Critique Article

CMHC KPIs, ASLOs & Dispositions 3/11/20 2

1. PYCL 0507 - Research and Evaluation for Counselors Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Faculty systematically assesses each student’s progress by examining a combination of knowledge and skills. Key performance indicators are course tasks, activities, or assignments selected by faculty to assess student learning in core content areas of the counseling curriculum. Key performance indicators are measured multiple times and at different points in time during the student’s master’s program. This course has been identified as fulfilling one of the eight core content areas of the counseling curriculum, Research and Evaluation for Counselors. The following content area objectives are addressed within this course via the designated Key Performance Indicator task described below.

1. Understand "the importance of research in advancing the counseling profession,” including its

use. 2. Demonstrate ability to search and acquire peer-reviewed literature through available physical and

electronic resources that inform evidence-based practice. 4. Understand development of outcome measures for counseling programs. 7. Understand designs used in research and program evaluation. 9. Understand the analysis and use of data in counseling. 10. Understand ethical and culturally relevant strategies for conducting, interpreting, and reporting

the results of research and/or program evaluation. Relevant Accreditation Standards Met by KPI:

Course Objective CACREP Standard* 1. 2. F. 8. A. 2. 2. F. 8. B. 4. 2. F. 8. D. 7. 2. F. 8. G. 9. 2. F. 8. i. 10. 2. F. 8. J.

* Clinical Mental Health Counseling Concentration only Students will demonstrate competency via successful completion of the following key performance indicator required task: PYCL 507 Required KPI Assignment: Critique of a Research Article (20 points) Each student will review an empirical research study (e.g., quantitative, qualitative, mixed method) published in a professional counseling journal and write a 9-page maximum paper critique (one page should be the title page, another one the abstract, and another one the reference list). Selecting an article that relates to your top clinical interest area is recommended. Please see the instructor for any questions about article selection.   For APA style, please use the 6th edition of the APA Publication Manual or visit the NSU library for online APA style resources. Papers are to be submitted prior to or on the due date. Papers submitted late will not be accepted. Submit your paper in Word format only. Consult the grading rubric at the end of this syllabus for grading details and additional information on this assignment.   Recommended Steps for this assignment:

1. Meet with an Alvin Sherman librarian. Go to the make an appointment for online help from the librarian at http://www.nova.edu/library/main/library-instruction.html. This is a full

CMHC KPIs, ASLOs & Dispositions 3/11/20 3

tutoring session, not just calling with a question. They can help you learn to search for peer- reviewed articles in the NSU Database.  2. Once you find the article, make sure that the following sections are clear: literature review, research questions, hypothesis, research methodology (that is, you can tell that the study is empirical) results, and interpretation of results.

A rubric for this assignment can be found at the end of the syllabus. Students must receive at least a 70% to receive a passing grade. A student who scores a ‘Not Met’ on any criterion of KPI assignment must complete an Individual Remediation Plan with the instructor. Failure to successfully remediate the KPI assignment will result in a F (Fail) grade in the course.

Required Critique of a Research Article Key Performance Indicator Rubric

The “Critique of a Research Article” assignment is used as a Key Performance Indicator for the

common core area of “Research and Evaluation.” Criterion Not Met =

0 points Met =

2 points Exceeded = 2.5 points

Points

Section 1: Rationale for Article Selection (2.5 points max) [C: 2. F. 8. a.] [C: 2. F. 8. b.]

The student did not provide or provided an inadequate rationale for selecting the article.

The student provided a brief rationale for selecting the article.

The student explained the rationale for selecting the article in a clear and precise manner.

Section 2: Description and Critique of Introduction and Literature Review. Includes statement of the problem, significance of the problem, theoretical context, and scope of the literature review, hypotheses/research questions/variables (2.5 points max) [C: 2. F. 8. a.]

The student did not provide a description or critique of the introduction and literature review; or major errors were found.

The student briefly described the introduction and literature review, but did not include the required elements in the critique; minor errors and omissions were found.

The student accurately described and critiqued the introduction and literature review and included all required elements in the critique

Section 3: Description and Critique of Research Methodology. Includes research design description, sampling, assessment of internal and external validity, instrumentation (psychometrics), sources of measurement error, feasibility of the study,

The student did not provide a critique of the research methodology; or major errors were found.

The student provided a brief critique of the research methodology and included some of the required elements, but not all; minor errors

Student provided am adequate critique of the research methodology and included all the required elements in the critique.

CMHC KPIs, ASLOs & Dispositions 3/11/20 4

ethical considerations (i.e., IRB approval, consent) (2.5 points max) [C: 2. F. 8. f.] [C: 2. F. 8. g.] [C: 2. F. 8. j.]

and omissions were found.

Section 4: Description and Interpretation of Findings. Includes data analysis procedures, reporting of results, use of figures and tables (i.e., used to promote understanding), interpretation of results (2.5 points max) [C: 2. F. 8. f.] [C: 2. F. 8. h.] [C: 2. F. 8. i.]

The student did not describe and interpret the findings; or major errors were found

The student briefly described and interpreted the findings but not did not include all the required elements; minor errors and omissions were found.

The student clearly described and interpreted the findings and included all the required elements.

Section 5: Discussion – Implications for Counseling Area of Study. Includes implications for counseling, implications for specific area (agency/clinical mental health, marriage and family, school), future research areas (2.5 points max) [C: 2. F. 8. i.] [C: 2. F. 8. d.]

The student did not include the implications for the counseling area of study, as requested; or major errors were found.

The student briefly described some of the implications for the counseling area of study future research areas; minor errors and omissions were found.

The student clearly described the implications for the counseling area of study including areas for future research.

Section 6: Description and Critique of Ethical Considerations. Includes description of ethical considerations (i.e., IRB approval, consent) (2.5 points max) [C: 2. F. 8. j.]

The student did not include a description of the ethical considerations under investigation, as requested; or major errors were found.

The student briefly described a description of the ethical considerations under investigation; minor errors and omissions were found.

The student clearly described the ethical considerations of the study including implications for future research.

Section 7: Discussion – Strengths, Limitations, Summary. Includes strengths, limitations, overall impression (what did you like, dislike, find interesting, etc.), what would you have added or changed? (2.5 points max)

The student did not properly summarize the strengths and limitations of the study; or major errors were found.

The student briefly summarized the strengths and limitations of the article; minor errors and omissions were found.

The student clearly summarized the strengths, limitations of the article, and added additional areas for improvement

Section 8: Instructor Evaluation of Writing. In accordance with APA

The student did not follow APA style guidelines,

The student followed some APA style

The student followed the instructions

CMHC KPIs, ASLOs & Dispositions 3/11/20 5

Manual (6th ed.)- includes clarity, readability, syntax, grammar, and punctuation errors impeding the readability of the paper; headings and sub-headings, title and reference pages, abstract, etc. (2.5 points max)

or major errors were found.

guidelines; minor errors and omissions were found.

outlined in Appendix A, and adhered to APA guidelines. The student’s writing was clear and to the point.

Total grade for the assignment (20 of 100 total points for the course or 20% of your total course grade):

*

* All students must pass the KPI Assignment at 70% or higher. Any ‘Not Met’ criterion requires instructor remediation prior to the end of the course to achieve a passing grade for the KPI. Students must pass the KPI to pass the course.