A3-Article Critique
Follow the template and grading rubric
Follow instruction
3 days ago 15
VIDEO.docx
ArticleCritiqueTemplate.docx
ArticleCritiqueAssignmentInstructions.doc
FiveApproachesGradingRubric.pdf
ArticleCritiqueGradingRubric.pdf
VIDEO.docx
VIDEO
https://canvas.liberty.edu/courses/1035064/pages/watch-a-primer-on-qualitative-research-approaches?module_item_id=103967200
ArticleCritiqueTemplate.docx
EDCO 747
Article Critique Template
Format your article critiques in a double-spaced Word document as follows:
|
Title page 2–4-paragraph summary of the article The last paragraph denotes the analysis section and begins with the words, “The following information depicts how this study uses the ______________________ approach:” and is followed with bulleted statements, just like Creswell & Poth’s work in the textbook. · First evidence statement (with or without citation from textbook) · Second evidence statement (with or without citation from textbook) · Third evidence statement (with or without citation from textbook) · Fourth evidence statement (with or without citation from textbook) Reference page |
ArticleCritiqueAssignmentInstructions.doc
EDCO 747
Article Critique Assignment Instructions
Overview
Creswell and Poth (2023) state, “We have always felt that the best way to learn how to write a qualitative study is to view a number of published qualitative journal articles and to look closely at the way they were composed” (p. 135). Thus, you will be given the opportunity to examine articles about two different research approaches and write critiques about each of them in two separate modules/weeks (the first one in module 3:week 3 and the second in module 5: week 5).
Instructions
First, you must select a research approach that you would like to understand better from the Creswell and Poth textbook:
· Narrative (Appendix A)
· Phenomenological (Appendix B)
· Grounded Theory (Appendix C)
· Ethnography (Appendix D)
· Case Study (Appendix E)
Choose one of the above research approaches for the first critique and select a different approach for the second critique. You cannot do the same approach for both critiques.
After selecting the approach you want to study, read the corresponding article (e.g. one of the appendices in the textbook) for that approach and the accompanying textbook summary of the approach you selected (pp. 135-153).
Next, you must choose a research article that corresponds to your selected research approach from the lists in Chapter 4 of the text.
· Narrative (pp. 86-87)
· Phenomenology (pp. 95-96)
· Grounded Theory (pp. 105-106)
· Ethnography (pp. 113-114)
· Case Study (pp.122-123)
NOTE: You MUST choose an article from the text, found in the list above.
Critique this article by following Creswell and Poth’s written model and the format in the template provided. Reread how Creswell and Poth carefully interject quotes from the article into their clear and concise article summaries to help you write your own summary.
· Remember: The First Article Critique is due in module 3: week 3 and the Second Article Critique is due in module 5: week 5
· Please see the Article Critique Template for specifications on length
· Follow APA formatting
Note: Your assignment will be checked for originality via the Turnitin plagiarism tool.
FiveApproachesGradingRubric.pdf
Criteria Ratings Points
Pertinent Information
20 to >18 pts
Advanced
Well-constructed, pertinent, and concise information is present for all content areas in the table for all five research approaches
18 to >16 pts
Proficient
Information is mostly well constructed, pertinent, and concise for all content areas in the table for all five research approaches
16 to >15 pts
Developing
Information is constructed with some pertinence for all content areas in the table for all five research approaches
15 to >0 pts
Below Expectations
Information is poorly constructed with limited pertinence for all content areas in the table for all five research approaches
0 pts
Not Present
Not present
20 pts
Comprehension of Approaches
15 to >13 pts
Advanced
Table clearly shows a solid understanding of the differences in each of the five approaches through careful word choice
13 to >12 pts
Proficient
Table adequately shows an understanding of the differences in each of the five approaches through adequate word choice
12 to >11 pts
Developing
Table somewhat shows an understanding of the differences of each of the five approaches through imprecise word choice
11 to >0 pts
Below Expectations
Table vaguely shows a limited understanding of the differences of each of the five approaches through imprecise word choice
0 pts
Not Present
Not present
15 pts
Format 10 to >9 pts
Advanced
Table uses clear and original writing with short phrases or short sentences when necessary; is free of spelling errors
9 to >8 pts
Proficient
The majority of the table uses clear and original writing with short phrases or short sentences; contains minimal spelling errors
8 to >7 pts
Developing
Table uses a fair amount of clear and original writing, short phrases or short sentences; spelling errors are present.
