Take time to proofread closely your work.This assignment has a significant point value (135 points) and is graded using several factors (content and format; Master’s level graduate quality; spelling, grammar, punctuation; originality of topic and content; and readability and organization).This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCover page w/honor code10.0 ptsFull Marks0.0 ptsNo Marks10.0 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeContent and format (per Syllabus)30.0 ptsFull Marks0.0 ptsNo Marks30.0 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeGrammar, punctuation, spelling15.0 ptsFull Marks0.0 ptsNo Marks15.0 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeReadability and organization15.0 ptsFull Marks0.0 ptsNo Marks15.0 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeOriginality (topic and content)30.0 ptsFull Marks0.0 ptsNo Marks30.0 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMaster’s level work50.0 ptsFull Marks0.0 ptsNo Marks50.0 ptsThis essay only gave a big topic. There is no specific requirement to write anything. （Submit your critique of Moral Intelligence, Enhancing Business Performance & Leadership Success.）Higher scores need to be done carefully. Thank you.you will have a small written assignment (not over 3 pages, double spaced, of text plus cover page). The assignment is a critique of Lennick & Kiel’s book, Moral Intelligence, Enhancing Business Performance & Leadership Success, one of the required texts for this course. Your research paper or project is a key element of your grade; however, it is intended to be an endeavor that will benefit you as you address ethical issues in your current or anticipated work environment.
Moral Intelligence Enhancing Business Performance & Leadership Success
GCCCD Civil Liberties of the Accused and Incarceration Discussion
GCCCD Civil Liberties of the Accused and Incarceration Discussion.
I want share some information about those civil liberties providing protections for individuals impacted by the power of the criminal justice system as well as give you the opportunity to earn up to five extra credit assignment points. First, take a look at the 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th Amendments to the Constitution (you can find a copy in your American Government Examined reader), why should anybody care about these protections if you had nothing to hide? Without the protections of these civil liberties, there would be nothing to keep government from targeting various unpopular minority factions or individuals who might be perceived as threats to the government. Thanks to these civil liberties, our legal system is set up to diminish the error of convicting an innocent person (although it does occasionally happen), with the tradeoff being an increase in the error of sometimes letting guilty people go free. This article – actually the review of a number of recent books – addresses a number of interesting issues related to the power of the criminal justice system, such as the danger of prosecutorial overreach, the abuse of plea bargaining, etc. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2019/04/15/who-belongs-in-prison. The article makes the case for deincarceration, or the idea that all prison sentences should be capped at something like 20 years because “justice without compassion is something other than civilized.” and “What was at stake was not the convict’s fate but ours.” What do you think?
GCCCD Civil Liberties of the Accused and Incarceration Discussion
Boeing Company’s Financial Analysis Report
write my term paper Selecting a Company Boeing Co. is listed on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE). The company has a market capitalization of $95.36 billion, and an average volume of 5.22 million stocks (“Boeing Co. NYSE: BA” table). It paid shareholders dividends at a rate of $0.73 per share at the end of 2013. The major competitor is Airbus Group. It has a market capitalization of $56.39 billion (“Airbus Group N.V. ADS” table). Airbus has earnings per share of $0.62 compared with $6.03 for Boeing. Economic Analysis The U.S. economy is moving upwards with key economic indicators showing improvement. The real GDP improved by 3.2% above the values that were recorded at the end of 2012. The seasonally adjusted GDP stood at $17,102.5 billion for the fourth quarter in 2013. Civil unemployment declined by 6.6% (FRED table). A higher real GDP