Want create site? With Free visual composer you can do it easy.

Assignment: Rough Draft  Qualitative Research

ORDER NOW FOR AN ORIGINAL PAPER ASSIGNMENT:Assignment: Rough Draft  Qualitative Research   

Assignment: Rough Draft  Qualitative Research

https://nursingpaperslayers.com/assignment-rough-draft-qualitative-research/

Write a critical appraisal that demonstrates comprehension of two qualitative research studies. Use the “Research Critique Guidelines – Part 1” document to organize your essay. Successful completion of this assignment requires that you provide rationale, include examples, and reference content from the studies in your responses.

Use the practice problem and two qualitative, peer-reviewed research article you identified in the Topic 1 assignment to complete this assignment.

In a 1,000–1,250 word essay, summarize two qualitative studies, explain the ways in which the findings might be used in nursing practice, and address ethical considerations associated with the conduct of the study.

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. Refer to the LopesWrite Technical Support articles for assistance.

Assignment: Rough Draft  Qualitative Research

Attachments

NRS-433V-RS2-ResearchCritiqueGuidelin

You must proofread your paper. But do not strictly rely on your computer’s spell-checker and grammar-checker; failure to do so indicates a lack of effort on your part and you can expect your grade to suffer accordingly. Papers with numerous misspelled words and grammatical mistakes will be penalized. Read over your paper – in silence and then aloud – before handing it in and make corrections as necessary. Often it is advantageous to have a friend proofread your paper for obvious errors. Handwritten corrections are preferable to uncorrected mistakes.

Use a standard 10 to 12 point (10 to 12 characters per inch) typeface. Smaller or compressed type and papers with small margins or single-spacing are hard to read. It is better to let your essay run over the recommended number of pages than to try to compress it into fewer pages.

Likewise, large type, large margins, large indentations, triple-spacing, increased leading (space between lines), increased kerning (space between letters), and any other such attempts at “padding” to increase the length of a paper are unacceptable, wasteful of trees, and will not fool your professor.

The paper must be neatly formatted, double-spaced with a one-inch margin on the top, bottom, and sides of each page. When submitting hard copy, be sure to use white paper and print out using dark ink. If it is hard to read your essay, it will also be hard to follow your argument.

ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE CLASS

Discussion Questions (DQ)

Initial responses to the DQ should address all components of the questions asked, include a minimum of one scholarly source, and be at least 250 words.
Successful responses are substantive (i.e., add something new to the discussion, engage others in the discussion, well-developed idea) and include at least one scholarly source.
One or two sentence responses, simple statements of agreement or “good post,” and responses that are off-topic will not count as substantive. Substantive responses should be at least 150 words.
I encourage you to incorporate the readings from the week (as applicable) into your responses.
Weekly Participation

Your initial responses to the mandatory DQ do not count toward participation and are graded separately.
In addition to the DQ responses, you must post at least one reply to peers (or me) on three separate days, for a total of three replies.
Participation posts do not require a scholarly source/citation (unless you cite someone else’s work).
Part of your weekly participation includes viewing the weekly announcement and attesting to watching it in the comments. These announcements are made to ensure you understand everything that is due during the week.
APA Format and Writing Quality

Familiarize yourself with APA format and practice using it correctly. It is used for most writing assignments for your degree. Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in LoudCloud for APA paper templates, citation examples, tips, etc. Points will be deducted for poor use of APA format or absence of APA format (if required).
Cite all sources of information! When in doubt, cite the source. Paraphrasing also requires a citation.
I highly recommend using the APA Publication Manual, 6th edition.
Use of Direct Quotes

I discourage overutilization of direct quotes in DQs and assignments at the Masters’ level and deduct points accordingly.
As Masters’ level students, it is important that you be able to critically analyze and interpret information from journal articles and other resources. Simply restating someone else’s words does not demonstrate an understanding of the content or critical analysis of the content.
It is best to paraphrase content and cite your source.
LopesWrite Policy