7 to >0 pts
Below Expectations
Table uses a limited amount of clear and original writing, short phrases or short sentences; spelling errors are pervasive
0 pts
Not Present
Not present
10 pts
APA 5 to >4 pts
Advanced
Citations are appropriately implemented and are formatted per current APA. Overall paper is formatted per current APA.
4 to >3 pts
Proficient
Minor errors regarding appropriate implementation and/or current APA formatting of citations. Few errors in paper format per current APA.
3 to >2 pts
Developing
A fair number of errors regarding appropriate implementation and/or APA formatting of citations. Several errors in paper format per APA.
2 to >0 pts
Below Expectations
Pervasive errors regarding appropriate implementation and/or current APA formatting of citations. Multiple errors in paper format per current APA.
0 pts
Not Present
Not present
5 pts
Five Approaches Grading Rubric | EDCO747_B01_202630
Criteria Ratings Points
Total Points: 50
Five Approaches Grading Rubric | EDCO747_B01_202630
ArticleCritiqueGradingRubric.pdf
Criteria Ratings Points
Summary Section
15 to >13 pts
Advanced
Summary is well-constructed and uses clear, and concise language; includes important article details, properly cited, and explains key components of the approach.
13 to >12 pts
Proficient
Summary is fairly well-constructed and uses language that is fairly clear and concise; includes most of the pertinent details of the article and explains key components of the approach fairly well with some appropriate citations.
12 to >11 pts
Developing
Summary is somewhat well constructed; uses language that has some clarity and conciseness; includes some of the pertinent details of the article and key components of the approach somewhat with a few appropriate citations.
11 to >0 pts
Below Expectations
Summary is poorly constructed; uses language that lacks clarity and conciseness; missing key details of the article and fails to explain key components of the approach well; lacks adequate citations.
0 pts
Not present
15 pts
Analysis Section
20 to >18 pts
Advanced
Analysis is well written and in the candidate’s own words; contains all required elements (correct introduction & bulleted information) and at least 4 statements delineating how the article fits the research design.
18 to >16 pts
Proficient
Analysis is adequately written, mostly in the candidate’s own words; contains most required elements (correct introduction & bulleted information) and some statements delineating how the article fits the research design.
16 to >15 pts
Developing
Analysis is written in some of the candidate’s own words; contains some required elements (introduction & bulleted information) and a few statements delineating how the article fits the research design.
15 to >0 pts
Below Expectations
Analysis is vaguely written and in some of the candidate’s own words; contains a few required elements (correct introduction & bulleted information); vaguely delineates how the article fits the research design.
0 pts
Not present
20 pts
Article Critique Grading Rubric | EDCO747_B01_202630
Criteria Ratings Points
Mechanics & Composition
5 to >4 pts
Advanced
Paper is free of errors in spelling and grammar. Doctoral-level writing style is evident with coherent, cohesive, effective sentence/ paragraph structures; logical progression; and transitions.
4 to >3 pts
Proficient
Few errors in spelling and grammar. Doctoral-level writing style is evident, displaying basic composition with most of the following elements: coherent, cohesive, effective sentence/ paragraph structures; logical progression; and transitions.
3 to >2 pts
Developing
A fair amount of errors in spelling, grammar, or punctuation. Writing includes several errors in some of the following categories: coherent, cohesive, effective sentence/ paragraph structures, logical progression, and transitions.
2 to >0 pts
Below Expectations
Pervasive errors in spelling, and grammar. Writing includes pervasive errors in the following categories: coherent, cohesive, effective sentence/ paragraph structures; logical progression; and transitions.
0 pts
Not present
5 pts
APA 10 to >9 pts
Advanced
Citations are appropriately implemented and are formatted per current APA. Overall paper is formatted per current APA: running head, page numbers, title page, spacing, indentions, margins, reference page and headings.
9 to >8 pts
Proficient
Minor errors regarding appropriate implementation and/or current APA formatting of citations. Few errors in paper format per current APA: running head, page numbers, title page, spacing, indentions, margins, reference page and headings.
8 to >7 pts
Developing
A fair amount of errors regarding appropriate implementation and/or APA formatting of citations. Several errors in paper format per APA: running head, page numbers, title page, spacing, indentations, margins, reference page and headings.
7 to >0 pts
Below Expectations
Pervasive errors regarding appropriate implementation and/or APA formatting of citations. Multiple errors in paper format per APA: running head, page numbers, title page, spacing, indentations, margins, reference page and headings.