and lower unemployment show that consumption is likely to increase. A higher GDP will result in higher aggregate demand, which will affect most industries positively. Real GDP and employment affect the operations of the company through its stock, and demand for products. Companies demand more goods and services when the economy improves. Optimism increases the stock prices by creating a higher demand in the stock exchange. People purchase more goods when they expect economic conditions to remain favorable. People save for precautionary purposes when they expect difficult economic conditions. Higher interest rates indicate the cost of raising capital for expansion has increased. The long-term interest rates are higher in 2013 than they were in 2011 and 2012. The graph of the 10-Year Treasury bills shows that the long-term interest rates have increased (see Appendix A). The 10-Year Treasury bill has a constant maturity rate of 2.76 (FRED table). The increase in interest rates for the long-term Treasury bills is an indication that other investment options are providing a higher rate. It is also an indication of increased demand for finances which is a sign of more opportunities. The 3-Month Treasury bill has a rate of 0.04%. The 3-Month Treasury bill rate has remained fairly constant since 2010 (see Appendix B). The low-interest rates are a result of the monetary policy seeking to create a favorable business environment. Boeing and Airbus are in an industry that relies on debt. Low rates on short-term loans mean the companies can obtain overdrafts for their cash account at a lower rate. The companies can also service their long-term debt at a lower cost compared with historical rates. A higher inflation rate reduces aggregate demand. A low inflation rate indicates that the purchasing power of the national income has been maintained. The CPI is a measure of inflation. The consumer price index (CPI) for all urban consumers averaged 233.109 in 2013 (FRED table). In the first month of 2014, it stood at 234.933. The 1982-84 prices have been used as the base year. There is a difference of 1.824. It shows an increase of about 1.8% between the two years. The producer price index for all commodities has changed with a small margin. It was 203.4% in 2013 (average), and 203.5% in 2014 (first month) (FRED table). It shows a difference of 0.1%. It indicates that the cost of production does not change rapidly. It is good news for manufacturing companies such as Boeing, and Airbus. A low inflation rate means demand for products will either increase or remain the same. A high consumption level creates investor confidence because they indicate companies will be able to generate high revenues. Personal consumption expenditures were 105.926% in 2013 (average) when 2009 is the base year at 100%. It was 106.47% in 2014 (first month) which shows that there is an improvement (FRED table). Increased consumption is favorable for manufacturing companies because it increases the chance of converting revenues into profits. The price level of government consumption was 1.69403 in 2011 when 2005 is considered the base year at 1.0 (FRED table). It shows that consumption has reached levels higher than the pre-financial crisis. Government consumption is important because the U.S. government is one of the major consumers of aerospace products. Considering the measures discussed above, the U.S. economy is favorable for the aerospace industry. There is increased aggregate demand for products based on a higher real GDP, low inflation rate, and low-interest rates. Industry Analysis Nature of industry The industry relies on a global market for engines and planes. Outsourcing has become a common feature because of competitive pricing. Companies seek to manufacture different parts in different countries and assemble them in one country. For example, General Electric has been manufacturing engines for Boeing airplanes since 1996 (Thurber par. 2). The industry can be analyzed using Porter’s five forces. There are very many competitors which show that there is an intense rivalry. Entry is barred by accumulated knowledge and the size of capital. Most of the companies have operated for several decades. They have accumulated knowledge and expertise. Some of the examples include Bombardier Aerospace (since 1942), Cessna (since 1927), Dassault (entered U.S. market in 1963), and Hawker Beechcraft (since 1937) (Thurber par. 5). Get your 