For assignments that need to be submitted to LopesWrite, please be sure you have received your report and Similarity Index (SI) percentage BEFORE you do a “final submit” to me.
Once you have received your report, please review it. This report will show you grammatical, punctuation, and spelling errors that can easily be fixed. Take the extra few minutes to review instead of getting counted off for these mistakes.
Review your similarities. Did you forget to cite something? Did you not paraphrase well enough? Is your paper made up of someone else’s thoughts more than your own?
Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in LoudCloud for tips on improving your paper and SI score.
Late Policy

The university’s policy on late assignments is 10% penalty PER DAY LATE. This also applies to late DQ replies.
Please communicate with me if you anticipate having to submit an assignment late. I am happy to be flexible, with advance notice. We may be able to work out an extension based on extenuating circumstances.
If you do not communicate with me before submitting an assignment late, the GCU late policy will be in effect.
I do not accept assignments that are two or more weeks late unless we have worked out an extension.
As per policy, no assignments are accepted after the last day of class. Any assignment submitted after midnight on the last day of class will not be accepted for grading.
Communication

Communication is so very important. There are multiple ways to communicate with me:Questions to Instructor Forum: This is a great place to ask course content or assignment questions. If you have a question, there is a good chance one of your peers does as well. This is a public forum for the class.
Individual Forum: This is a private forum to ask me questions or send me messages. This will be checked at least once every 24 hours.

Rough Draft Qualitative Research Critique and Ethical Considerations – Rubric

Criteria Description

Qualitative Studies

5. 5: Excellent

9.5 points

Two articles are presented. Both articles are based on qualitative research.

4. 4: Good

8.93 points

N/A

3. 3: Satisfactory

7.89 points

N/A

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

7.13 points

Two articles are presented. Of the articles presented, only one article is based on qualitative research.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Only one article is presented. Neither of the articles presented use qualitative research.

Criteria Description

Background of Study

5. 5: Excellent

19 points

Background of study, including problem, significance to nursing, purpose, objective, and research questions, is thorough with substantial relevant details and extensive explanation.

4. 4: Good

17.86 points

Background of study, including problem, significance to nursing, purpose, objective, and research questions, is complete and includes relevant details and explanation.

3. 3: Satisfactory

15.77 points

Background of study, including problem, significance to nursing, purpose, objective, and research questions, is partially complete and includes some relevant details and explanation.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

14.25 points

Background of study, including problem, significance to nursing, purpose, objective, and research questions, is included but lacks relevant details and explanation.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Background of study, including problem, significance to nursing, purpose, objective, and research questions, is incomplete.

Criteria Description

Article Support of Nursing Practice Issue

5. 5: Excellent

28.5 points

A clear discussion on how articles support the PICOT question is presented. The articles demonstrate strong support in answering the proposed PICOT question. The interventions and comparison groups in the articles strongly compare to those identified in the PICOT question.

4. 4: Good

26.79 points

A discussion on how articles support the PICOT question is presented. The articles demonstrate support in answering the proposed PICOT question. The interventions and comparison groups in the articles compare to those identified in the PICOT question. Minor detail or rational is needed for clarity or support.

3. 3: Satisfactory

23.65 points

A general discussion on how articles support the PICOT question is presented. The articles demonstrate general support in answering the proposed PICOT question. It is unclear how the interventions and comparison groups in the articles compare to those identified in the PICOT question. Some rational or information is needed.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

21.38 points

A summary of how articles support the PICOT question is presented. It is unclear how the articles can be used to answer the proposed PICOT question. Significant information and detail are required.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Discussion on how articles support the PICOT question is incomplete.

Criteria Description

Method of Study

5. 5: Excellent

28.5 points

A thorough discussion on the method of study for each article is presented. The comparison of study methods is described in detail. A benefit and a limitation of each method are presented. The discussion demonstrates a solid understanding of research methods.

4. 4: Good

26.79 points

A discussion on the method of study for each article is presented. The comparison of study methods is generally described. A benefit and a limitation of each method are presented. There minor are inaccuracies. Some detail is required for accuracy or clarity.

3. 3: Satisfactory

23.65 points

A general discussion on the method of study for each article is presented. The comparison of study methods is summarized. A benefit and a limitation of each method are summarized. There some inaccuracies or partial omissions. More information is needed.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

21.38 points

A partial summary of the method of study for each article is presented. The comparison of study methods is incomplete. A benefit and a limitation of each method are omitted or incomplete. There are significant inaccuracies.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Discussion on the method of study for each article is omitted. The comparison of study methods is omitted or incomplete.

