Description
This assignment requires to locate a primary research peer-reviewed article (not a systematic one) in my area which is type 2 diabetes which includes the elements in the uploaded file below and write no more than 2 page analysis of the research that includes the elements listed and don’t forget to provide a link to the peer-reviewed research article; ONLY critique the research problem The link to a sample video is provided for more clarification Please format the analysis according to the APA 6th edition guidelines and strictly follow the guidelines and instructions
Unformatted Attachment Preview
Fe.com/courses/2598219/assignments/23742445
Week 5: Critique of the Research Problem
Submit Assignment
Due Oct 13 by 11:59pm
Points 25
Submitting a file upload
Resource: John A. Graziano Memorial Library
In preparation for your final research paper, this analysis will be included as
of the critique of 10 required articles.
Locate a primary research peer-reviewed article in your area of interest that includes the following elements (Do not
use a systematic review paper for this assignment):
• Background
• Methods
• Results
Discussion
.
Write no more than a 2-page analysis of the research article that includes the following:
.
• Title of the article, problem, and purpose (Note: Format these in a way similar to Tables 5-1 to 5-4 on pp. 88-93 of
The Practice of Nursing Research.)
Critique of the significance of the problem according to its clarity, feasibility, potential influence on nursing
practice, and building on previous research
o clarity (Is the problem clearly stated or do you have to hunt for it?)
o feasibility (is this a problem that is possible to research and why?)
o potential influence on nursing practice
o how the study builds upon previous research (does the literature review in the article support the need for this
study?)
Please provide a link to your peer-reviewed research article
You ONLY need to critique the research problem for this assignment; we will examine the sample, methods and
data analysis in future assignments.
• A link to your peer-reviewed research article
Below is a link to a video review of this week’s critique of the research problem by Dr. Hultgren in a previous class.
This may be helpful to facilitate understanding this assignment.
https://samuelmerritt.instructure.com/media_objects/m-5Wp3vc5si7CXSKozjd7TMySF1SUPZWs3
Format your analysis according to APA 6th edition guidelines.
Submit your assignment no later than 11:59 p.m. (Pacific time) on Sunday.
merritt instructure.com/courses/2598219/assignments/23742445
data analysis in future assignments.
• A link to your peer-reviewed research article
Below is a link to a video review of this week’s critique of the research problem by Dr. Hultgren in a previous class.
This may be helpful to facilitate understanding this assignment.
https://samuelmerritt instructure.com/media_objects/m-5Wp3vc5si7CXSKozjd7TMySF1SUPZWs3
Format your analysis according to APA 6th edition guidelines.
Submit your assignment no later than 11:59 p.m. (Pacific time) on Sunday.
Week 5: Critique of the Research Problem
Criteria
Ratings
Pts
5.0 pts
3.0 pts
Met
Analysis of
topic, and
logical
expression of
ideas
1.0 pts
Not Met
0.0 pts
No
Submission
♡
Exceeds
Excels in responding to
assignment. Interesting,
demonstrates
sophistication of thought.
Central idea/thesis is
clearly communicated,
worth developing, while
limited enough to be
manageable. Submission
recognizes some
complexity of its thesis:
may acknowledge its
contradictions,
qualifications, or limits
and follow out their
logical implications.
Understands and
critically evaluates its
sources, appropriately
limits and defines terms.
2.0 pts
Needs Improvement
Adequate but
weaker and less
effective, possibly
responding less well
to assignment
Presents central idea
in general terms,
often depending on
platitudes or clichés.
Usually does not
adequately
acknowledge other
views. Shows basic
comprehension of
sources, perhaps
with lapses in
understanding. If it
defines terms, often
depends on
dictionary
definitions.
A solid submission,
responding
appropriately to
assignment. Clearly
states a
thesis/central idea
but may have minor
lapses in
development.
Begins to
acknowledge the
complexity of
central idea and the
possibility of other
points of view.
