EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICE

Generalist Practice 1 Fall

Written Assignment #1: Evidence-Based Practice Paper.

Due Week 7

Syllabus Description:

In this paper, you will start by choosing a practice problem (preferably something of interest to you), conduct an evidence-based search, find two articles that address your practice problem, and then summarize the two articles.

Please have your practice problem approved by the instructor prior to completing this assignment (due week 3).

Please submit an annotated bibliography of your two articles (due week 4).

Outline for Paper:

Abstract (1/2 page) – Okay to include but not expected. If included, add an additional page to your paper. *Note abstracts go on their own page even if only a paragraph long.

Introduction (3/4 page) – Introduce your reader to the topic and structure of your paper.

Summary of Article 1 (3/4 page page) – Provide a summary of the article you are critiquing: this shows you understood it. Provide a brief overview of what the article was trying to do (i.e., the problem), methods, if relevant, and the thesis or findings.

Evidence from Article 1 (describe and critique the evidence) – (1 page) – Your critical evaluation of the article. You might address the article’s problem, methods, or findings, or all of these, offering specific support from the text itself (using paraphrase or direct quote with proper citations) for your observations.

Summary of Article 2 (3/4 page) - Provide a summary of the article you are critiquing: this shows you understood it. Provide a brief overview of what the article was trying to do (i.e., the problem), methods, if relevant, and the thesis or findings.

Evidence from Article 2 (describe and critique the evidence) (1 page)

Evidence from Article 2 (describe and critique the evidence) – (1 page) – Your critical evaluation of the article. You might address the article’s problem, methods, or findings, or all of these offering specific support from the text itself (using paraphrase or direct quote with proper citations) for your observations.

Here are some guiding questions to help you think of what to write when critiquing the evidence from both articles:

◦Did the article ask the right question in the first place? How does it fit with other articles on the same topic? Did it miss any important studies it should have considered? ◦Did the problem match the methods? For example, to understand student behavior, were students observed or interviewed, or did all the data come from teachers? ◦Were the findings reported in a consistent and clear format? Did you notice problems in the data that the article overlooked? Did the article fail to acknowledge and explain any limitations? ◦Was the logic clear and were claims properly supported with convincing data? Did you spot any fallacies?

Conclusion (What I believe now, what evidence convinced me, and why) (3/4 page). Your opinion of the article. Did you agree with the thesis or believe the findings? If everything was logical, clear, and well-ordered, yet you remain skeptical, how would you explain that? Perhaps a fundamental difference in values would explain it, or perhaps you know of counter-evidence not considered by the author. Your estimation of the article’s contribution to knowledge and its implications or applications to our world.

References (1 page)

Page length –7 pages (including title page and reference page).

Follow APA formatting, Times New Roman, and 12 font, double spaced.

Grading Rubric

Criterion/Points	Below Expectations 1-5	Needs Improvement 6-10	Meets Expectations 11-15	Exceeds Expectations 16-20	SCORE
Summary of Article #1	Does not address question	Response is underdeveloped, lacks specifics, and is missing key concepts from the article.	Response is moderately developed, addresses specifics with identification of some key concepts from the article	Response sufficiently addresses question, with thorough identification of key concepts from the article.
Evaluation/Critique of Article #1	Does not address question	Response is underdeveloped, lacks specifics, and is missing key information.	Response is moderately developed, addresses specifics with identification of some key information.	Response provides thorough critique with thorough identification of key information.
Summary of Article #2	Does not address question	Response is underdeveloped, lacks specifics, and is missing key concepts from the article.	Response is moderately developed, addresses specifics with identification of some key concepts from the article.	Response is sufficiently developed with thorough identification of key concepts from the article.
Evaluation/Critique of Article #2	Does not address question	Response is underdeveloped, lacks specifics, and is missing key information.	Response is moderately developed, addresses specifics with identification of some key information.	Response sufficiently addresses question, with thorough identification of key information.
Professional Communication, Writing, and APA	Paper has more than 10 spelling and/or grammar errors. OR more than 10 APA errors; AND is conceptually and/or logically unsound.	Paper has 7-10 spelling and/or grammar errors; or 7-10 APA errors; AND lacks flow but is not logically presented.	Paper has 4-6 spelling and/or grammar errors; OR 4-6 APA errors; AND lacks flow, but is conceptually sound.	Paper has 0-1 spelling and/or grammar errors; OR 0-1 APA errors; AND paper is logically and conceptually sound
Total