100% original paper on any topic done in as little as 3 hours Learn More All these companies rely on accumulated knowledge. The cost of the planes is high. For example, Airbus’ A319 initial price was $35 million (Thurber par. 1). As a result of the high prices, the customers would be few and large. However, the global market opens up an opportunity for many customers. They include airlines, governments, and rich individuals across the globe. The high number of countries and airlines shows that there are many customers. It reduces their bargaining power. There are few substitutes for airplanes such as high-speed trains. There are many suppliers as mentioned in the outsourcing of parts. Suppliers have low bargaining power because of their high number. The five areas are the summary of the industry under Porter’s five forces. The U.S. aerospace industry generated $86 billion in export as revenues in 2011 (Select USA par. 2). Exports in the aerospace industry exceeded imports by $47.1 billion. The sale of commercial planes is projected to grow at a rate of 3.5% annually for the next 20 years (Select USA par. 3). There is potential for growth and investment in the industry. Major competitors Boeing has developed a reputation for making large-cabin planes. Boeing partnered with General electric in 1996 to develop a new generation 737 known as BBJ. BBJ2 and BBJ3 (2005) followed the same trend of large size business jets. Boeing large-sized jets include the 737, 747-8, and the 787 (Thurber par. 2). Airbus entered the business jet segment in 1997 with its versions known as the Airbus Corporate Jet (ACJ). It has been able to capture a large market by receiving boosts from customers in the Middle East, and Asia Pacific (Thurber par. 1). Embraer has been recognized as the fourth largest commercial airplane maker. It mainly relies on small-cabin and mid-sized jets to maintain its market share (Thurber par. 6). Cessna Aircraft has dominated the industry over the years. Thurber (2011) explains that of the 16,000 business jets used across the globe, a third of them have been produced by Cessna. Cessna produced the Mustang. It was considered the fastest business jet in 2011 (Thurber par. 7). It mainly focuses on light jets and their speed. Importance of technological developments Important technological developments include fuel-efficient engines such as the pusher-turboprop Piaggio Avanti in the 1970s. There is a need for lower-cost aircraft. There are customers who are looking for jets that provide the highest speed such as G650 by Gulfstream Aerospace. It goes at a maximum speed of Mach 0.925 (Thurber par. 8). Customers are also looking for the size of the cabin such as commercial planes developed by Airbus, and Boeing. There are planes designed to go for a long-distance without refueling such as the G650 by Gulfstream. It can fly 7,000 nautical miles without the need to refuel (Thurber par. 6). There is a demand for comfort, and automated aerodynamics. Companies capture their market share based on these developments. We will write a custom Report on Boeing Company’s Financial Analysis specifically for you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More Economic forces with the most impact The industry relies on a global market. It is reliant on the global economy as a result of the global market. The global economy relies on the EU economies, the U.S., and other advanced economies. The industry relies on the level of consumption. The level of consumption is boosted by a higher real GDP, and lower unemployment. When people have high expectations of employment, they reduce their precautionary balances by engaging in more consumption. A higher GDP creates investor confidence. Investment by firms results in more consumption. Companies are the main customers in the industry. The industry relies on exports as indicated in the nature of the industry. It means global levels of consumption are important. Company Analysis Liquidity ratios Current ratio = current assets/ current liabilities Boeing ($) 2013 = 65.07B/ 51.49B = 1.26 times 2012 = 57.31B/ 44.98B = 1.27 times Airbus (Euros) 2013 = 47, 098M/ 48,581M = 0.97 times Not sure if you can write a paper on Boeing Company’s Financial Analysis by yourself? We can help you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More Quick ratio = (current assets – inventory) / current liabilities Boeing 2013 = (65.07B – 42.91B) / 51.49B = 0.43 times 2012 = (57.31B – 37.75B) / 44.98B = 0.43 times Airbus (Euros) 2013 = (47,098M – 25,060M) / 48,581M = 0.45 times The current ratio shows that Boeing has a higher ability to clear its current debts than Airbus. The Airbus quick ratio is higher than the Boeing’s quick ratio. It indicates that Boeing holds a larger inventory than the competitor. The firm has maintained its current ratio and quick ratio over the two years. Cash ratio = cash/ current liabilities Boeing ($) 2013 = 9.09B/ 51.49B = 0.18 times 2012 = 10.34B/ 44.98B = 0.23 times Airbus (Euros) 2013 = 7,765M / 48,581M = 0.16 times Sources: “Boeing Co. NYSE: BA” (table) and “Airbus Group N.V. ADS” (table). Boeing improved efficiency in holding cash in 2013 by reducing the amount it holds to match its major competitor. There is an opportunity cost of keeping cash that is not needed. Airbus appears to have more efficient cash holdings. Financial leverage ratios Total debt ratio = (total assets – total equity) / total assets Boeing ($) 2013 = (92.66B – 15.0B) / 92.66B = 83.8% 2012 = (88.9B – 5.97B) / 88.9B = 93.3% Airbus (Euros) 2013 = (93,311M – 11,054M) / 93,311M = 88.2% Debt/ Equity ratio = total debt/ total equity Boeing ($) 2013 = 77.67B/ 15.0B = 517.8% 2012 = 82.93B/ 5.97B = 1389.1% Airbus (Euros) 2013 = 82,257M / 11,054M = 744.1% Equity multiplier = total assets/ total equity = 1 debt/ equity Boeing ($) 2013 = 92.66B/ 15B = 6.18 (using the second formula = 1 5.17 = 6.17) 2012 = 88.9B/ 5.97B = 14.89 Airbus (Euros) 2013 = 93,311M / 11,054M = 8.44 Sources: “Boeing Co. NYSE: BA” (table) and “Airbus Group N.V. ADS” (table). Both firms use leverage to a very large extent. The debt levels in both companies exceed equity several times. Boeing reduced the total debt ratio and debt-equity ratio in 2013. Reduction in the proportion of debts is good for investors because it reduces risk. Both companies are risky to investors because of the high debt ratios. There is reduced profitability as a result of servicing debts. There is a reduced ability to retain equity in case of bankruptcy. Profitability ratios Profit margin = net income/ sales Boeing ($) 2013 = 4.58B/ 86.62B = 5.3% 2012 = 3.9B/ 81.7B = 4.8% Airbus (Euros) 2013 = 1,475M / 59,256M = 2.5% The two companies have low profitability because of the high cost of goods sold (COGS). It can be seen in the small difference between COGS excluding depreciation and amortization (71.35B) and sales (86.62B) for Boeing in 2013. Depreciation and amortization are about 3.5B in 2013. It shows that COGS is the main cause of the low-profit margin. The situation is similar to that of Airbus. Return on assets (ROA) = net income/ total assets Boeing ($) 2013 = 4.58B/ 92.66B = 4.9% 2012 = 3.9B/ 88.9B = 4.4% Airbus (Euros) 2013 = 1,475M / 93,311M = 1.6% Return on equity (ROE) = net income/ total equity Boeing ($) 2013 = 4.58B/15B = 30.5% 2012 = 3.9B/ 5.97B = 65.3% Airbus (Euros) 2013 = 1,475M / 11,054M = 13.34% EBITDA Margin = EBITDA / Sales Boeing ($) 2013 = 8.25B/ 86.62B = 9.5% 2012 =7.94B/ 81.7B = 9.7% Airbus (Euros) 2013 = 2,607M / 59,256M = 4.4% Sources: “Boeing Co. NYSE: BA” (table), and “Airbus Group N.V. ADS” (table). The profitability ratios are used to show the efficiency of the firm in generating income from assets and equity. Boeing is more profitable than Airbus. Boeing uses assets more efficiently than Airbus. Boeing’s use of assets improved in 2013. Measures of efficiency Accounts receivable turnover = net sales/ net accounts receivable Boeing 2013 = 86.62B / 6.62B = 13.08 times 2012 = 81.7B / 5.76B = 14.18 times Airbus 2013 = 59,256M / 7,239M = 8.19 times Accounts receivable turnover indicates that Boeing has shorter times to wait for receivables than Airbus, considering its higher frequency. Boeing’s efficiency in managing receivables reduced slightly in 2013. Inventory turnover = cost of goods sold/ inventory Boeing 2013 = 73.19B / 42.91B = 1.71 times 2012 = 68.56B / 37.75B = 1.82 times Airbus 2013 = 50,895M / 25,060M = 2.03 times Airbus manages inventory more efficiently than Boeing. Boeing efficiency in managing inventory reduced in 2013. Accounts payable turnover = COGS/ accounts payable Boeing 2013 = 73.19B / 9.39B = 7.79 times 2012 = 68.56B / 9.39B = 7.30 times Airbus 2013 = 50,895M / 10,372M = 4.91 times Accounts payable turnover shows that Airbus is able to delay payments longer than Boeing, which is an advantage in managing the cash account. Boeing’s efficiency reduced in 2013. Fixed asset turnover = Net sales/ net property, plant, equipment Boeing 2013 = 86.62B / 10.22B = 8.48 times 2012 = 81.7B / 9.66B = 8.46 times Airbus 59,256M/ 15,925M = 3.72 times Boeing utilizes fixed assets more efficiently than Airbus. Boeing efficiency improved between the two years. Estimating Beta Filling data into Excel b1 = 14.22 b0 = Ybar – (b1 * Xbar) 3953.36 SSE = 10094513.29 SST = 16443456.72 SSR = (SST – SSE) = 6348943.43 R-square = SSR/ SST = 0.386107589 Y = b0 b1(X) = 3953 14(X) The expression can be expressed as a function of X as shown below. 