Shows careful
reading of sources
but may not
evaluate them
critically. Attempts
to define terms, not
always successfully.
Does not have
a clear central
idea or does
not respond
appropriately
to the
assignment
Thesis may be
too vague or
obvious to be
developed
effectively.
Submission
may not
demonstrate
understanding
of sources.
Does not
respond to
the
assignment,
lacks a
thesis or
central
idea, and
may
neglect to
use sources
where
necessary.
The
assignment
is not
turned in.
5.0 pts
1.0 pts
Not Met
0.0 pts
No
Submission
Critical
Thinking
(Logical
Structure,
5.0 pts
Exceeds
Uses a logical
structure
3.0 pts
Met
Shows a logical
progression of
2.0 pts
Needs Improvement
Lists ideas or arrange
them randomly rather
Has random
organization
No
e
samuelmerritt instructure.com/courses/2598219/assignments/23742445
to define terms, not
always successfully.
definitions.
5.0 pts
Exceeds
3.0 pts
Met
1.0 pts
Not Met
0.0 pts
No
Submission
Has random
Critical
Thinking
(Logical
Structure,
clear
purpose,
considers
audience,
transitions
between
ideas are
clear, ideas
are
developed,
reader can
follow
progression
of ideas.)
Uses a logical
structure
appropriate to
submission’s
subject, purpose,
audience, thesis,
and disciplinary
field. Sophisticated
transitional
sentences often
develop one idea
from the previous
one, or identify
their logical
relations. Guides
the reader through
the chain of
reasoning or
progression of
ideas.
Shows a logical
progression of
ideas and uses
fairly
sophisticated
transitional
devices; e.g.
may move from
least to more
important idea.
Some logical
links may be
faulty, but each
paragraph
clearly relates
to submission’s
central idea.
2.0 pts
Needs Improvement
Lists ideas or arrange
them randomly rather
than using any evident
logical structure. May use
transitions, but they are
likely to be sequential
(first, second, third) rather
than logic-based. While
each paragraph may relate
to central idea, logic is not
always clear. Paragraphs
have topic sentences but
may be overly general, and
arrangement of sentences
within paragraphs may
lack coherence.
organization,
lacking internal
paragraph
coherence and
using few or
inappropriate
transitions.
Paragraphs may
lack topic
sentences or
main ideas or are
too general or too
specific to be
effective.
Paragraphs do
not all relate to
submission’s
thesis.
No
appreciable
organization;
lacks
transitions
and
coherence.
The
assignment
is not turned
in.
5.0 pts
Evidence
5.0 pts
Exceeds
1.0 pts
Not Met
Depends on clichés
or
Uses
evidence
appropriately
and
effectively,
providing
sufficient
evidence and
explanation
to convince.
Full Marks
3.0 pts
Met
Begins to offer
reasons to support
its points, perhaps
using varied kinds
of evidence. Begins
to interpret the
evidence and
explain connections
between evidence
and main ideas. Its
examples bear
some relevance.
2.0 pts
Needs Improvement
Often uses generalizations
to support its points. May
use examples, but they may
be obvious or not relevant.
Often depends on
unsupported opinion or
personal experience or
assumes that evidence
speaks for itself and needs
no application to the point
being discussed. Often has
lapses in logic.
overgeneralizations
for support or
offers little
evidence of any
kind. May be
personal narrative
rather than essay,
or summary rather
than analysis.
0.0 pts
No
Submission
Uses
irrelevant
details or
lacks
supporting
evidence
entirely
May be
unduly
brief. The
assignment
is not
turned in
5.0 pts
1.0 pts
0.0 pts
3.0 pts
2.0 pts
Language
5.0 pts
e
rritt.instructure.com/courses/2598219/assignments/23742445
progression of
ideas.
thesis,
Evidence
5.0 pts
Exceeds
3.0 pts
Met
1.0 pts
Not Met
0.0 pts
No
Submission
Uses
evidence
appropriately
and
effectively,
providing
sufficient
evidence and
explanation
to convince.
