代写 401011 Nursing & Midwifery

401011 – Research Principles for Nursing & Midwifery Learning Guide – Autumn 2016 2.6 Assessment details Assessment 1: Critical analysis of nominated literature Weighting: 50% Word count: : There is a word limit of 1500 words. Use your computer to total the number of words used in your assignment. However, do not include the reference list at the end of your assignment in the word count. In-text citations will be included in the additional 10% word count. If you exceed the word limit by more than 10% the marker will stop marking at 1500 words plus 10%. Due Date: Wednesday, April 20 th at 1700hrs Submission details: Refer to Submission Requirements (p.10) Marking Criteria and Standards: See pages 11 and 17. Aim of assessment The aim of this assessment item is to enable students to explore, in detail, the research process by critically analysing a journal article. Details Using the appropriate guide, provided in this Learning Guide (either p. 11 or 16 ), critically analyse  one of the papers available in the assessment tab on vUWS. For a qualitative paper, use the guide on page 11. For a quantitative paper, use the guide on page 16. Please use research methods literature to inform the critical anaysis. The assessment must comply with the following: •  Students must respond to each of the questions provided in the guide for analysis using academic writing. It is anticipated that the work will be presented in a question / answer format using full sentences and paragraphs. Students will be able to access an electronic template for this assignment from the Unit vUWS site. •  Referencing must be presented according to Section 4 Citing Resources and References, in this learning guide •  A minimum of 3 recent academic references must be used (published no earlier than 2011). •  The questions provided in the guide and reference list are not included in word limit •  Refer to section entitled Submission of Assessment Tasks for guidance regarding word limit and further formatting / submission detail ©School of Nursing and Midwifery  Page 8 of 34 University of Western Sydney trading as Western Sydney University ABN 53 014 069 881 CRICOS Provider No: 00917K  401011 – Research Principles for Nursing & Midwifery Learning Guide – Autumn 2016 Standards and Criteria. Please look carefully at the standards and criteria. They are designed to give guidance regarding the level of understanding of research concepts needed to explicitly identify, discuss and critique to achieve the marks allocated. Resources i.  Examples may be available on the vUWS site. ii.  There are a number of textbooks and resources available through the Western Sydney University Library that may assist you. Please refer to the unit’s vUWS site for specific unit resources ©School of Nursing and Midwifery  Page 9 of 34 University of Western Sydney trading as Western Sydney University ABN 53 014 069 881 CRICOS Provider No: 00917K  401011 – Research Principles for Nursing & Midwifery Learning Guide – Autumn 2016 Guide: Assessment 1(a) – Critical analysis of nominated literature (QUALITATIVE) Please use the questions provided in this guide to analyse  one of the journal articles (available in the assessment tab on vUWS). When answering each question please explain and justify responses with reference to the current literature. Please see Standards and Criteria on page 11. . 1.  Background of the study (Total: 5 marks) 1.1 Briefly describe the health issue of the study’s focus? 1.2 What is the significance of the study? . 2.  Overview of research design (Total: 5 marks) 2.1  What was the aim of the research? 2.2  What research design was used? Was it appropriate? Why/why not? . 3.  Sampling (Total: 10 marks) 3.1  Who were the study participants? 3.2  What are the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the sample? Why is it important to have these criteria identified before recruitment? 3.3  What sampling technique was employed in this study? Was it appropriate for the research design? Why/why not? 3.4  How was the sample size determined? Was it appropriate? Why/why not? 4.  Data collection (Total: 10 marks) 4.1  How was the data collected? 4.2  Was the data collection method appropriate for the study question and the research design? Why/why not? 4.3  Define the concept of rigor and discuss what measures were/were not taken to ensure rigor? . 5.  Data analysis/results (Total: 10 marks) 5.1  Identify and describe the method of data analysis? Was it appropriate? Why/why not? 5.2  What were the findings? 5.3  Can the study findings be used in other settings? Why/why not? 6.  Evidence utilization (Total: 5 marks) Would you implement the findings of this study in clinical practice? Why/why not? . 7.  Presentation (Total: 5 marks) 7.1  Referencing in-text and in reference list conforms to APA referencing style. 7.2  Critique supported by relevant literature using at least three recent academic references published from 2011. 7.3  Correct sentence, paragraph, grammatical construction, spelling, punctuation and presentation. ©School of Nursing and Midwifery  Page 10 of 34 University of Western Sydney trading as Western Sydney University ABN 53 014 069 881 CRICOS Provider No: 00917K  Page 11 of 34 Marking criteria and standards: Assessment 1(a) – Critical analysis of nominated literature (QUALITATIVE) Criteria Mark High Distinction Distinction Credit Pass Fail Background of the study /5 Health issue and study significance is explicitly described Health issue and study significance comprehensively described Health issue and study significance is mostly described Health issue and study significance is described adequately Fails to describe the health issue and study significance 4.5-5  4  3.5  2.5-3  ≤2 Overview of the research design /5 Outstanding overview of the research study, with clear, correct, concise identification of aim/s of research. Excellent identification and description of research design with excellent rationales provided for research design chosen for study. Very good overview of the research study, with clear, correct, concise identification of aim/s of research. Very good identification and description of research design with very good rationales provided for research design chosen for study. Good overview of the research study, with clear, correct identification of aim/s of research. Good identification and description of research design with good rationales provided for research design chosen for study. Adequate overview of the research study, with satisfactory identification of aim/s of research, with adequate identification and description of research design, with satisfactory rationales provided for research design chosen for study. Inadequate overview of the research study. Unsatisfactory identification of aim/s of research. Inadequate identification and/or description of the research design Inadequate or unsatisfactory rationales provided for research design chosen for study. 