two question

Students will locate one recent examples of ethical failures by researchers listed on the following site: http://www.scu.edu/ethics/practicing/focusareas/cases.cfm and provide substantive evaluations of these ethical failures. please use the template below.

25

RESEARCH ARTICLE CRITIQUE

DATE:

YOUR NAME:

Theme/Title of

your research

proposal

[ Place the overall theme/research question of your research here]

COMPLETE

APA

REFERENCE

For ARTICLE

(in correct form):

[Author, date, peer-reviewed journal article title, publication title]

SUMMARY (not to exceed 50% of review):

Look for the what, where, who, when, how and particularly the why of the article.

CRITICAL ANALYSIS:

What were the strong points of the Journal Article? Timely, relevant, important, applicable?

Make sure to include the type of methodology used. Did the author’s conclusions appear to be

supported by the data? Recommendations for future research? Weaknesses in data collection or

analysis? Was method chosen appropriate? What would you have done differently?

PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS/IMPLICATIONS:

Answer the “So what?” question.

References:

Make sure to cite using APA style!

26

Assignment Cover Sheet

Course ADM-545 Values & Ethics in Administration

Title of Assignment

Submitted by:

Date of Submission:

CERTIFICATION OF AUTHORSHIP:

By including this cover sheet I certify that I am the author of this submittal and that any

assistance I received in its preparation is fully acknowledged and disclosed. I have also cited any

sources from which I used data, ideas, or words, either quoted directly or paraphrased. I also

certify that this paper was prepared by me specifically for this course only and was not

previously submitted in any other course. I have read the PACE Academic Dishonesty Policy

regarding cheating and plagiarism and understand its consequences and penalties.

Students will complete a most recent journal article critiques* related to their proposal topic using the article evaluation rubic form below These critiques are intended to be cumulative in your understanding of the material and it is expected that as we progress through the material the evaluation will become more complete. APA fromat is required must not be less than two full page. NB. Teacher dont want direct quote use from article teacher wants what every quote use must be in own words and sited appropriately.

24

Rubric for Values & Ethics Forum Evaluation

Criterion Excellent Very Good Good Competent Inadequate

1. Overall quality of the

presentation: preparation,

clarity, structure, content.

Truly exceptional:

well prepared, very

clear, very well

structured,

compelling content

Strong: prepared,

clear, structured,

interesting or useful

content

Satisfactory:

prepared, relatively

clear, fair

structure,

somewhat

interesting content

Barely adequate:

somewhat clear,

somewhat

structured, adequate

content

Very weak:

demonstrating lack

of preparation, lack

of clarity, lack of

structure, and

minimal content

2. Critique of video/chapter

topics.

Truly exceptional:

very responsive,

incisive,

informative

Strong: responsive,

direct, generally

informative

Satisfactory:

somewhat

responsive,

generally direct,

somewhat

informative

Barely adequate:

weak or short

responses,

somewhat rambling,

little information

Very weak: not

responsive,

rambling, not

informative

Score: _________

Rubric for Values & Ethics in Administration Journal Article Critiques

Criterion 5 4 3 2 0-1

1. Overall quality of the

presentation: preparation,

clarity, structure, content,

journal article used.

Truly exceptional:

well prepared, very

clear, very well

structured,

compelling content

Strong: prepared,

clear, structured,

interesting or useful

content

Satisfactory:

prepared, relatively

clear, fair

structure,

somewhat

interesting content

Barely adequate:

somewhat clear,

somewhat

structured, adequate

content

Very weak:

demonstrating lack

of preparation, lack

of clarity, lack of

structure, and

minimal content

2. Critique of journal article Truly exceptional:

very responsive,

incisive,

informative

Strong: responsive,

direct, generally

informative

Satisfactory:

somewhat

responsive,

generally direct,

somewhat

informative

Barely adequate:

weak or short

responses,

somewhat rambling,

little information

Very weak: not

responsive,

rambling, not

informative