Posted: June 17th, 2022

Summative Assignment: Critique Of Research Article

Week eight: Summative Venture: Critique of Evaluation Article

Due Oct 18 by 2:59am Components 280 Submitting a textual content material entry area or a file add

Start Venture

A evaluation critique demonstrates your functionality to critically be taught an investigative study. For this process, choose a evaluation article related to nursing.

Articles used for this process cannot be used for the alternative assignments (faculty college students ought to find new evaluation articles for each new process). The chosen articles must be distinctive evaluation articles. Overview articles, concept analysis, meta-analysis, meta-synthesis, integrative analysis, and systemic analysis should not be used. Mixed-methods analysis should not be used. Dissertations should not be used.

Your critique should embody the subsequent:

Evaluation Downside/Aim

State the difficulty clearly because it’s launched inside the report. Have the investigators positioned the study draw back contained in the context of present info? Will the study resolve a problem associated to nursing? State the goal of the evaluation.

Overview of the Literature

Set up the concepts explored inside the literature analysis. Had been the references current? If not, what do you assume the reasons are? Was there proof of reflexivity inside the design (qualitative)?

Theoretical Framework

Are the theoretical concepts outlined and related to the evaluation? Does the evaluation draw solely on nursing idea or does it draw on idea from totally different disciplines? Is a theoretical framework mentioned on this evaluation piece? If not, counsel one which can be acceptable for the study.

Variables/Hypotheses/Questions/Assumptions (Quantitative)

What are the unbiased and dependent variables on this study? Are the operational definitions of the variables given? In that case, are they concrete and measurable? Is the evaluation question or the hypothesis mentioned? What’s it?

Conceptual Underpinnings, Evaluation Questions (Qualitative)

Are key concepts outlined conceptually? Is the philoosoophical basis, underlying customized, conoceptual framework, or ideological orientation made specific and is it acceptable for the difficulty? Are evaluation questions explicitly mentioned? Are the questions in line with the study’s philosophical basis, underlying customized, conceptual framework, or ideological orientation?

Methodology

What kind of design (quantitative, qualitative, and type) was used on this study? Was inductive or deductive reasoning used on this study? State the sample measurement and study inhabitants, sampling method, and study setting. Did the investigator choose a chance or non-probability sample? State the sort of reliability and the validity of the measurement devices (quantitative solely)

Qualitative analysis (reply the subsequent questions together with these above moreover the ultimate bulleted merchandise)

Had been the methods of gathering information acceptable? Had been information gathered by the use of two or additional methods to appreciate triangulation? Did the researcher ask the most effective questions or make the most effective observations and had been they recorded in a suitable vogue? Was a ample amount of data gathered? Was the knowledge of ample depth and richness?

Had been ethical considerations addressed? Had been acceptable procedures used to safeguard the rights of study people?

NURS_350_OL – NURS350-Evaluation Critique

Information Analysis

What information analysis software program was used? Was saturation achieved? (qualitative) How had been the outcomes launched inside the study? Had been the knowledge administration (e.g., coding) and information analysis methods sufficiently described? (qualitative) Set up a minimal of 1 (1) discovering.

Summary/Conclusions, Implications, and Strategies

Do the themes adequately seize the meaning of the knowledge? Did the analysis yield an insightful, provocative and vital picture of the phenomenon under investigation? Had been methods used to strengthen the trustworthiness of the knowledge (and analysis) and was the define of those methods ample? Are there clear clarification of the boundaries/limitations, thick description, audit path? What are the strengths and limitations of the study? By the use of the findings, can the researcher generalize to totally different populations? Make clear. Take into account the findings and conclusions as to their significance for nursing (every qualitative and quantitative).-Do the themes seize the whole meaning of the knowledge? In that case, how did the analysis produce a compelling and insightful picture of the phenomenon? Are the methods used ample to strengthen the knowledge’s trustworthiness?

The physique of your paper must be 4–6 double-spaced pages plus a cover net web page and a reference net web page. The critique needs to be hooked as much as the article and observe Help write my thesis – APA pointers.

Need Help write my thesis – APA Help? (https://westcoastuniversity.edu/sources/online-student-resources/apa.html)

You can submit the evaluation study articles alongside alongside together with your process.

Overview the rubric for extra knowledge on how your process will most likely be graded.

https://westcoastuniversity.edu/sources/online-student-resources/apa.html
Requirements Rankings Pts

28 pts

42 pts

28 pts

14 pts

Evaluation Downside/Aim

28 to >24.92 pts Meets or Exceeds Expectations

Evaluation draw back, operate of study, and relevance to nursing are clearly acknowledged.

24.92 to >21.zero pts Largely Meets Expectations

Evaluation draw back, operate of study, and relevance to nursing are significantly acknowledged.

21 to >16.52 pts Beneath Expectations

Evaluation draw back, operate of study, and relevance to nursing are principally absent or misidentified.

16.52 to >zero pts Does Not Meet Expectations

Evaluation draw back, operate of study, and relevance to nursing are absent.

Overview of the Literature

42 to >37.38 pts Meets or Exceeds Expectations

Concepts explored inside the literature analysis are clearly acknowledged. Critique of the references is included and successfully developed.

37.38 to >31.5 pts Largely Meets Expectations

Concepts explored inside the literature analysis are significantly acknowledged. Critique of the references is included, nonetheless might be not completely developed.

31.5 to >24.78 pts Beneath Expectations

Concepts explored inside the literature analysis are misidentified. Critique of the references is severely lacking.

24.78 to >zero pts Does Not Meet Expectations

Concepts explored inside the literature analysis are absent. Critique of the references is absent.

Theoretical Framework

28 to >24.92 pts Meets or Exceeds Expectations

A theoretical concept/framework is acknowledged and successfully analyzed for appropriateness. If the article lacks an concept/framework, an acceptable one is normally advisable.