4.5-5  4  3.5  2.5-3  ≤2 Page 12 of 34 Criteria Mark High Distinction Distinction Credit Pass Fail Sampling /10 Excellent identification of study participants and sampling techniques and its appropriateness. Excellent identification of the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the sample, with compelling, excellent rationale/s provided. Excellent identification and discussion of how sample size is determined and its appropriateness. Very good identification of study participants and sampling techniques and its appropriateness. Very good identification of the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the sample, with very good rationale/s provided. Very good identification and discussion of how sample size is determined and its appropriateness. Good identification of study participants and sampling techniques and its appropriateness. Good identification of the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the sample, with good rationale/s provided. Good identification and discussion of how sample size is determined and its appropriateness. Adequately identifies study participants and sampling techniques and its appropriateness. Satisfactorily identifies the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the sample, with adequate rationale/s. Adequate identification and discussion of how sample size is determined and its appropriateness. Inadequate identification of study participants and/or sampling techniques and its appropriateness. Unsatisfactory identification of inclusion and exclusion criteria of the sample. Inadequate rationale/s provided for inclusion and exclusion criteria of sample to be identified before recruitment. Inadequate identification and discussion of how sample size is determined and its appropriateness 8.5-10  7.5-8  6.5-7  5-6  ≤4.5 Page 13 of 34 Criteria Mark High Distinction Distinction Credit Pass Fail Data collection /10 Excellent identification of how data was collected. Comprehensive discussion of the appropriateness of data collection method. Excellent discussion of measures taken to ensure rigor in the study Very good identification of how data was collected. In-depth discussion of the appropriateness of data collection method. Very good discussion of measures taken to ensure rigor in the study. Good identification of how data was collected. Defined discussion of the appropriateness of data collection method. Clear discussion of measures taken to ensure rigor in the study. Adequate identification of how data was collected. Satisfactory discussion of the appropriateness of data collection method. Adequate discussion of measures taken to ensure rigor in the study Fail to adequately identify how data was collected. Unsatisfactory discussion of the appropriateness of data collection method. Inadequate discussion of measures taken to ensure rigor in the study. 8.5-10  7.5-8  6.5-7  5-6  ≤4.5 Results /10 Excellent identification and description of data analysis and its appropriateness Comprehensive identification of the findings. Expert discussion of the use of the study findings to other settings Very good identification and description of data analysis and its appropriateness Thorough identification of the findings. Very good discussion of the use of the study findings to other settings Good identification and description of data analysis and its appropriateness Defined identification of the findings. Good discussion of the use of the study findings to other settings. Adequate identification and description of data analysis and its appropriateness Adequate identification of the findings. Satisfactory discussion of the use of the study findings to other settings Fail to identify data analysis and its appropriateness Inadequate identification of the findings. Unsatisfactory discussion of the use of the study findings to other settings 8.5-10  7.5-8  6.5-7  5-6  ≤4.5 Evidence utilization /5 Insightful discussion of how study findings can/cannot be implemented in clinical practice Comprehensive discussion of how study findings can/cannot be implemented in clinical practice Thorough discusscussion of how study findings can/cannot be implemented in clinical practice Adequate discussion of how study findings can/cannot be implemented in clinical practice Inadequate discussion of how study findings can/cannot be implemented in clinical practice 5  4-4.5  3-3.5  2.5  ≤2 Page 14 of 34 Criteria Mark High Distinction Distinction Credit Pass Fail Presentation /5 Flawless referencing, with all references correctly given, both in text and in final reference list according to APA referencing style. No referencing errors. Extensive, relevant current academic reference list with evidence of effective use in text. Publishable or outstanding level of clarity of expression, scholarly writing style and absence of any discriminatory use of language throughout. No errors in spelling, grammar or punctuation Very good referencing, with correct references given both in text and in final reference list according to APA referencing style. Limited number of referencing errors. Comprehensive, relevant, list of current academic references effectively used in text. Evidence of use in text. Clear concise