Full Marks
Begins to offer
reasons to support
its points, perhaps
using varied kinds
of evidence. Begins
to interpret the
evidence and
explain connections
between evidence
and main ideas. Its
examples bear
some relevance.
2.0 pts
Needs Improvement
Often uses generalizations
to support its points. May
use examples, but they may
be obvious or not relevant.
Often depends on
unsupported opinion or
personal experience or
assumes that evidence
speaks for itself and needs
no application to the point
being discussed. Often has
lapses in logic.
Depends on clichés
or
overgeneralizations
for support or
offers little
evidence of any
kind. May be
personal narrative
rather than essay,
or summary rather
than analysis.
5.0 pts
Uses
irrelevant
details or
lacks
supporting
evidence
entirely.
May be
unduly
brief. The
assignment
is not
turned in.
Language
usage
3.0 pts
Met
1.0 pts
Not Met
0.0 pts
No
Submission
5.0 pts
Exceeds
Chooses words for their
precise meaning and
uses an appropriate
level of specificity.
Sentence style fits
assignment’s audience
and purpose. Sentences
are varied, yet clearly
structured and carefully
focused, not long and
rambling.
Generally uses
words accurately
and effectively, but
may sometimes be
too general.
Sentences
generally clear,
well structured,
and focused,
though some may
be awkward or
ineffective.
2.0 pts
Needs
Improvement
Uses relatively
vague and general
words, may use
some
inappropriate
language.
Sentence structure
generally correct,
but sentences may
be wordy,
unfocused,
repetitive, or
confusing
May be too vague
and abstract, or
very personal
and specific.
Usually contains
several awkward
or ungrammatical
sentences:
sentence
structure is
simple or
monotonous.
5.0 pts
ما
Usually
contains
many
awkward
sentences,
misuses
words.
employs
inappropriate
language. The
assignment is
not turned in.
1.0 pts
0.0 pts
5.0 pts
Exceeds
No Submission
Almost
entirely free
of spelling,
ounctuation,
3.0 pts
Met
May contain a
few errors,
which may
annoy the
reader but not
impede
2.0 pts
Needs
Improvement
Usually contains
several mechanical
errors, which may
temporarily
confuse the reader
Not Met
Usually contains either
many mechanical errors
or a few important
errors that block the
reader’s understanding
and ability to see
Contains so many
mechanical errors that
it is impossible for the
reader to follow the
thinking from
sentence to sentence.
5.0 pts
matical
que of the Research X
+
samuelmerritt instructure.com/courses/2598219/assignments/23742445
repetitive, or
confusing.
not turned in.
5.0 pts
Exceeds
Mechanics
such as
punctuation,
spelling and
grammatical
correctness
Almost
entirely free
of spelling
punctuation,
and
grammatical
errors.
3.0 pts
Met
May contain a
few errors,
which may
annoy the
reader but not
impede
understanding
2.0 pts
Needs
Improvement
Usually contains
several mechanical
errors, which may
temporarily
confuse the reader
but does not
impede the overall
understanding.
1.0 pts
Not Met
Usually contains either
many mechanical errors
or a few important
errors that block the
reader’s understanding
and ability to see
connections between
thoughts.
0.0 pts
No Submission
Contains so many
mechanical errors that
it is impossible for the
reader to follow the
thinking from
sentence to sentence.
The assignment is not
turned in.
5.0 pts
G CLO
1.0 pts
0.0 pts
No Marks
Aligned
N601_01
view longer
description
threshold: 1.0 pts
1.0 pts
Aligned
0.0 pts
No Marks
CLO
N601_02
view longer
description
threshold: 1.0 pts
1.0 pts
Aligned
0.0 pts
No Marks
CLO
N601_04
view longer
description
threshold: 1.0 pts
GCLO
1.0 pts
Aligned
0.0 pts
No Marks
N601_05
view longer
description
threshold: 1.0 pts
Total Points: 25.0
Next
« Previous
El
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