24.92 to >21.zero pts Largely Meets Expectations

A theoretical concept/framework is significantly acknowledged and analyzed for appropriateness. If the article lacks an concept/framework, a doable concept/framework is normally advisable, nonetheless it is significantly inappropriate.

21 to >16.52 pts Beneath Expectations

A theoretical concept/framework is significantly acknowledged and analyzed for appropriateness. If the article lacks an concept/framework, a doable concept/framework is normally advisable, is simply not acknowledged or is grossly inappropriate.

16.52 to >zero pts Does Not Meet Expectations

A theoretical concept/framework is misidentified or not analyzed for appropriateness.

Variables, Hypotheses, Questions, and Assumptions

14 to >12.46 pts Meets or Exceeds Expectations

IV and DV are acknowledged and outlined. Dialogue on measurability is included. Evaluation question and hypothesis are acknowledged.

12.46 to >10.5 pts Largely Meets Expectations

IV and DV are significantly acknowledged and or partially outlined. Dialogue on measurability is significantly included. Evaluation question and hypothesis are partially acknowledged.

10.5 to >eight.26 pts Beneath Expectations

IV and DV identification and definition are absent or severely lacking. Dialogue on measurability is absent or inaccurate. Evaluation question and hypothesis aren’t acknowledged or grossly misidentified.

eight.26 to >zero pts Does Not Meet Expectations

IV and DV identification and definition are absent. Dialogue on measurability is absent. Evaluation question and hypothesis aren’t acknowledged.

Full Components: 280

Requirements Rankings Pts

56 pts

42 pts

56 pts

14 pts

Methodology 56 to >49.84 pts Meets or Exceeds Expectations

Type of design, sample measurement, study inhabitants, sampling method, and sort of reasoning are appropriately acknowledged. Reliability and validity of measurement devices, ethical considerations, and chance vs. non- chance sampling are talked about.

49.84 to >42.zero pts Largely Meets Expectations

Type of design, sample measurement, study inhabitants, sampling method, and sort of reasoning are significantly acknowledged. Reliability and validity of measurement devices, ethical considerations, and chance vs. non-probability sampling are talked about, nonetheless some knowledge is inaccurate.

42 to >33.04 pts Beneath Expectations

Type of design, sample measurement, study inhabitants, sampling method, and sort of reasoning are absent or misidentified. Reliability and validity of measurement devices, ethical considerations, and chance vs. non-probability sampling are each absent or grossly inaccurate.

33.04 to >zero pts Does Not Meet Expectations

Type of design, sample measurement, study inhabitants, sampling method, and sort of reasoning are absent. Reliability and validity of measurement devices, ethical considerations, and chance vs. non- chance sampling are absent.

Information Analysis 42 to >37.38 pts Meets or Exceeds Expectations

Information analysis software program is acknowledged. A proof on how the outcomes are launched inside the study is included and proper. A minimum of one discovering is appropriately acknowledged.

37.38 to >31.5 pts Largely Meets Expectations

Information analysis software program is significantly acknowledged. An incomplete clarification on how the outcomes are launched inside the study is included. A minimum of one discovering is acknowledged.

31.5 to >24.78 pts Beneath Expectations

Information analysis software program is absent or misidentified. A proof on how the outcomes are launched inside the study is absent or grossly unclear. Findings aren’t included or are grossly inaccurate.

24.78 to >zero pts Does Not Meet Expectations

Information analysis software program is absent. A proof on how the outcomes are launched inside the study is absent. Findings aren’t included.

Summary, Conclusions, Implications, and Strategies

56 to >49.84 pts Meets or Exceeds Expectations

Strengths and limitations of the study are acknowledged. A dialogue on whether or not or not or not the study could possibly be generalized is included. An evaluation of the findings, conclusions, and significance to nursing is included and acceptable.

49.84 to >42.zero pts Largely Meets Expectations

Strengths and limitations of the study are significantly acknowledged. A dialogue on whether or not or not or not the study could possibly be generalized is included nonetheless might be not completely developed. An evaluation of the findings, conclusions, and significance to nursing might be not completely developed.

42 to >33.04 pts Beneath Expectations

Strengths and limitations of study are absent or lacking. A dialogue on whether or not or not or not the study could possibly be generalized is absent or lacking. An evaluation of the findings, conclusions, and significance to nursing is absent or inappropriate.

33.04 to >zero pts Does Not Meet Expectations

Strengths and limitations of study are absent. A dialogue on whether or not or not or not the study could possibly be generalized is absent. An evaluation of the findings, conclusions, and significance to nursing is absent.

Mechanics and Help write my thesis – APA Format

14 to >12.46 pts Meets or Exceeds Expectations

Written in a clear, concise, formal, and organized technique. Responses are principally error free. Information from sources is appropriately paraphrased and exactly cited.

12.46 to >10.5 pts Largely Meets Expectations

Writing is generally clear and organized nonetheless is simply not concise or formal in language. Plenty of errors exist in spelling and grammar with minor interference with readability or comprehension. Most knowledge from sources is appropriately paraphrased and cited.-Writing is generally organized nonetheless lacks formal or formal language. Fairly a couple of errors can occur in spelling and grammar.
clear

Predict

10.5 to >eight.26 pts Beneath Expectations

Writing is generally unclear and unorganized. Some errors in spelling and grammar detract from readability and comprehension. Sources are missing or improperly cited.

eight.26 to >zero pts Does Not Meet Expectations

Writing is unclear and unorganized. Errors in spelling and grammar detract from readability and comprehension. Sources are missing.

-research paper writing service

Order | Check Discount

Tags: custom written college papers, essay custom writer service writing paper, essay writer free generator, essay writing service online free, free essay typer