clarity of expression, with no ambiguity issues, very good, well developed writing style with no use of discriminatory language throughout. No errors in spelling, grammar or punctuation Minimal referencing errors, according to APA referencing style conventions both in text and in final reference list. Good, adequate use of references, using a reasonable range of current academic reference. More than 3 current journal articles used in text. Good written expression with minimal ambiguity and no discriminatory language throughout. Minimal errors in grammar, punctuation, sentence construction, paragraph construction or spelling Some referencing style errors but following APA referencing style both in text and in final reference list. Satisfactory use of references, using a reasonable range of current academic reference (at least 3). Reasonable clarity and writing style but limited use of language. Some minor errors in grammar, spelling, sentence structure, or paragraph structure that do not impede meaning. Absent, inadequate or incorrect referencing style noted. Unsatisfactory use of references. Insufficient, current academic references (i.e. less than 3). Poor writing style with errors in expression, sentence structure, paragraph structure, spelling and punctuation that impede meaning 5  4-4.5  3-3.5  2.5  ≤2 Page 15 of 34 Comments: Lecturer’s Signature: Date: Weighting: /50 Grade: 401011 – Research Principles for Nursing & Midwifery Learning Guide – Autumn 2016 Guide: Assessment 1(b) – Critical analysis of nominated literature (QUANTITATIVE) Please use the questions provided in this guide to analyse  one of the journal articles reporting (available in the assessment tab on vUWS). When answering each question please explain and justify responses with reference to the current literature. Please see Standards and Criteria on pages 17. . 1.  Background of the study (Total: 5 marks) 1.1  Briefly describe the health issue of the study’s focus? 1.2  What is the significance of the study? . 2.  Overview of the research design (Total: 5 marks) 2.1  What was the aim of the research? 2.2  What research design was used? Was it appropriate? Why/why not? . 3.  Sampling (Total: 10 marks) 3.1  Who were the study participants? 3.2  What are the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the sample? Why is it important to have these criteria identified before recruitment? 3.3  What sampling technique was employed in this study? Was it appropriate for the research design? Why/why not? 3.4 Briefly describe the intervention and control groups. How were participants allocated to groups? Was the allocation appropriate? Why/why not? 4.  Data collection (Total: 10 marks) 4.1  What are the independent and dependent variables in this study? 4.2 How was the data collected? 4.3 Define the concepts of reliability and validity and discuss how each has/has not been demonstrated in this study? . 5.  Results (Total: 10 marks) 5.1  What differences in outcomes were identified between the intervention and control groups? 5.2  Were the results significant? Why/why not? 5.3  Can the study results be generalised to other settings? Why/why not? 6.  Evidence utilization (Total: 5 marks) 6.1  Would you implement the findings of this study in clinical practice? Why/why not? . 7.  Presentation (Total: 5 marks) 7.1  Referencing in-text and in reference list conforms to APA referencing style 7.2  Critique supported by relevant literature using at least three recent academic references published from 2011 7.3  Correct sentence, paragraph, grammatical construction, spelling, punctuation and presentation ©School of Nursing and Midwifery  Page 16 of 34 University of Western Sydney trading as Western Sydney University ABN 53 014 069 881 CRICOS Provider No: 00917K  Page 17 of 34 Marking criteria and standards: Assessment 1(b) – Critical analysis of nominated literature (QUANTITATIVE) Criteria Mark High Distinction Distinction Credit Pass Fail Background of the study /5 Health issue and study significance is explicitly described Health issue and study significance comprehensively described Health issue and study significance is mostly described Health issue and study significance is described adequately Failed to describe the health issue and study significance 4.5-5  4  3.5  2.5-3  ≤2 Overview of the research design /5 Outstanding overview of the research study, with clear, correct, concise identification of aim/s of research. Excellent identification and description of research design with excellent rationales provided for research design chosen for study. Very good overview of the research study, with clear, correct, concise identification of aim/s of research. Very good identification and description of research design with very good rationales provided for research design chosen for study. Good overview of the research study, with clear, correct identification of aim/s of research. Good identification and description of research design with good rationales provided for research design chosen for study. Adequate overview of the research study, with satisfactory identification of aim/s of research, with adequate identification and description of research design, with satisfactory rationales provided for research design chosen for study. Inadequate overview of the research study. Unsatisfactory identification of aim/s of research. Inadequate identification and/or description of the research design Inadequate or unsatisfactory rationales provided for research design chosen for study. 