Literature Review

/in /by

Literature Review

© 2017 Laureate Education, Inc.

1

Literature Review Program Transcript

[MUSIC PLAYING]

NARRATOR: Have you ever thought about a literature review as representing your intellectual heritage or intellectual genealogy? In his exploration of the purpose of a literature review, Dr. Patton explains this interesting perspective. He also points out common errors to avoid when undertaking a literature review.

MICHAEL QUINN PATTON: One of the things that we do as scholar practitioners is look at the knowledge created by other people. And we draw on that knowledge as a way of positioning our own work and understanding where our contribution to knowledge, our own research, fits in that larger tradition. This is often referred to as the literature review. And the way that you go about knowing the knowledge that others have generated, that you’re going to build on and contribute to, is to conduct a literature review.

I tend not to like that terminology, because it sounds like the purpose is to review the literature. Literature review is actually a means to another end. And it’s that end, it’s that purpose of conducting the literature review that I want to focus on.

The purpose is for you to understand your intellectual heritage, your intellectual genealogy. Anytime we undertake an inquiry into a particular issue, we are building on the knowledge of others. And we need to know what that knowledge is. It’s part of our obligation as scholars, is to understand what work has come before us, what concepts we’ve inherited, what methods we’ve inherited, what measures we’ve inherited. Some of which we’ve adopted, some of which we’ve parted from. But we need to know that.

Because at the end of a program of study, a master’s degree, a program of doctoral inquiry, you’re going to be expected to be able to locate your work within that tradition. And so it means that you need to be able to establish the people who formulated the basic distinctions that you’re drawing on.

Let me share with you some of the mistakes that I, from my point of view, find students engaging in when they undertake the literature review. One of these is to simply do an internet search to see how many articles they can find on a topic. Where they think that the game is how many citations you can come up with to show that you’ve done the literature review.

This isn’t a quantitative game. It’s not something where the number of sources is important. It’s the quality of those sources and your engagement with them, that you are able to engage with what other people have done and understand what’s relevant, what’s not relevant to your own area of inquiry. So that you’re positioning yourself out of those traditions that others have engaged in.

 

 

Literature Review

© 2017 Laureate Education, Inc.

2

A second error is to think that the game is to position your work as unique. It is to try to find something that nobody else has ever done, to say nobody else has ever studied this before. Likewise, for any given field, there are burning questions that have defined that field.

In sociology, which is my own field, all sociology derives from what we call the Hobbesian question of order. What holds society together? Why doesn’t society fall apart? Every sociological question stems from that question that Hobbes asked. And therefore, if you look at sociology articles in the premier journals, the American Sociological Review, the American Journal of Sociology, you’ll find that they typically begin with a reference to Hobbes or to Durkheim time or to Weber or to Marx who were asking the original burning questions in psychology and sociology.

In psychology, you’ll find original references to Freud and to Adler and to Jung that go back to things like the notion of the unconscious. And whether you agree or disagree with various aspects of Freudian theory, the notion that there’s an unconscious mind and that that unconscious mind makes a difference in what we do is a part of what has framed modern psychology.

And so you stand on the shoulders of people who are trying to understand how the mind works, and who have divided off from those original classical theorists and researchers about how the mind works. The burning question in psychology is, why do we behave as we behave? How do we think and feel? How do we know and engage the world? And so you need to know who the classic people were who were asking those questions, who their disciples were, what were the splits along the world, along the journey where one group went in this direction and another group went in another direction?

Up to the more recent published research, and up to the kind of work that’s now going on that may not yet be published, where you can get in touch with those people who are engaged in research now. Find out what the funded research is from the National Institutes of Health, the National Institutes of Mental Health, the major foundations. And find out what cutting edge work is going on so that you have a full scale genealogy of what your intellectual tradition is.

When you have finished that inquiry over a period of time, you’re able to then say, these are the people on whose shoulders I stand. These are the intellectual traditions that I’m a part of. This is my intellectual DNA. Here is what I’ve drawn on. Here are the places where I’m departing from others. And here is where I’m going to make my contribution. That’s the purpose of a literature review. You’re positioning yourself in a stream of knowledge, in a flow of knowledge.

As a part of that work, a third error that I think students often make is to only read second-hand and third-hand accounts of the classics. The classics got to be

 

 

Literature Review

© 2017 Laureate Education, Inc.

3

classics for a reason. People over the years read those works and found the thinking in them profound.

Yes, in some cases, the findings may be out of date. But a part of what you ought to be learning as you engage in a literature review and in your intellectual history is not just the specific findings. You are learning how scholars think. You’re learning how scientists think. You’re learning how a researcher thinks.

So read those works not only for what they found out. Read them for their methods. Look for the methods-findings linkage. How did particular findings yield and come from particular methods? How did those methods develop over time? And how did the classic writers think about things, inquire into things?

So as you’re engaging in that, it has two streams that you’re paying attention to. One is the theoretical stream. What are the findings? What are the constructs that you’ve inherited? And the other is the methodological stream. What are the methods of inquiries, the measures, the instrumentation, the ways of going about recording what you observe that we’ve inherited?

Both of those are your rich inheritance as scholar practitioners. And one of the things that you ought to come out of your education with is knowing what that intellectual heritage is, both conceptual and methodological, and then where you’re going to make your contribution.

Assessment 3 Instructions: Interdisciplinary Plan Proposal

/in /by

Assessment 3 Instructions: Interdisciplinary Plan Proposal

For this assessment you will create a 2-4 page plan proposal for an interprofessional team to collaborate and work toward driving improvements in the organizational issue you identified in the second assessment.
The health care industry is always striving to improve patient outcomes and attain organizational goals. Nurses can play a critical role in achieving these goals; one way to encourage nurse participation in larger organizational efforts is to create a culture of ownership and shared responsibility (Berkow et al., 2012). Participation in interdisciplinary teams can also offer nurses opportunities to share their expertise and leadership skills, fostering a sense of ownership and collegiality.
You are encouraged to complete the Budgeting for Nurses activity before you develop the plan proposal. The activity consists of seven questions that will allow you the opportunity to check your knowledge of budgeting basics and as well as the value of financial resource management. The information gained from completing this formative will promote success with the Interdisciplinary Plan Proposal. Completing this activity also demonstrates your engagement in the course, requires just a few minutes of your time, and is not graded.
Demonstration of Proficiency

  • Competency 1: Explain strategies for managing human and financial resources to promote organizational health.
    • Explain organizational resources, including a financial budget, needed for the plan to be a success and the impacts on those resources if nothing is done, related to the improvements sought by the plan.
  • Competency 2: Explain how interdisciplinary collaboration can be used to achieve desired patient and systems outcomes.
    • Describe an objective and predictions for an evidence-based interdisciplinary plan to achieve a specific objective related to improving patient or organizational outcomes.
    • Explain the collaboration needed by an interdisciplinary team to improve the likelihood of achieving the plan’s objective. Include best practices of interdisciplinary collaboration from the literature.
  • Competency 4: Explain how change management theories and leadership strategies can enable interdisciplinary teams to achieve specific organizational goals.
    • Explain a change theory and a leadership strategy, supported by relevant evidence, that are most likely to help an interdisciplinary team succeed in collaborating and implementing, or creating buy-in for, the project plan.
  • Competency 5: Apply professional, scholarly, evidence-based communication strategies to impact patient, interdisciplinary team, and systems outcomes.
    • Communicate the interdisciplinary plan with writing that is clear, logically organized, and professional, with correct grammar and spelling, using current APA style.
  • Reference
    Berkow, S., Workman, J., Aronson, S., Stewart, J., Virkstis, K., & Kahn, M. (2012). Strengthening frontline nurse investment in organizational goals. JONA: The Journal of Nursing Administration, 42(3), 165–169.
    Professional Context
    This assessment will allow you to describe a plan proposal that includes an analysis of best practices of interprofessional collaboration, change theory, leadership strategies, and organizational resources with a financial budget that can be used to solve the problem identified through the interview you conducted in the prior assessment.
    Scenario
    Having reviewed the information gleaned from your professional interview and identified the issue, you will determine and present an objective for an interdisciplinary intervention to address the issue.
    Note: You will not be expected to implement the plan during this course. However, the plan should be evidence-based and realistic within the context of the issue and your interviewee’s organization.
    Instructions
    For this assessment, use the context of the organization where you conducted your interview to develop a viable plan for an interdisciplinary team to address the issue you identified. Define a specific patient or organizational outcome or objective based on the information gathered in your interview.
    The goal of this assessment is to clearly lay out the improvement objective for your planned interdisciplinary intervention of the issue you identified. Additionally, be sure to further build on the leadership, change, and collaboration research you completed in the previous assessment. Look for specific, real-world ways in which those strategies and best practices could be applied to encourage buy-in for the plan or facilitate the implementation of the plan for the best possible outcome.
    Using the Interdisciplinary Plan Proposal Template [DOCX] will help you stay organized and concise. As you complete each section of the template, make sure you apply APA format to in-text citations for the evidence and best practices that inform your plan, as well as the reference list at the end.
    Additionally, be sure that your plan addresses the following, which corresponds to the grading criteria in the scoring guide. Please study the scoring guide carefully so you understand what is needed for a distinguished score.
  • Describe an objective and predictions for an evidence-based interdisciplinary plan to achieve a specific goal related to improving patient or organizational outcomes.
  • Explain a change theory and a leadership strategy, supported by relevant evidence, that is most likely to help an interdisciplinary team succeed in collaborating and implementing, or creating buy-in for, the project plan.
  • Explain the collaboration needed by an interdisciplinary team to improve the likelihood of achieving the plan’s objective. Include best practices of interdisciplinary collaboration from the literature.
  • Explain organizational resources, including a financial budget, needed for the plan to succeed and the impacts on those resources if the improvements described in the plan are not made.
  • Communicate the interdisciplinary plan, with writing that is clear, logically organized, and professional, with correct grammar and spelling, using current APA style.
  • Additional Requirements
  • Length of submission: Use the provided template. Remember that part of this assessment is to make the plan easy to understand and use, so it is critical that you are clear and concise. Most submissions will be 2 to 4 pages in length. Be sure to include a reference page at the end of the plan.
  • Number of references: Cite a minimum of 3 sources of scholarly or professional evidence that support your central ideas. Resources should be no more than 5 years old.
  • APA formatting: Make sure that in-text citations and reference list follow current APA style.
  • Note: Faculty may use the Writing Feedback Tool when grading this assessment. The Writing Feedback Tool is designed to provide you with guidance and resources to develop your writing based on five core skills. You will find writing feedback in the Scoring Guide for the assessment, once your work has been evaluated.
    Portfolio Prompt: Remember to save the final assessment to your ePortfolio so that you may refer to it as you complete the final Capstone course.

