Research for Evidence Based Practice

WK.9.DISCUSSION.ResearchforEvidenceBasedPractic3.docx

Home >Nursing homework help >Research for Evidence Based Practice

Research for Evidence Based Practice

DISCUSSION: USING QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TO INFORM EVIDENCE-BASED PRACTICE

“Qualitative researchers are motivated to know more about a phenomenon, a social process, or a culture from the perspectives of the people who are experiencing the phenomenon, involved in the social process, or living in the culture (Gray & Grove, 2020).

Qualitative research requires extensive time commitment and dedication. While all research can be rigorous and time consuming, by nature, the qualitative researcher seeks to build connections and trust with participants, which adds an additional layer of dedication. However, before research can even begin, researchers must first develop a research question.

Qualitative research questions tend to be broader than quantitative research questions. In a qualitative study, the researcher seeks to describe an experience or a phenomenon, so the questions are typically more global in scope. Additionally, many research questions describe and guide the research purpose, versus state it directly. Oftentimes phrases such as, “ lived experience, framework or theoretical development, society, culture, or narrative” are used to describe the purpose (Gray & Grove, 2020).

For this Discussion, reflect on an area of interest and develop your own qualitative research question. How might you approach this topic and purpose? What types of research methods and design might you employ to address your qualitative research question?

Reference: Gray, J. R., & Grove, S. K. (2020). Burns and Grove’s the practice of nursing research: Appraisal, synthesis, and generation of evidence (9th ed.). Elsevier.

RESOURCES

LEARNING RESOURCES

Required Readings

· Gray, J. R., & Grove, S. K. (2020). Burns and Grove’s the practice of nursing research: Appraisal, synthesis, and generation of evidence (9th ed.). Elsevier.

· Chapter 4, “Introduction to Qualitative Research” (pp. 75-102)

· Chapter 12, “Qualitative Research Methods” (pp. 314–357)

· Cypress, B. S. (2019). Qualitative research: Challenges and dilemmas Links to an external site. . Dimensions of Critical Care Nursing, 38(5), 264–270. doi:10.1097/DCC.0000000000000374

· Firnhaber, G. C., Roberson, D. W., & Kolasa, K. M. (2020). Nursing staff participation in end‐of‐life nutrition and hydration decision‐making in a nursing home: A qualitative study Links to an external site. . Journal of Advanced Nursing, 76(11), 3059–3068. doi:10.1111/jan.14491

· Recine, A. G., Recine, L., & Paldon, T. (2020). How people forgive: A systematic review of nurse-authored qualitative research Links to an external site. . Journal of Holistic Nursing, 38(2), 233–251. doi:10.1177/0898010119828080

Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity. Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.

WEEKLY RESOURCES

TO PREPARE:

· Review the Learning Resources for this week and reflect on qualitative research methods and designs.

· Select a topic or issue in nursing practice to focus on for this Discussion.

· Consider a qualitative research question that you might develop to address the topic or issue in nursing practice that you selected.

· Reflect on how a qualitative research design might best support a research study to address your research question.

Post a qualitative research question in relation to your topic or issue of interest. Explain why a qualitative research design is best suited to support this research question. Then, describe potential ethical considerations you should keep in mind in relation to your qualitative research question. Be specific and provide examples.

Assignment Rubric Details Close

Rubric

NURS_8201_Week9_Discussion_Rubric

NURS_8201_Week9_Discussion_Rubric

Criteria

Ratings

Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMain Posting: Response to the Discussion question is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current scholarly sources.

44 to >39.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

Thoroughly responds to the Discussion question(s). Is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current scholarly sources. No less than 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth. Supported by at least three current scholarly sources that are correctly cited and formatted.

39 to >34.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

Responds to most of the Discussion question(s). Is somewhat reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. 50% of the post has exceptional depth and breadth. Supported by at least three scholarly sources that are correctly cited and formatted.

34 to >30.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Responds to some of the Discussion question(s). One to two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed. Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis. Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. Supported by fewer than two scholarly sources that are correctly cited and formatted.

30 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Does not respond to the Discussion question(s). Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria. Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis. Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. Contains only one or no scholarly sources.

44 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMain Posting: Writing

6 to >5.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

Written clearly and concisely. Contains no grammatical or spelling errors. Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. Response is effectively written in Standard Academic English.

5 to >4.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

Written clearly and concisely. May contain one to two grammatical or spelling errors. Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. Response is effectively written in Standard Academic English.

4 to >3.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Written somewhat clearly and concisely. May contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors. Contains some APA formatting errors. Edits are needed to follow standards for Standard Academic English.

3 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Not written clearly or concisely. Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors. Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style. Does not follow Standard Academic English for most of the post.

6 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMain Posting: Timely and full participation

10 to >8.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. ... Posts main Discussion by due date.

8 to >7.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

Meets requirements for full participation. ... Posts main Discussion by due date.

7 to >6.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Posts main Discussion by due date.

6 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Does not meet requirements for full participation. ... Does not post main Discussion by due date.

10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFirst Response: Post to colleague's main post that is reflective and justified with scholarly sources.

9 to >8.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings. Responds to questions posed by faculty. Uses scholarly sources to support ideas. Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives. Scholarly sources are correctly cited and formatted.

8 to >7.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting. Uses scholarly sources to support ideas. Demonstrates a beginning synthesis and understanding of learning objectives. Scholarly sources are correctly cited and formatted.

7 to >6.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Response is on topic and may have some depth. Minimal or no scholarly sources provided.

6 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth. No sources.

9 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFirst Response: Writing

6 to >5.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Response to faculty questions is fully answered, if posed. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more scholarly sources. Response is effectively written in Standard Academic English.

5 to >4.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues. Response to faculty questions is mostly answered, if posed. Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources. Response is written in Academic English.

4 to >3.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Response posed in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication. Response to faculty questions is minimally addressed, if posed. Few or no scholarly sources are cited.

3 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective communication. Response to faculty questions is missing. No scholarly sources are cited.

6 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFirst Response: Timely and full participation

5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. ... Posts by due date.

4 to >3.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

Meets requirements for full participation. ... Posts by due date.

3 to >2.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Posts by due date.

2 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Does not meet requirements for full participation. ... Does not post by due date.

5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSecond Response: Post to colleague's main post that is reflective and justified with scholarly sources.

9 to >8.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

8 to >7.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

7 to >6.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Response is on topic and may have some depth. Minimal or no scholarly sources provided.

6 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth. No sources.

9 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSecond Response: Writing

6 to >5.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

5 to >4.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues. Response to faculty questions is mostly answered, if posed. Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few at least two scholarly sources.... Response is written in Standard Academic English.

4 to >3.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Response posed in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication. Response to faculty questions is minimally addressed, if posed. Few or no scholarly sources are cited.

3 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective communication. Response to faculty questions is missing. No scholarly sources are cited.

6 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSecond Response: Timely and full participation

5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. Posts by due date.

4 to >3.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

Meets requirements for full participation. Posts by due date.

3 to >2.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Posts by due date.

2 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Does not meet requirements for full participation. Does not post by due date.

5 pts

Total Points: 100