14X = Y – 3953 X = (Y/14) – (3953/14) X = 0.07Y – 282 The same equation can be written as X = 0.07Y – 282 since X standards for the values of Boeing stock. It would indicate that 7% of the Boeing stock prices are influenced by shifts in the entire market. The monthly return of the stock and market index is represented as a change from the previous month. Date Stock price (X) NYSE 100 index (Y) Monthly return of stock Monthly return market index 12/2/2013 135.72 5726.66 -2.22 100.34 11/1/2013 133.5 5626.32 -4.2 16.77 10/1/2013 129.3 5609.55 -12.88 212.13 9/3/2013 116.42 5397.42 -13.46 264.5 8/1/2013 102.96 5132.92 0.7 -77.05 7/1/2013 103.66 5209.97 -2.62 229.59 6/3/2013 101.04 4980.38 -3.38 -184.5 5/1/2013 97.66 5164.88 -7.96 -166.86 4/1/2013 89.7 5331.74 -5.46 175.46 3/1/2013 84.24 5156.28 -8.78 -14.85 2/1/2013 75.46 5171.13 -3.44 -169.84 1/2/2013 72.02 5340.97 1.45 183.64 12/3/2012 73.47 5157.33 -1.05 201.39 11/1/2012 72.42 4955.94 -4.16 65.45 10/1/2012 68.26 4890.49 -0.82 43.01 9/4/2012 67.44 4847.48 1.75 157.32 8/1/2012 69.19 4690.16 2 137.34 7/2/2012 71.19 4552.82 0.38 -0.15 6/1/2012 71.57 4552.97 -4.52 292.19 5/1/2012 67.05 4260.78 6.5 -574.73 4/2/2012 73.55 4835.51 -2.33 -111.6 3/1/2012 71.22 4947.11 0.55 -64.58 2/1/2012 71.77 5011.69 -1.15 165.18 1/3/2012 70.62 4846.51 -0.79 276.94 12/1/2011 69.83 4569.57 -4.44 -86.28 11/1/2011 65.39 4655.85 -3.15 -146.23 10/3/2011 62.24 4802.08 -5 480.77 9/1/2011 57.24 4321.31 6.01 -559.88 8/1/2011 63.25 4881.19 2.97 -434.24 7/1/2011 66.22 5315.43 3.25 -156.73 6/1/2011 69.47 5472.16 3.85 -96.95 5/2/2011 73.32 5569.11 1.25 -217.11 4/1/2011 74.57 5786.22 -5.47 239.99 3/1/2011 69.1 5546.23 -1.79 -140.98 2/1/2011 67.31 5687.21 -2.74 226.82 1/3/2011 64.57 5460.39 -3.92 130.43 12/1/2010 60.65 5329.96 -1.39 396.1 11/1/2010 59.26 4933.86 5.99 -255.68 10/1/2010 65.25 5189.54 -3.79 150.2 9/1/2010 61.46 5039.34 -4.99 407.46 8/2/2010 56.47 4631.88 6.09 -193.99 7/1/2010 62.56 4825.87 -4.95 498.86 6/1/2010 57.61 4327.01 1.31 -157.44 5/3/2010 58.92 4484.45 7.2 -567.23 4/1/2010 66.12 5051.68 0.16 -159.92 3/1/2010 66.28 5211.6 -8.63 298.72 2/1/2010 57.65 4912.88 -2.71 36.94 1/4/2010 54.94 4875.94 -5.86 -355.26 12/1/2009 49.08 5231.2 -1.56 2.2 11/2/2009 47.52 5229 -4.56 214.24 10/1/2009 42.96 5014.76 5.71 -102.6 9/1/2009 48.67 5117.36 -4.03 206.17 8/3/2009 44.64 4911.19 -6.44 132.78 7/1/2009 38.2 4778.41 -0.37 465.93 6/1/2009 37.83 4312.48 2.09 -141.3 5/1/2009 39.92 4453.78 -4.62 567.16 4/1/2009 35.3 3886.62 -3.94 408.99 3/2/2009 31.36 3477.63 -3.65 242.52 2/2/2009 27.71 3235.11 9.21 -346.18 1/2/2009 36.92 3581.29 9.21 0 Total 4099.22 295506.6 -89.59 2145.37 Estimating beta using regression The beta can be estimated by finding the slope of the Yi and Xi values. In Excel, it involves selecting ‘SLOPE’ on the formula bar, and then the range of Y and X values. The result is 14.22. It is similar to the value ‘b1’ obtained by the long method. The market indices used are for the NYSE 100. The R-squared, which is 0.39, indicates that more than half the points fall outside the regression line. Estimating Intrinsic Value of Stock Boeing paid its shareholders $0.485 as dividends on a quarterly basis in 2013 (“The Boeing Company (BA): Yahoo Finance” table). It adds up to $1.94 for the year. The company paid $0.44 on a quarterly basis in 2012. It paid $0.42 between 2009 and 2012 (“The Boeing Company (BA): Yahoo Finance” table). The current profitability levels indicate the company will maintain the level of growth in dividend issued. It cannot afford rapid growth in dividends because of low profitability. The average dividend growth rate between 2009 and 2013 is 3.9% (((= 0.485 – 0.42) / 0.42)) /4 years). The dividend growth rate in the coming years may grow by a value slightly higher than 3.9% annually because the global economy has recovered. The years 2009 and 2010 were immediately after the global financial crisis (GFC). Low