|
Qualitative Analysis (1)
|
|
Criteria
|
Ratings
|
Pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAPA style reference
|
|
3 to >2.67 pts
Full Marks
No errors. Authors, date, article title, journal name, issue, volume, pages, and DOI are correct.
|
2.67 to >2.37 pts
Meets expectations
No more than one error in the entry.
|
2.37 to >0.33 pts
Developing
No more than two errors in the entry.
|
0.33 to >0 pts
Unacceptable
More than two errors in the entry.
|
|
3 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeConflict of Interest
Able to identify sources of funding and possible conflict of interest. Can explain the importance of funding sources.
|
|
2 to >1.58 pts
Exemplary
The student is able to locate information on funding sources and explain the importance of conflict of interest as it relates to research.
|
1.58 to >1.0 pts
Developing
The student partially answers the prompt. Funding sources might be identified, but the importance might not be clear.
|
1 to >0 pts
Unnacceptable
Incomplete or no answer.
|
|
2 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAbstract
The student is able to analyze the article's abstract and compare it to APA requirements.
|
|
5 to >4.4 pts
Exemplary
Accurately describes the content of the abstract, including purpose, method, results, implications and keywords.
|
4.4 to >2.0 pts
Meets Expectations
A moderately clear summary of the abstract. No more than one small detail was omitted.
|
2 to >0 pts
Unsatisfactory
Incomplete or missing discussion of the abstract.
|
|
5 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIntroduction
The student can locate and describe the purpose/goal/aims of the study. Can also explain why this purpose or goal is important?
|
|
5 to >4.4 pts
Exemplary
An exceptionally clear statement of purpose and importance.
|
4.4 to >2.0 pts
Meets Expectations
A moderately clear statement of purpose; moderately clear explanation of importance.
|
2 to >0 pts
Unsatisfactory
No statement of purpose or the one that is provided is not accurate. Importance is missing or inaccurate.
|
|
5 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeOverview of research design
Able to locate and accurately represent what the authors say about their research design, their rationale for using it, and any theoretical perspective if one is used. Able to identify the location of this information in the article.
|
|
5 to >3.0 pts
Full Marks
Able to locate and accurately represent what the authors say about their research design, their rationale for using it, and any theoretical perspective if one is used. Able to identify the location of this information in the article
|
3 to >2.0 pts
Meets Expectations
Somewhat able to locate and accurately represent what the authors say about their research design, their rationale for using it, and any theoretical perspective if one is used. Able to identify the location of this information in the article
|
2 to >0 pts
No Marks
Limited ability to locate and accurately represent what the authors say about their research design, their rationale for using it, and any theoretical perspective if one is used. Unable to identify the location of this information in the article.
|
|
5 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeParticipant Information
Able to locate and accurately represent what the authors say about their participants, including the number, demographic characteristics, and any perspectives the participants might have which could affect the results. Able to identify the location of this information in the article.
|
|
5 to >3.0 pts
Full Marks
Able to locate and accurately represent what the authors say about their participants, including the number, demographic characteristics, and any perspectives the participants might have which could affect the results. Able to identify the location of this information in the article.
|
3 to >2.0 pts
Meets Expectations
Mostly able to locate and accurately represent what the authors say about their participants, including the number, demographic characteristics, and any perspectives the participants might have which could affect the results. Able to identify the location of this information in the article.
|
2 to >0 pts
No Marks
Limited ability to locate and accurately represent what the authors say about their participants, including the number, demographic characteristics, and any perspectives the participants might have which could affect the results. Unable to identify the location of this information in the article.
|
|
5 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeParticipant Selection
Able to locate and accurately represent what the authors say about the participant selection process, and can identify the location of this information in the article.
|
|
5 to >3.0 pts
Full Marks
Able to locate and accurately represent what the authors say about the participant selection process, and can identify the location of this information in the article.
|
3 to >2.0 pts
Meets Expectations
Mostly able to locate and accurately represent what the authors say about the participant selection process, and can identify the location of this information in the article.
|
2 to >0 pts
No Marks
Unable to locate and accurately represent what the authors say about the participant selection process, and cannot identify the location of this information in the article.
|
|
5 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeData Collection
Able to accurately and precisely describe how the authors collected their data (e.g., interviews, questionnaires, observation, etc.). Can identify the location of this information in the article.
|
|
5 to >3.0 pts
Full Marks
The student is able to accurately and precisely describe how that the authors collected their data (e.g., interviews, questionnaires, observation, etc.), and can identify the location of this information in the article.
|
3 to >2.0 pts
Meets Expectations
The student is somewhat able to accurately and precisely describe how that the authors collected their data (e.g., interviews, questionnaires, observation, etc.), and can identify the location of this information in the article.
|
2 to >0 pts
No Marks
The student is unable to accurately and precisely describe how that the authors collected their data (e.g., interviews, questionnaires, observation, etc.), and cannot identify the location of this information in the article.
|
|
5 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeData analysis
Able to describe how the authors analyzed the data (e.g., coding, thematic analysis) and whether coding categories were set before the study, or during the study. Able to identify the location of this information in the article.
|
|
5 to >3.0 pts
Full Marks
The student is able to describe how the authors analyzed the data (e.g., coding, thematic analysis) and whether coding categories were set before the study, or during the study. Able to identify the location of this information in the article.
|
3 to >2.0 pts
Meets Expectations
The student is somewhat able to describe how the authors analyzed the data (e.g., coding, thematic analysis) and whether coding categories were set before the study, or during the study. Able to identify the location of this information in the article.
|
2 to >0 pts
No Marks
The student is unable to describe how the authors analyzed the data (e.g., coding, thematic analysis) and whether coding categories were set before the study, or during the study. Unable to identify the location of this information in the article.
|
|
5 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFindings & Results
Able to accurately and precisely describe how the authors report the findings (themes, categories, narratives) and show how they reached their findings (quotes, excerpts from the data). Can identify the location of this information in the article.
|
|
5 to >3.0 pts
Full Marks
Able to accurately and precisely describe how the authors report the findings (themes, categories, narratives) and show how they reached their findings (quotes, excerpts from the data). Can identify the location of this information in the article.
|
3 to >2.0 pts
Meets Expectations
Somewhat able to accurately and precisely describe how the authors report the findings (themes, categories, narratives) and show how they reached their findings (quotes, excerpts from the data). Can identify the location of this information in the article
|
2 to >0 pts
No Marks
Unable to accurately and precisely describe how the authors report the findings (themes, categories, narratives) and show how they reached their findings (quotes, excerpts from the data). Cannot identify the location of this information in the article
|
|
5 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDiscussion & Limitations
Able to accurately and precisely describe how the authors describe their contribution, the significance of their findings, and their limitations. Able to identify the location of this information in the article.
|
|
5 to >3.0 pts
Full Marks
Able to accurately and precisely describe how the authors describe their contribution, the significance of their findings, and their limitations. Able to identify the location of this information in the article.
|
3 to >2.0 pts
Meets Expectations
Somewhat able to accurately and precisely describe how the authors describe their contribution, the significance of their findings, and their limitations. Able to identify the location of this information in the article.
|
2 to >0 pts
No Marks
Unable to accurately and precisely describe how the authors describe their contribution, the significance of their findings, and their limitations. Unable to identify the location of this information in the article.
|
|
|
Adrien
QualitativeAnalysisrubric.docx
