Please do not delete anything from the template except for the words.docx

Please do not delete anything from the template except for the
words “you fill out”
. Simply place your
answers
where requested below, and be sure to show and explain all of
your work. Please also attach your Excel spreadsheet (
required
). This document contains a lot of information. Please read
every word, all the way to the end
J
***Please place your intro paragraph here (100 words min.).
Please use APA format for your intro (double spaced, size 12
font). ***
Your intro paragraph must include a thesis statement. Please
explain your paper and what you are doing here in this task.
1.
Using the Hamilton method of apportionment, determine the
number of seats each state should receive.
Please fill out the below table. Please also attach your Excel
spreadsheet.
State
Number of Seats
1
You fill out
2
You fill out
3
You fill out
4

You fill out
5
You fill out
6
You fill out
7
You fill out
8
You fill out
9
You fill out
10
You fill out
2.
Using the numbers you just calculated from applying the
Hamilton method, determine the average constituency for each
state. Explain your decision making process for allocating the
remaining seats.
Please fill out the below table. Please also attach your Excel
spreadsheet.
State
Average Constituency
1
You fill out
2
You fill out
3
You fill out
4
You fill out
5

You fill out
6
You fill out
7
You fill out
8
You fill out
9
You fill out
10
You fill out
Please answer the following (required):
·
What does Average Constituency mean?
·
What does it measure?
·
How is it calculated?
·
What is the process for allocating surplus/remaining seats?
HINT: see pages 533-534 of the textbook.
3.
Calculate the absolute and relative unfairness of this

apportionment.
Please answer the following:
·
What two states will you be using for your calculations?
Please state them here.
·
What is the absolute unfairness?
State your final answer here.
Please show all work.
·
What is the relative unfairness?
State your final answer here.
Please show all work
HINT: you can find the formulas in the textbook.
4.
Explain how changes in state boundaries or populations could
affect the balance of representation in this congress. Provide an
example using the results above.
Please answer the following (
100 words minimum
):

·
Explain how changes in state boundaries or populations could
affect the balance of representation in this congress. What can
cause population increase? What can cause population decrease?
What can cause state boundaries to change? How do all of these
affect the balance of representation?
·
Provide a
numerical exam
ple like I showed in the example document. Include and show
all of your work. Include your original population numbers and
seat numbers, and include your modified population numbers
and seat numbers. Please explain all of your work very clearly
(with written text and math work).
5.
How and why could an Alabama Paradox occur?
Please answer the question with
at least 3 to 5 complete sentences
. Please discuss both
HOW
and
WHY
it occurs.
HINTS:
http://www.ctl.ua.edu/math103/apportionment/paradoxs.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apportionment_paradox#Alabama_
paradox
6.
Explain how applying the Huntington-Hill apportionment
method helps to avoid an Alabama Paradox.
Please answer the question with
at least 3 to 5 complete sentences
.
HINT: see Section 11.2 in the textbook.
7.
Based upon your experience in solving this problem, do you feel
apportionment is the best way to achieve fair representation? Be
sure to support your answer.
Answers will vary. Please provide an answer of
no less than 150 words
and defend your reasoning.
Hint: Note that “Apportionment” here refers to a method of
dividing seats between states to achieve fair representation.
And, Hamiltonian and Huntington methods are specific
types
of Apportionment. Here is a diagram to help illustrate:
Ways of achieving
representation:

Apportionment Other
types? (you will need to research these)
Hamiltonian Huntington-Hill
Method Method
of Apportionment of Apportionment
Please evaluate the Hamiltonian method. Do you feel that it is
fair? Why or why not? Cite examples from your work above and
other examples that you find.
Please evaluate the Huntington-Hill method. Do you feel that it
is fair? Why or why not? Cite examples from your work above
and other examples that you find.

Please evaluate the Apportionment method as a whole. Do you
feel that it is fair? Why or why not? Cite examples from your
work above and other examples that you find.
8.
Suggest another strategy that could be applied to achieve fair
representation either using apportionment methods or a method
of your choosing.
Answers will vary. Please provide an answer of
no less than 100 words
and defend your reasoning with
specific examples
.
Here are some examples of different methods that you might
choose and discuss:
• Jefferson’s method
• Adams’ method
• Webster’s method
---------------------------------------------------
***Please place your conclusion paragraph here (100 words
min.) Please use APA format for your intro (double spaced, size
12 font). ***
Please include your references in APA format here at the end.
Here is the grading rubric. Your goal is to achieve all in the
orange column
J

Unsatisfactory
Emerging
Proficient
Exemplary
Assignment Components
Application of Hamilton and Huntington-Hill formulas to
determine number of seats for each state.
Analysis of those results to determine state average
constituency.
(CO1, CO2, CO3)
Application of both the Hamilton
and
Huntington-Hill formulas is inaccurate, resulting in
inappropriate number of seats for each state.
Analysis of the results from both the Hamilton
and
Huntington-Hill formulas are inaccurate and results in the
inappropriate state average constituency for the correct formula;
or analysis is too underdeveloped or too unclear and interferes
with comprehension.
Application of either the Hamilton
or
Huntington-Hill formulas is accurate, resulting in appropriate
number of seats for each state. However, the other formula is
inaccurate.