0 pts
Not present
10 pts
Total Points: 50
Article Critique Grading Rubric | EDCO747_B01_202630
VIDEO.docx
VIDEO
https://canvas.liberty.edu/courses/1035064/pages/watch-a-primer-on-qualitative-research-approaches?module_item_id=103967200
ArticleCritiqueTemplate.docx
EDCO 747
Article Critique Template
Format your article critiques in a double-spaced Word document as follows:
|
Title page 2–4-paragraph summary of the article The last paragraph denotes the analysis section and begins with the words, “The following information depicts how this study uses the ______________________ approach:” and is followed with bulleted statements, just like Creswell & Poth’s work in the textbook. · First evidence statement (with or without citation from textbook) · Second evidence statement (with or without citation from textbook) · Third evidence statement (with or without citation from textbook) · Fourth evidence statement (with or without citation from textbook) Reference page |
ArticleCritiqueAssignmentInstructions.doc
EDCO 747
Article Critique Assignment Instructions
Overview
Creswell and Poth (2023) state, “We have always felt that the best way to learn how to write a qualitative study is to view a number of published qualitative journal articles and to look closely at the way they were composed” (p. 135). Thus, you will be given the opportunity to examine articles about two different research approaches and write critiques about each of them in two separate modules/weeks (the first one in module 3:week 3 and the second in module 5: week 5).
Instructions
First, you must select a research approach that you would like to understand better from the Creswell and Poth textbook:
· Narrative (Appendix A)
· Phenomenological (Appendix B)
· Grounded Theory (Appendix C)
· Ethnography (Appendix D)
· Case Study (Appendix E)
Choose one of the above research approaches for the first critique and select a different approach for the second critique. You cannot do the same approach for both critiques.
After selecting the approach you want to study, read the corresponding article (e.g. one of the appendices in the textbook) for that approach and the accompanying textbook summary of the approach you selected (pp. 135-153).
Next, you must choose a research article that corresponds to your selected research approach from the lists in Chapter 4 of the text.
· Narrative (pp. 86-87)
· Phenomenology (pp. 95-96)
· Grounded Theory (pp. 105-106)
· Ethnography (pp. 113-114)
· Case Study (pp.122-123)
NOTE: You MUST choose an article from the text, found in the list above.
Critique this article by following Creswell and Poth’s written model and the format in the template provided. Reread how Creswell and Poth carefully interject quotes from the article into their clear and concise article summaries to help you write your own summary.
· Remember: The First Article Critique is due in module 3: week 3 and the Second Article Critique is due in module 5: week 5
· Please see the Article Critique Template for specifications on length
· Follow APA formatting
Note: Your assignment will be checked for originality via the Turnitin plagiarism tool.
FiveApproachesGradingRubric.pdf
Criteria Ratings Points
Pertinent Information
20 to >18 pts
Advanced
Well-constructed, pertinent, and concise information is present for all content areas in the table for all five research approaches
18 to >16 pts
Proficient
Information is mostly well constructed, pertinent, and concise for all content areas in the table for all five research approaches
16 to >15 pts
Developing
Information is constructed with some pertinence for all content areas in the table for all five research approaches
15 to >0 pts
Below Expectations
Information is poorly constructed with limited pertinence for all content areas in the table for all five research approaches
0 pts
Not Present
Not present
20 pts
Comprehension of Approaches
15 to >13 pts
Advanced
Table clearly shows a solid understanding of the differences in each of the five approaches through careful word choice
13 to >12 pts
Proficient
Table adequately shows an understanding of the differences in each of the five approaches through adequate word choice
12 to >11 pts
Developing
Table somewhat shows an understanding of the differences of each of the five approaches through imprecise word choice
11 to >0 pts
Below Expectations
Table vaguely shows a limited understanding of the differences of each of the five approaches through imprecise word choice
0 pts
Not Present
Not present
15 pts
Format 10 to >9 pts
Advanced
Table uses clear and original writing with short phrases or short sentences when necessary; is free of spelling errors
9 to >8 pts
Proficient
The majority of the table uses clear and original writing with short phrases or short sentences; contains minimal spelling errors
8 to >7 pts
Developing
Table uses a fair amount of clear and original writing, short phrases or short sentences; spelling errors are present.