consumption and less profitability followed the GFC. I project an upper limit of a 4.5% dividend growth rate in the coming years because of favorable economic conditions. Expected return CAPM Rf = risk free rate = 8% Rm = market risk premium Βi = beta of the stock Ri = Rf βi X (Rm – Rf) Ri = 8% 14.22 (12% – 8%) = 8.57% Constant growth dividend valuation model The price of stock = Dividend in the coming period/ (Discount rate – growth rate) P0 = Div1/ (R – g) Div1 = Div0 (1 g) P0 = $1.94* (1 4.5%) / (8.6% – 4.5%) P0 = 2.813/ 4.1% = $68.61 Conclusion and Recommendation Conclusion The U.S. economic conditions are more favorable than they were a few years ago. There is increased consumption, reduced unemployment rate, and real GDP growth. The producer price index is favorable for manufacturers because it shows a very small change in the cost of raw materials. The profitability of the firm will improve at a slow rate because of the high COGS associated with the industry. Dividends are likely to increase at a higher rate than in the past years. The intrinsic value of the stock is lower than the market price of the stock in Dec 2013 ($68.61 compared with the adjusted close of $135.72). It shows that investors have overestimated the value of its stock. Recommendation The investor should sell the stock because the growth opportunities of the firm are low considering its low-profit margins, and low return on assets. There is no need to hold the stock because the returns are lower than the risk-free rate. Works Cited Airbus Group N.V. ADS 2014. Web. Boeing Co. NYSE: BA 2014. Web. FRED 2014, Federal Reserve Economic Data: 212,000 US and international time series from 62 sources. Web. Select USA 2013, The aerospace industry in the United States. Web. The Boeing Company (BA): Yahoo Finance 2014. Web. Thurber, Matt 2011, The major airplane manufacturers at a glance. Web. Appendices Appendix A Appendix B
PUB 550 Benchmark – Analyzing and Reporting Data
PUB 550 Benchmark – Analyzing and Reporting Data.
The purpose of this assignment is analyze a dataset and report findings to relevant stakeholders.Read the Topic Material “Analyzing and Reporting Data – Overview” prior to beginning the assignment.For this assignment, you will use IBM SPSS Statistics and one of the three datasets to conduct a basic statistical analysis and report the results by creating a scientific poster. MPH students can use this assignment as an introduction to the option of a larger secondary data analysis for their capstone project.Select a public health topic that is of interest to you and complete the following using the “GCU MPH Poster Template.”Review the three datasets provided in the Topic Materials and brainstorm at least one potential research question that could be answered by one of the datasets. The question should be based on a topic that is of interest to you and is supported by existing literature.Select the dataset and organize the data to complete the analysis.Provide descriptive statistics that summarize the sample.Select an appropriate statistical test and conduct the analysis.Interpret the results of your analysis.Prepare your poster presentation putting the results in the context of the larger story surrounding the purpose for the analysis. Consider the data source, assumptions, hypotheses, decision rule, and interpretation.In addition to the poster, write a 1,000-word summary of the analysis that addresses the questions below. The summary should include additional discussion notes you would include for each section if you were presenting your poster at a professional conference. Typically, a poster presentation involves presenting your poster to small groups and providing an oral explanation as the audience reviews your poster.Summary of the data source.Variables used in the analysis.The six steps of hypothesis testing.Prepare and submit the PowerPoint poster and summary as two separate documents.Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. Refer to the LopesWrite Technical Support articles for assistance.
PUB 550 Benchmark – Analyzing and Reporting Data
Young’s Modulus Example (Increase In Length)
Young’s Modulus Example (Increase In Length).
A 190-kg load is hung on a wire of length of 3.70 m, cross-sectional area 2.00 10-5 m2, and Young’s modulus 8.00 1010 N/m2. What is its increase in length?
Young’s Modulus Example (Increase In Length)
Essay Writing at Online Custom Essay
Review This Service