Analysis of the results from either the Hamilton
or
Huntington-Hill formulas is accurate and results in the
appropriate state average constituency for the correct formula;
or analysis is unclear and confusing.
Application of both the Hamilton and Huntington-Hill formulas
is accurate, resulting in appropriate number of seats for each
state.
Analysis of the results from both the Hamilton and Huntington-
Hill formulas is accurate and results in the appropriate state
average constituency.
Application of both the Hamilton and Huntington-Hill formulas
is accurate, resulting in appropriate number of seats for each
state, and clearly described to demonstrate mastery of all
calculations.
Analysis of the results from both the Hamilton and Huntington-
Hill formulas is accurate and results in the appropriate state
average constituency. Analysis is clear and detailed.
Analysis of results from above to determine if Alabama paradox
occurred.
(CO1, CO2, CO3)
Determination of whether or not an Alabama paradox occurred
in both the Hamilton and the Huntington-Hill results is
inaccurate or too underdeveloped or unclear to assess.
in both the Hamilton and the Huntington-Hill results is
somewhat accurate, but is somewhat unclear or underdeveloped.
in both the Hamilton and the Huntington-Hill results is clear
and accurate.

in both the Hamilton and the Huntington-Hill results is clear,
accurate, and uses several specific examples to support its
analysis.
Analysis of state boundaries and population effects on
representational balance.
(CO4, CO5)
Analysis of effects on representational balance is unclear,
underdeveloped, or inaccurate throughout. It lacks examples
from state boundaries
or
population to support its claims.
Analysis of effects on representational balance is somewhat
unclear or inaccurate in spots. It includes examples from state
boundaries
or
population to support its claims.
Analysis of effects on representational balance is clear and
accurate. It includes specific, accurate examples from both state
boundaries and population to support its claims.
Analysis of effects on representational balance is clear and
accurate. It includes specific, accurate examples from both state
boundaries and population to support its claims. Examples
provided are demonstrated mathematically.
Evaluation of the apportionment methods.
(CO4, CO5)
Evaluation of apportionment does not reference data found to
support the claim. It evaluates the Hamilton or the Huntington-
Hill results independently, but evaluation is underdeveloped or
inaccurate. Evaluation of the apportionment method may be
present but is inaccurate. Evaluation is clearly lacking
development and clarity.

Evaluation of apportionment vaguely references data found to
support the claim. It evaluates the Hamilton or the Huntington-
Hill results independently or evaluates the apportionment
method as a whole without using specific examples for each.
The evaluation is somewhat inaccurate or unclear.
Evaluation of apportionment references specific examples from
the data found to support the claim. It evaluates the Hamilton
and the Huntington-Hill results independently or evaluates the
apportionment method as a whole without using specific
examples for each.
Evaluation of apportionment references specific examples from
the data found to support the claim. It evaluates both the
Hamilton and the Huntington-Hill results independently, and it
evaluates the apportionment method as a whole using examples
for each.
Proposed solution to achieve fair representation.
(CO4, CO5)
Proposal is underdeveloped or inaccurate. No examples are
provided to support solution’s effectiveness.
Proposal is somewhat clear or may have elements that are
inaccurate. It provides a few to any examples, but examples do
not clearly support solution’s effectiveness.
Proposal is clear and accurate. It provides specific examples to
support the solution’s effectiveness.
Proposal is clear, accurate, and insightful. It provides a variety
of specific examples that demonstrate the solution’s
effectiveness in a variety of settings.
Writing Components
Organization
Introduction
Thesis
Transitions

Conclusion
Introduction is limited or missing entirely.
The paper lacks a thesis statement.
Transitions are infrequent, illogical, or missing entirely.
Conclusion is limited or missing entirely.
Introduction is present but incomplete or underdeveloped.
The paper is loosely organized around a thesis that may have to
be inferred.
Transitions are sporadic.
Conclusion is present, but incomplete or underdeveloped.
Introduction has a clear opening, provides background
information, and states the topic.
The paper is organized around an arguable, clearly stated thesis
statement.
Transitions are appropriate and help the flow of ideas.
Conclusion summarizes main argument and has a clear ending.
Introduction catches the reader’s attention, provides compelling
and appropriate background info, and clearly states the topic.
The paper is well organized around an arguable, focused thesis.
Thoughtful transitions clearly show how ideas relate.

Conclusion leaves the reader with a sense of closure and
provides concluding insights.
Usage and Mechanics
Grammar
Spelling
Sentence structure
Writing contains numerous errors in spelling, grammar, and/or
sentence structure that severely interferes with readability and
comprehension.
Errors in spelling and grammar exist that somewhat interfere
with readability and/or comprehension.
Writing follows conventions of spelling and grammar
throughout. Errors are infrequent and do not interfere with
readability or comprehension.
The paper is basically error free in terms of mechanics.
Grammar and mechanics help establish a clear idea and aid the
reader in following the writer’s logic.
APA Elements
Attribution
Paraphrasing
Quotations
No attempt at APA format.
APA format is attempted to paraphrase, quote, and cite, but
errors are significant.
Using APA format, accurately paraphrased, quoted, and cited in
many spots throughout when appropriate or called for. Errors
present are somewhat minor.

Using APA format, accurately paraphrased, quoted, and cited
throughout the presentation when appropriate or called for.
Only a few minor errors present.
Style
Audience
Word Choice
Writing often slips into first and/or second person.
Word choice is consistently inaccurate, unclear, or
inappropriate for the audience.
Writing sometimes slips into first and/or second person.
Word choice is sometimes inaccurate, unclear, or inappropriate
for the audience.
Writing remains in third person throughout writing.
Word choice is accurate, clear and appropriate for the audience.
Writing remains professional in third person throughout
writing.
Word choice is precise, appropriate for the audience, and
memorable.

Please do not delete anything from the template except for the words.docx

More Related Content

Similar to Please do not delete anything from the template except for the words.docx (6)

More from rowthechang (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Please do not delete anything from the template except for the words.docx