4.5-5  4  3.5  2.5-3  ≤2 Page 18 of 34 Criteria Mark High Distinction Distinction Credit Pass Fail Sampling /10 Excellent identification of study participants and sampling techniques and its appropriateness. Excellent identification of the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the sample, with compelling, excellent rationale/s provided. Excellent identification and discussion of how sample size is determined and its appropriateness. Very good identification of study participants and sampling techniques and its appropriateness. Very good identification of the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the sample, with very good rationale/s provided. Very good identification and discussion of how sample size is determined and its appropriateness. Good identification of study participants and sampling techniques and its appropriateness. Good identification of the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the sample, with good rationale/s provided. Good identification and discussion of how sample size is determined and its appropriateness. Adequately identifies study participants and sampling techniques and its appropriateness. Satisfactorily identifies the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the sample, with adequate rationale/s. Adequate identification and discussion of how sample size is determined and its appropriateness. Inadequate identification of study participants and/or sampling techniques and its appropriateness. Unsatisfactory identification of inclusion and exclusion criteria of the sample. Inadequate rationale/s provided for inclusion and exclusion criteria of sample to be identified before recruitment. Inadequate identification and discussion of how sample size is determined and its appropriateness 8.5-10  7.5-8  6.5-7  5-6  ≤4.5 Page 19 of 34 Criteria Mark High Distinction Distinction Credit Pass Fail


代写 401011 Nursing & Midwifery

  Data collection /10 Excellent identification of how data was collected. Comprehensive discussion of the appropriateness of data collection method. Excellent discussion of measures taken to ensure rigor in the study Very good identification of how data was collected. In-depth discussion of the appropriateness of data collection method. Very good discussion of measures taken to ensure rigor in the study. Good identification of how data was collected. Defined discussion of the appropriateness of data collection method. Clear discussion of measures taken to ensure rigor in the study. Adequate identification of how data was collected. Satisfactory discussion of the appropriateness of data collection method. Adequate discussion of measures taken to ensure rigor in the study Indequate identification how data was collected. Unsatisfactory discussion of the appropriateness of data collection method. Inadequate discussion of measures taken to ensure rigor in the study. 8.5-10  7.5-8  6.5-7  5-6  ≤4.5 Results /10 Excellent identification and description of data analysis and its appropriateness Comprehensive identification of the findings. Expert discussion of the use of the study findings to other settings Very good identification and description of data analysis and its appropriateness Thorough identification of the findings. Very good discussion of the use of the study findings to other settings Good identification and description of data analysis and its appropriateness Clear identification of the findings. Good discussion of the use of the study findings to other settings. Adequate identification and description of data analysis and its appropriateness Adequate identification of the findings. Satisfactory discussion of the use of the study findings to other settings Inadequate identification of data analysis and its appropriateness Inadequate identification of the findings. Unsatisfactory discussion of the use of the study findings to other settings 8.5-10  7.5-8  6.5-7  5-6  ≤4.5 Evidence utilization /5 Insightful discussion of how study findings can/cannot be implemented in clinical practice Comprehensive discussion of how study findings can/cannot be implemented in clinical practice Thorough discussion of how study findings can/cannot be implemented in clinical practice Adequate discussion of how study findings can/cannot be implemented in clinical practice Inadequate discussion of how study findings can/cannot be implemented in clinical practice Page 20 of 34 5  4-4.5  3-3.5  2.5  ≤2 Criteria Mark High Distinction Distinction Credit Pass Fail Presentation /5 Flawless referencing, with all references correctly given, both in text and in final reference list according to APA referencing style. No referencing errors. Extensive, relevant current academic reference list with evidence of effective use in text. Publishable or outstanding level of clarity of expression, scholarly writing style and absence of any discriminatory use of language throughout. No errors in spelling, grammar or punctuation Very good referencing, with correct references given both in text and in final reference list according to APA referencing style. Limited number of referencing errors. Comprehensive relevant list of current academic references effectively used in text. Evidence of use in text. Clear concise clarity of expression, with no ambiguity issues, very good, well developed writing style with no use of discriminatory language throughout. No errors in spelling, grammar or punctuation Minimal referencing errors, according to APA referencing style conventions both in text and in final reference list. Good, adequate use of references, using a reasonable range of current academic reference. More than 3 current journal articles used in text. Good written expression with minimal ambiguity and no discriminatory language throughout. Minimal errors in grammar, punctuation, sentence construction, paragraph construction or spelling Some referencing style errors but following APA referencing style both in text and in final reference list. Satisfactory use of references, using a reasonable range of current academic reference (at least 3). Reasonable clarity and writing style but limited use of language. Some minor errors in grammar, spelling, sentence structure, or paragraph structure that do not impede meaning. Absent, inadequate or incorrect referencing style noted. Unsatisfactory use of references. Insufficient, current academic references (i.e. less than 3). Poor writing style with errors in expression, sentence structure, paragraph structure, spelling and punctuation that impede meaning 5  4-4.5  3-3.5  2.5  ≤2 Page 21 of 34 Comments: Lecturer’s Signature: Date: Weighting: /50 Grade: 代写 401011 Nursing & Midwifery