Criteria Description

Results of Study

5. 5: Excellent

28.5 points

Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is thorough with substantial relevant details and extensive explanation.

4. 4: Good

26.79 points

Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is complete and includes relevant details and explanation.

3. 3: Satisfactory

23.65 points

Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is generally presented. Overall, the discussion includes some relevant details and explanation.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

21.38 points

A summary of the study results includes findings and implications for nursing practice but lacks relevant details and explanation. There are some omissions or inaccuracies.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is incomplete.

Criteria Description

Ethical Considerations

5. 5: Excellent

28.5 points

Discussion of ethical considerations associated with the conduct of nursing research is thorough with substantial relevant details and extensive explanation. A detailed discussion on ethical considerations of the two articles used in the essay is presented.

4. 4: Good

26.79 points

Discussion of ethical considerations when conducting nursing research is complete and includes relevant details and explanation. A discussion on ethical considerations of the two articles used in the essay is presented; some detail in needed for accuracy or clarity.

3. 3: Satisfactory

23.65 points

Discussion of ethical considerations when conducting nursing research is partially complete and includes some relevant details and explanation. A discussion on ethical considerations of the two articles used in the essay is discussed but there are some inaccuracies, or some information is needed.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

21.38 points

Discussion of ethical considerations when conducting nursing research is included but lacks relevant details and explanation. A discussion on ethical considerations of the two articles used in the essay is summarized but there are significant inaccuracies or omissions.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Discussion of ethical considerations when conducting nursing research is incomplete. A discussion on ethical considerations of the two articles presented in the essay is incomplete.

Criteria Description

Thesis Development and Purpose

5. 5: Excellent

9.5 points

Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.

4. 4: Good

8.93 points

Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.

3. 3: Satisfactory

7.89 points

Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

7.13 points

Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.

Criteria Description

Argument Logic and Construction

5. 5: Excellent

9.5 points

Argument is clear and convincing and presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.

4. 4: Good

8.93 points

Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.

3. 3: Satisfactory

7.89 points

Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

7.13 points

Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.

Criteria Description

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

5. 5: Excellent

9.5 points

Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.

4. 4: Good

8.93 points

Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used.

3. 3: Satisfactory

7.89 points

Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

7.13 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, or word choice are present.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.

Criteria Description

Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)

5. 5: Excellent

9.5 points

All format elements are correct.

4. 4: Good

8.93 points

Template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style.

3. 3: Satisfactory

7.89 points

Template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

7.13 points

Template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.

Criteria Description

Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)

5. 5: Excellent

9.5 points

Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.

4. 4: Good

8.93 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.

3. 3: Satisfactory

7.89 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

7.13 points

Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Sources are not documented.

Total 190 points

Rough Draft Qualitative Research Critique and Ethical Considerations – Rubric

Rubric Criteria

Total 190 points

Criterion

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

3. 3: Satisfactory

4. 4: Good

5. 5: Excellent

Ethical Considerations

Ethical Considerations

0 points

Discussion of ethical considerations when conducting nursing research is incomplete. A discussion on ethical considerations of the two articles presented in the essay is incomplete.

21.38 points

Discussion of ethical considerations when conducting nursing research is included but lacks relevant details and explanation. A discussion on ethical considerations of the two articles used in the essay is summarized but there are significant inaccuracies or omissions.

23.65 points

Discussion of ethical considerations when conducting nursing research is partially complete and includes some relevant details and explanation. A discussion on ethical considerations of the two articles used in the essay is discussed but there are some inaccuracies, or some information is needed.

26.79 points

Discussion of ethical considerations when conducting nursing research is complete and includes relevant details and explanation. A discussion on ethical considerations of the two articles used in the essay is presented; some detail in needed for accuracy or clarity.

28.5 points

Discussion of ethical considerations associated with the conduct of nursing research is thorough with substantial relevant details and extensive explanation. A detailed discussion on ethical considerations of the two articles used in the essay is presented.

