survey interview(s) and how were they corrected in the final form of the survey, overall what were the strengths and/or weaknesses of the process you went through and how would you correct any weaknesses and/or enhance any strengths if you were to go through this process again? Be as specific in answering these questions as you can. Use examples to illustrate your points.
PLACE THIS ORDER OR A SIMILAR ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET AN AMAZING DISCOUNT 🙂