User talk:Shelby sharp/sandbox

A. To Do List: 1) Find a photo of Likert to be displayed. 2) I also believe that we need to fix the opening paragraph to be more appealing to the readers needs. 3) We should look more into the contributions and idea's that lead Likert's legacy. 4) Explore into his books more and give more information about what they are about, like a brief synopses. 5) Touch up the article to make if look more professional and appealing 6) Add more to the current sections because they are lacking. KeshaSavvy (talk) 23:00, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Here is what I believe we need to have on our To-Do List for the Rensis Likert article. To-Do List: 1. Add more background information on Rensis Likert 2. Add more information on Likert's personal/professional achievements 3. Add details about Likert's ideas and his contributions 4. Make sure to add an adequate amount of resources and references 5. Add information on Likert's Linking Pin Model 6. Make article page more coherent and flow better as an articleShelby sharp (talk) 23:04, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Okay let's combine our To Do Lists with all of the major things we need to do. Master To Do List: 1)Find a photo of Likert to be displayed. 2) Add more background information and fix the opening paragraph to make it more appealing to the readers. 3) List more information on Likert's contributions and ideas. 4) Add more information to the already existing paragraphs to help reinforce our new information found. 5) Make sure to add an adequate amount of resources and references. 6) Add synopses of the books that Likert has done. 7) Make the article page more coherent and flow better, along with touching up the article to be more professional. 8) Add information about Likert's Linking Pin Model. 9) Find more contributions and how they helped psychology today. Shelby what do you think? I combined out lists to make it easier to divide up. Let me know if you want to change anything or if you think this is okay.KeshaSavvy (talk) 23:14, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

I think that that To-Do List looks good and will be a great start to fixing up this article. Shelby sharp (talk) 23:16, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

I went ahead and put together an outline for the article. As of right now this is the current outline that the article has: Contents 1. Personal Life 2. Professional achievements 3. Likert Scale 4. Management systems 5. Books 6. References 7. Further Reading

This is a rough draft of an outline I feel the article should look like when we are done with it. Again this is a rough idea and any changes that we want to make or decide to make will be taken into consideration at that time. Rough Draft Contents Opening Paragraph and background information 1. Personal Life 2. Professional Achievements 3. Books 4. Likert Scale 5. Linking Pin Model 6. Management Systems 7. Contributions, Ideas, and Theories 8. Further Readings 9. References Please let me know if you have any ideas/changes you would like to make to this, or if this looks good as a ROUGH DRAFT for you, Kesha. Shelby sharp (talk) 23:31, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

These look good, I just looked for some sources that we could use in the wikipedia article. Note that we may decide to use these or use different sites so these are just to get us started and by no means will have to be in the article. I just thought this way we have some sources to go off of. It all really just depends on what we need to find to help the article. But here are all of the sources I've found. Rensis Likert Resources page http://organisationdevelopment.org/the-theorists-rensis-likert/  Picture Likert, Rensis. (2012). Britannica Online Academic Edition. Online Journal Likert, R. (1961). New patterns of management. New York: McGraw-Hill. Book Conversation … with Rensis Likert. (1973). Organizational Dynamics, 2(1), 33-49. Online Article Kish, L. (1982). In Memoriam: Rensis Likert, 1903-1981. The American Statistician,36(2), 124-125. Online Article Kish, L. (1982). Rensis Likert 1903–1981. The American Statistician, 36(2), 124-125. Online Article Wall, M., Likert, R., Fugger, J., & Bjorksten, J. (1963). Independent Research Institutes. Science, 140(3565), 424-427. Online ArticleKeshaSavvy (talk) 23:41, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Here is a list of what I would like to do and what I think we can share responsibilities on: 1. Ill fix the opening paragraph by adding more information and background information 2. Ill list some contributions and ideas and theories (I think you can add to this as well) 3. Add more details to the management system section and personal life and on his personal achievements section as well 4. Ill find information on the linking pin model 5. I think we can split the book list in half and we both can add synapses and information on the books 6. Obviously ill be adding to the reference list too with all my additional findings 7. We can both touch up the article and make sure it flows better Shelby sharp (talk) 23:53, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Okay this looks good. Since You will be doing those things I guess my stuff is laid out nicely. So my list would be: 1. I will find the photo (my favorite part) 2. I'll list some contributions and ideas and theories (since were both doing it) 3. I like the idea of splitting the books that way I feel like we will cover the information better that way. 4. The references will be both of us as we go along so that works out nicely 5. I like the idea of us both touching up the article because you might see something that I don't and vise versa. 6. I'll add more information to the Likert Scale and the other paragraphs that are lacking 7. I will also tie in how Likert is linked to psychology and what he has done to help psychology today.KeshaSavvy (talk) 00:03, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Great start!
Nice start on improving the Likert article! It's too bad neither of you have come to class, but it is good to know that the instructions on Blackboard are clear enough that you can follow them without me walking you through in class. I think you have a good plan and plenty of material already. You should not have any problem adding signficant new material to the article. However, I don't see where Kesha has helped to develop the outline.
 * Once again, sorry I missed that you moved to Shelby's sandbox. I'll give Shelby credit for Assignment 5. J.R. Council (talk) 19:56, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Shelby and I are actually roommates and so when we do this project we were working at our kitchen table. So sometimes we forget/don't really know how to show you since when we've been doing everything it's been together. So I had her post the outline, while I posted the sources, both of these items were done together. But if you would like us to somehow post these things separate we can. Its just hard for us to remember that we know that we are both contributing since we are at home working on them together but its not as easy for you to know. So we will work on that. KeshaSavvy (talk) 03:05, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

You need to start working on this.
Shelby and Kesha - this assignment is worth 25 points. It does require some effort, so you need to start working on it now. J.R. Council (talk) 22:37, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Not sure what's going on - nothing added
Kesha and Shelby - there is lots of material on Likert that you could be adding to this article. I don't understand why you have not done anything. If you are struggling, please let me know what kind of help you need. J.R. Council (talk) 02:48, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Still nothing
I don't understand why there has been no work on the last couple of assignments. This group is losing major points. Please contact me if you need help or guidance. J.R. Council (talk) 16:37, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

This article is still far from being ready
It is good that Shelby added some new material. This is a close paraphrase of the first paragraph of the Britannica article, with a citation. It really can't add much to the existing article. However, What you have here is not ready to add to the existing article. For this group, the final assignment will be to further develop the article in the sandbox. Perhaps there will be bits and pieces that can be added to improve the article. J.R. Council (talk) 18:33, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
 * 1) You should be developing the article in the sandbox, not talk.
 * 2) The article should be about the person, Rensis Likert.
 * Check on April 23. Nothing new. J.R. Council (talk) 21:55, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Shelby sharp (talk) 22:10, 13 April 2015 (UTC)Here is a start to some new material that I think should be added to the Likert Scale part of the article with the citation below it. The Likert Scale is a rating system that is most commonly used in questionnaires. The scale is aimed to measure the attitudes, perceptions, and/or opinions of people. Participants using the scale are asked to respond to questions with a small range of possible answers. These responses often include “strongly agree,” “agree,” “neither agree nor disagree,” “disagree,” and “strongly disagree.” When the scale is put into use for a study that must be able to mathematically describe these responses, the categories are usually then numerically coded. For instance, 1 = strongly agree, 2 = agree, and it continues on for all possible responses. The Likert Scale is named after the Rensis Likert, who devised the scale in 1932.

Jamieson, Susann. "Likert Scale." Encyclopedia Britannica. Encyclopedia Britannica, 15 Dec.13. Web. 13 Apr. 15. .

Not suitable for publication
Due to the small amount of work and poor quality of what has been done, I can't approve this article for movement to Wikipedia main article space. ~ James Council