PSY635 Ashford Week 4 Research and Critique a Qualitative Study Assignment I need someone to write a paper concerning the above question. I need at least a
PSY635 Ashford Week 4 Research and Critique a Qualitative Study Assignment I need someone to write a paper concerning the above question. I need at least a four page paper. I will include information that will help you write the paper. I need this paper within three days. Thank you in advance! Research and Critique a Qualitative Study
Prior to beginning work on this assignment, be sure to have read all the required
resources for the week.
Locate a peer-reviewed qualitative research study in the Ashford University Library on
the topic you chose in Week One for your Final Research Proposal. You may choose to
use a qualitative study that was included in the literature review you used in the Week
One assignment by searching the reference list for qualitative research studies on the
topic. It is also acceptable to utilize a qualitative research study on your topic that was
not included in your literature review.
Once you have located an appropriate qualitative study, identify the specific qualitative
research design used. Summarize the main points of the study including information on
the research question, sampling strategy, research design, data analysis method(s),
findings, and conclusion(s). Evaluate the published qualitative research study focusing
on and identifying the researchers paradigm or worldview and any evidence of
reflexivity described in the report. Explain whether or not potential biases were
adequately addressed by the researchers. Describe how the researchers applied ethical
principles in the research study.
The Research and Critique a Qualitative Study
Must be three to four double-spaced pages in length (not including title and
references pages) and formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford
Writing CenterLinks to an external site..
Must include a separate title page with the following:
o Title of paper
o Students name
o Course name and number
o Instructors name
o Date submitted
Must use at least one peer-reviewed source from the Ashford University Library in
addition to those required for this week.
Must document all sources in APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center.
Must include a separate references page that is formatted according to APA style as
outlined in the Ashford Writing Center.
PSY635.W4A1.04.2016
Description:
Total Possible Score: 8.00
Includes a Qualitative Research Study on the Topic Chosen in Week One for the Final Research Proposal
Total: 0.50
Distinguished – Chooses a qualitative research study on the topic chosen in Week One. The study is a clear example of a qualitative research design.
Proficient – Chooses a qualitative research study, but the study may not be on the exact topic selected in Week One although it is on a related topic.
Basic – Chooses a research study that does not use qualitative methods. The topic of the study may not be related to the topic selected in Week One.
Below Expectations – Chooses an article which is not a primary research study.
Non Performance – The selection of a qualitative research study on the chosen topic is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the
assignment instructions.
Identifies the Specific Qualitative Research Design Used in the Study
Total: 1.00
Distinguished – Identifies the specific qualitative research design used in the study by providing thorough details of the design. The classification is
supported by properly cited evidence from the assigned readings and/or other scholarly sources.
Proficient – Identifies the general type of qualitative research design used in the study by providing some details of the design. The classification is
supported by evidence cited from the assigned readings and/or other scholarly sources, but minor details are missing.
Basic – Identifies the study as being in the qualitative category and offers some evidence for this classification. The classification is minimally supported
by evidence cited from the assigned readings and/or other scholarly sources, and relevant details are missing.
Below Expectations – Attempts to identify the qualitative research design used in the study; however, The classification is not supported by evidence
cited from the assigned readings and/or other scholarly sources, and significant details are missing.
Non Performance – The identification of the specific qualitative research design used in the study is either nonexistent or lacks the components
described in the assignment instructions.
Summarizes the Main Points of the Qualitative Research Study Including Information on the Research
Question, Sampling Strategy, Research Design, Data Analysis Method, Findings, and Conclusion(s)
Total: 1.50
Distinguished – Thoroughly summarizes all of the main points of the study, including information on the research question, sampling strategy, research
design, data analysis method, findings, and conclusion(s).
Proficient – Summarizes most of the main points of the study, such as the research question, sampling strategy, research design, data analysis,
findings, and conclusion(s). Details about one of these areas may be missing.
Basic – Minimally summarizes some of the main points of the study, such as the research question, sampling strategy, research design, data analysis,
findings, and conclusion(s). One or more of these areas is missing.
Below Expectations – Attempts to summarize the main points of the study. However, many relevant details are missing.
Non Performance – The summary of the main points of the study is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment
instructions.
Evaluates the Published Qualitative Research Study Focusing on and Identifying the Researchers Paradigm
or Worldview and Any Evidence of Reflexivity Described in the Report
Total: 2.00
Distinguished – Effectively evaluates the study and identifies the researchers paradigm or worldview. The evaluation is supported by substantial
citations from the assigned readings and/or other scholarly sources. Fully explains the concept of reflexivity and determines whether or not any
evidence of reflexivity is described in the research report.