Results of Study

Results of Study

0 points

Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is incomplete.

21.38 points

A summary of the study results includes findings and implications for nursing practice but lacks relevant details and explanation. There are some omissions or inaccuracies.

23.65 points

Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is generally presented. Overall, the discussion includes some relevant details and explanation.

26.79 points

Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is complete and includes relevant details and explanation.

28.5 points

Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is thorough with substantial relevant details and extensive explanation.

Article Support of Nursing Practice Issue

Article Support of Nursing Practice Issue

0 points

Discussion on how articles support the PICOT question is incomplete.

21.38 points

A summary of how articles support the PICOT question is presented. It is unclear how the articles can be used to answer the proposed PICOT question. Significant information and detail are required.

23.65 points

A general discussion on how articles support the PICOT question is presented. The articles demonstrate general support in answering the proposed PICOT question. It is unclear how the interventions and comparison groups in the articles compare to those identified in the PICOT question. Some rational or information is needed.

26.79 points

A discussion on how articles support the PICOT question is presented. The articles demonstrate support in answering the proposed PICOT question. The interventions and comparison groups in the articles compare to those identified in the PICOT question. Minor detail or rational is needed for clarity or support.

28.5 points

A clear discussion on how articles support the PICOT question is presented. The articles demonstrate strong support in answering the proposed PICOT question. The interventions and comparison groups in the articles strongly compare to those identified in the PICOT question.

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

0 points

Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.

7.13 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, or word choice are present.

7.89 points

Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used.

8.93 points

Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used.

9.5 points

Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.

Thesis Development and Purpose

Thesis Development and Purpose

0 points

Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.

7.13 points

Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.

7.89 points

Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.

8.93 points

Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.

9.5 points

Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.

Documentation of Sources

Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)

0 points

Sources are not documented.

7.13 points

Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.

7.89 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.

8.93 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.

9.5 points

Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.

Qualitative Studies

Qualitative Studies

0 points

Only one article is presented. Neither of the articles presented use qualitative research.

7.13 points

Two articles are presented. Of the articles presented, only one article is based on qualitative research.

7.89 points

N/A

8.93 points

N/A

9.5 points

Two articles are presented. Both articles are based on qualitative research.

Argument Logic and Construction

Argument Logic and Construction

0 points

Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.

7.13 points

Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.

7.89 points

Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.

8.93 points

Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.

9.5 points

Argument is clear and convincing and presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.

Method of Study

Method of Study

0 points

Discussion on the method of study for each article is omitted. The comparison of study methods is omitted or incomplete.

21.38 points

A partial summary of the method of study for each article is presented. The comparison of study methods is incomplete. A benefit and a limitation of each method are omitted or incomplete. There are significant inaccuracies.

23.65 points

A general discussion on the method of study for each article is presented. The comparison of study methods is summarized. A benefit and a limitation of each method are summarized. There some inaccuracies or partial omissions. More information is needed.

26.79 points

A discussion on the method of study for each article is presented. The comparison of study methods is generally described. A benefit and a limitation of each method are presented. There minor are inaccuracies. Some detail is required for accuracy or clarity.

28.5 points

A thorough discussion on the method of study for each article is presented. The comparison of study methods is described in detail. A benefit and a limitation of each method are presented. The discussion demonstrates a solid understanding of research methods.

Background of Study

Background of Study

0 points

Background of study, including problem, significance to nursing, purpose, objective, and research questions, is incomplete.

14.25 points

Background of study, including problem, significance to nursing, purpose, objective, and research questions, is included but lacks relevant details and explanation.

15.77 points

Background of study, including problem, significance to nursing, purpose, objective, and research questions, is partially complete and includes some relevant details and explanation.

17.86 points

Background of study, including problem, significance to nursing, purpose, objective, and research questions, is complete and includes relevant details and explanation.

19 points

Background of study, including problem, significance to nursing, purpose, objective, and research questions, is thorough with substantial relevant details and extensive explanation.

Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)

Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)

0 points

Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.

7.13 points

Template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent.

7.89 points

Template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.

8.93 points

Template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style.

9.5 points

All format elements are correct.

Did you find apk for android? You can find new Free Android Games and apps.
error: