Example 1: Plagiarize the original text by copying portions of it word-for-word.
So, a teachers who has ranked at the 43rd percentile compared to his or her peers might actually be anywhere between the 15th percentile and the 71st percentile. The value-added scores also fluctuate between years.
Example 2: Plagiarize the original text by paraphrasing its structure too closely, without copying it word-for-word.
There will always be unsteadiness in these rankings, some of which will mirror “real” performance changes. But it is hard to trust any performance rating if the probability of getting the same rating next year is no better than a coin toss.
Example 3: Plagiarize the original text by paraphrasing its structure too closely, and include a citation. Even though you cited it, paraphrasing too closely is still plagiarism.
No calculation is just right, but the approximations of value-added and other “growth models,” which attempt to separate the “true effect” of an individual teacher through his or her students’ test scores are frighteningly error-prone in any given year. Sean Corcoran, an economist at New York University, observed the teacher evaluation systems in New York City and Houston. He found that the average “margin of error” of a New York City teacher was plus or minus 28 points (The Death and Life of the Great American School System).
Example 4: Properly paraphrase from the original text by restating the author’s ideas in different words and phrases, and include a citation to the original source.
A teacher’s ranking compared to her students test scores is not always accurate. The students could have high test scores and still have a subpar teacher. There is a lot of error in the data that tries to explain that a teachers rankings is in correlation with her students (The Death and Life of the Great American School System).
Example 5: Properly paraphrase from the original text by restating the author’s ideas in different words and phrases, add a direct quote, and include a citation to the original source.
A teacher’s ranking compared to her students test scores is not always accurate. The students could have high test scores and still have a subpar teacher. There is a lot of error in the data that tries to explain that a teachers rankings is in correlation with her students, “The value-added scores also fluctuate between years. A teacher who gets a particular ranking in year one is likely to get a different ranking the next year. There will always be instability in these rankings, some of which will reflect “real” performance changes. But it is difficult to trust any performance rating if the odds of getting the same rating next year are no better than a coin toss,” (The Death and Life of the Great American School System).
Based on the avoiding plagiarism assignment, you grasp the essential ideas about properly paraphrasing. But placing the title of a book in parentheses is not an accepted citation system. Look at the link to expository writing guides and learn how to properly use either Chicago-style endnotes or APA/MLA citations. Let me know if you’d like to review this with me, since using one of these systems is important to your success in this and future courses at Trinity.
Furthermore, to avoid confusing the reader, place single quotation marks around any internal quotations, like this: “some of which will reflect ‘real’ performance changes.”
Also, in example 5 there were run-on sentences and other grammatical errors (a teachers ranking: missing apostrophe) that should not have appeared, particularly in a writing exercise.