Proficient – Evaluates the study and identifies the researchers paradigm or worldview. The evaluation is supported by evidence cited from scholarly
sources such as the assigned readings. Explains reflexivity and whether or not evidence of reflexivity is included in the research report.
Basic – Evaluates the study and mentions the apparent paradigm or worldview of the researcher. The evaluation is not supported by evidence cited
from scholarly sources. Minimally explains reflexivity and vaguely indicates whether or not evidence of reflexivity is included in the research report.
Below Expectations – Attempts to evaluate the study and identify the paradigm or worldview of the researcher. There is no explanation or discussion of
reflexivity. Evidence from scholarly sources may not be cited to support the evaluation.
Non Performance – The evaluation of the study and identification of the paradigm and reflexivity is either nonexistent or lacks the components
described in the assignment instructions.
Applied Ethics: Ethical Issue Recognition
Total: 1.00
Distinguished – States ethical issues when presented in a complex, ambiguous context and recognizes interrelationships among the various issues.
Proficient – States ethical issues when they are presented in an ambiguous context or recognizes cross-relationships among the issues.
Basic – States basic and apparent ethical issues and understands the complexities or interrelationships among the issues.
Below Expectations – States apparent ethical issues but fails to recognize their complexity or interrelationships.
Non-Performance – The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.
Critical Thinking: Evidence
Total: 0.50
Distinguished – Employs persuasive and applicable information from credible sources to develop an ample analysis or synthesis of the topic.
Viewpoints of experts are scrutinized thoroughly.
Proficient – Employs applicable information from credible sources to develop an analysis of the topic.
Basic – Identifies applicable information from credible sources, but may neglect the application of such information toward the analysis of the topic.
Below Expectations – Presents information from external sources, but such information may lack credibility and/or relevance. Neglects to apply such
information toward the analysis of the topic.
Non-Performance – The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.
Critical Thinking: Conclusions and Related Outcomes
Total: 0.50
Distinguished – Conclusions and related outcomes are logical and clearly reflect an informed evaluation and the ability to place evidence and
perspectives discussed in priority order.
Proficient – Conclusions and related outcomes are logical and reflect an informed evaluation and the ability to place evidence and perspectives
discussed in priority order.
Basic – Conclusions and related outcomes are identified and minimally reflect an informed evaluation and the ability to place evidence and perspectives
discussed in priority order.
Below Expectations – Conclusions and related outcomes are not logical or reflective of an informed evaluation and the ability to place evidence and
perspectives discussed in priority order.
Non-Performance – The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.
Written Communication: Control of Syntax and Mechanics
Total: 0.25
Distinguished – Displays meticulous comprehension and organization of syntax and mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains
no errors and is very easy to understand.
Proficient – Displays comprehension and organization of syntax and mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains only a few minor
errors and is mostly easy to understand.
Basic – Displays basic comprehension of syntax and mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains a few errors which may slightly
distract the reader.
Below Expectations – Fails to display basic comprehension of syntax or mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains major errors
which distract the reader.
Non-Performance – The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.
Written Communication: APA Formatting
Total: 0.25
Distinguished – Accurately uses APA formatting consistently throughout the paper, title page, and reference page.
Proficient – Exhibits APA formatting throughout the paper. However, layout contains a few minor errors.
Basic – Exhibits limited knowledge of APA formatting throughout the paper. However, layout does not meet all APA requirements.
Below Expectations – Fails to exhibit basic knowledge of APA formatting. There are frequent errors, making the layout difficult to distinguish as APA.
Non-Performance – The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.
Written Communication: Page Requirement
Total: 0.25
Distinguished – The length of the paper is equivalent to the required number of correctly formatted pages.
Proficient – The length of the paper is nearly equivalent to the required number of correctly formatted pages.
Basic – The length of the paper is equivalent to at least three quarters of the required number of correctly formatted pages.
Below Expectations – The length of the paper is equivalent to at least one half of the required number of correctly formatted pages.
Non-Performance – The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.
Written Communication: Resource Requirement
Total: 0.25
Distinguished – Uses more than the required number of scholarly sources, providing compelling evidence to support ideas. All sources on the reference
page are used and cited correctly within the body of the assignment.
Proficient – Uses the required number of scholarly sources to support ideas. All sources on the reference page are used and cited correctly within the
body of the assignment.
Basic – Uses less than the required number of sources to support ideas. Some sources may not be scholarly. Most sources on the reference page are
used within the body of the assignment. Citations may not be formatted correctly.
Below Expectations – Uses an inadequate number of sources that provide little or no support for ideas. Sources used may not be scholarly. Most
sources on the reference page are not used within the body of the assignment. Citations are not formatted correctly.
Non-Performance – The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