7 to >0 pts
Below Expectations
Table uses a limited amount of clear and original writing, short phrases or short sentences; spelling errors are pervasive
0 pts
Not Present
Not present
10 pts
APA 5 to >4 pts
Advanced
Citations are appropriately implemented and are formatted per current APA. Overall paper is formatted per current APA.
4 to >3 pts
Proficient
Minor errors regarding appropriate implementation and/or current APA formatting of citations. Few errors in paper format per current APA.
3 to >2 pts
Developing
A fair number of errors regarding appropriate implementation and/or APA formatting of citations. Several errors in paper format per APA.
2 to >0 pts
Below Expectations
Pervasive errors regarding appropriate implementation and/or current APA formatting of citations. Multiple errors in paper format per current APA.
0 pts
Not Present
Not present
5 pts
Five Approaches Grading Rubric | EDCO747_B01_202630
Criteria Ratings Points
Total Points: 50
Five Approaches Grading Rubric | EDCO747_B01_202630
ArticleCritiqueGradingRubric.pdf
Criteria Ratings Points
Summary Section
15 to >13 pts
Advanced
Summary is well-constructed and uses clear, and concise language; includes important article details, properly cited, and explains key components of the approach.
13 to >12 pts
Proficient
Summary is fairly well-constructed and uses language that is fairly clear and concise; includes most of the pertinent details of the article and explains key components of the approach fairly well with some appropriate citations.
12 to >11 pts
Developing
Summary is somewhat well constructed; uses language that has some clarity and conciseness; includes some of the pertinent details of the article and key components of the approach somewhat with a few appropriate citations.
11 to >0 pts
Below Expectations
Summary is poorly constructed; uses language that lacks clarity and conciseness; missing key details of the article and fails to explain key components of the approach well; lacks adequate citations.
0 pts
Not present
15 pts
Analysis Section
20 to >18 pts
Advanced
Analysis is well written and in the candidate’s own words; contains all required elements (correct introduction & bulleted information) and at least 4 statements delineating how the article fits the research design.
18 to >16 pts
Proficient
Analysis is adequately written, mostly in the candidate’s own words; contains most required elements (correct introduction & bulleted information) and some statements delineating how the article fits the research design.
16 to >15 pts
Developing
Analysis is written in some of the candidate’s own words; contains some required elements (introduction & bulleted information) and a few statements delineating how the article fits the research design.
15 to >0 pts
Below Expectations
Analysis is vaguely written and in some of the candidate’s own words; contains a few required elements (correct introduction & bulleted information); vaguely delineates how the article fits the research design.
0 pts
Not present
20 pts
Article Critique Grading Rubric | EDCO747_B01_202630
Criteria Ratings Points
Mechanics & Composition
5 to >4 pts
Advanced
Paper is free of errors in spelling and grammar. Doctoral-level writing style is evident with coherent, cohesive, effective sentence/ paragraph structures; logical progression; and transitions.
4 to >3 pts
Proficient
Few errors in spelling and grammar. Doctoral-level writing style is evident, displaying basic composition with most of the following elements: coherent, cohesive, effective sentence/ paragraph structures; logical progression; and transitions.
3 to >2 pts
Developing
A fair amount of errors in spelling, grammar, or punctuation. Writing includes several errors in some of the following categories: coherent, cohesive, effective sentence/ paragraph structures, logical progression, and transitions.
2 to >0 pts
Below Expectations
Pervasive errors in spelling, and grammar. Writing includes pervasive errors in the following categories: coherent, cohesive, effective sentence/ paragraph structures; logical progression; and transitions.
0 pts
Not present
5 pts
APA 10 to >9 pts
Advanced
Citations are appropriately implemented and are formatted per current APA. Overall paper is formatted per current APA: running head, page numbers, title page, spacing, indentions, margins, reference page and headings.
9 to >8 pts
Proficient
Minor errors regarding appropriate implementation and/or current APA formatting of citations. Few errors in paper format per current APA: running head, page numbers, title page, spacing, indentions, margins, reference page and headings.
8 to >7 pts
Developing
A fair amount of errors regarding appropriate implementation and/or APA formatting of citations. Several errors in paper format per APA: running head, page numbers, title page, spacing, indentations, margins, reference page and headings.
7 to >0 pts
Below Expectations
Pervasive errors regarding appropriate implementation and/or APA formatting of citations. Multiple errors in paper format per APA: running head, page numbers, title page, spacing, indentations, margins, reference page and headings.
0 pts
Not present
10 pts
Total Points: 50
Article Critique Grading Rubric | EDCO747_B01_202630