    PART TWO:

Assessment 4 Instructions: Stakeholder Presentation

For this assessment you will create an 8-12 slide PowerPoint presentation for one or more stakeholder or leadership groups to generate interest and buy-in for the plan proposal you developed for the third assessment.
As a current or future nurse leader, you may be called upon to present to stakeholders and leadership about projects that you have been involved in or wish to implement. The ability to communicate a plan—and potential implications of not pursuing such a plan—to stakeholders effectively can be critically important in creating awareness and buy-in, as well as building your personal and professional brand in your organization. It is equally important that you know how to create compelling presentations for others’ delivery and ensure that they convey the same content you would deliver if you were the presenter.
You are encouraged to complete the Evidence-Based Practice: Basics and Guidelines activity before you develop the presentation. This activity consists of six questions that will create the opportunity to check your understanding of the fundamentals of evidence-based practice as well as ways to identify EBP in practice. The information gained from completing this formative will help promote success in the Stakeholder Presentation and demonstrate courseroom engagement—it requires just a few minutes of your time and is not graded.
Demonstration of Proficiency

  • Competency 1: Explain strategies for managing human and financial resources to promote organizational health.
    • Explain how the interdisciplinary plan could be implemented and how the human and financial resources would be managed.
  • Competency 2: Explain how interdisciplinary collaboration can be used to achieve desired patient and systems outcomes.
    • Explain an organizational or patient issue for which a collaborative interdisciplinary team approach would help achieve a specific improvement goal.
  • Competency 3: Describe ways to incorporate evidence-based practice within an interdisciplinary team.
    • Summarize an evidence-based interdisciplinary plan to address an organizational or patient issue.
  • Propose evidence-based criteria that could be used to evaluate the degree to which the project was successful in achieving the improvement goal.
    • Competency 5: Apply professional, scholarly, evidence-based communication strategies to impact patient, interdisciplinary team, and systems outcomes.
  • Communicate the PowerPoint presentation of the interdisciplinary improvement plan to stakeholders in a professional, respectful manner, with writing that is clear, logically organized, with correct grammar and spelling, using current APA style.
  • Professional Context
    This assessment will provide you with an opportunity to sharpen your ability to create a professional presentation to stakeholders. In this presentation, you will explain the Plan-Do-Study-Act cycle and how it can be used to introduce the plan (P), implement the plan (D), study the effectiveness of the plan (S), and act on what is learned (A) to drive continuous improvement. By using this cycle, the stakeholders will have a tool and a proposal to expand on these ideas to drive workplace change and create improved processes to solve an interprofessional collaboration problem.
    Scenario
    In addition to summarizing the key points of Assessments 2 and 3, you will provide stakeholders and/or leadership with an overview of project specifics as well as how success would be evaluated—you will essentially be presenting a discussion of the Plan, Do, and Study parts of the PDSA cycle. Again, you will not be expected to execute the project, so you will not have any results to study. However, by carefully examining the ways in which your plan could be carried out and evaluated, you will get some of the experience of the thinking required for PDSA.
    When creating your PowerPoint for this assessment, it is important to keep in mind the target audience: your interviewee’s organizational leadership. The overall goal of this assessment is to create a presentation that your interviewee could potentially give in his or her organization.
    Instructions
    Please follow the Capella Guidelines for Effective PowerPoint Presentations [PPTX]. If you need technical information on using PowerPoint, refer to Capella University Library: PowerPoint Presentations.
    Be sure that your plan addresses the following, which corresponds to the grading criteria in the scoring guide. Please study the scoring guide carefully so you understand what is needed for a distinguished score.
  • Explain an organizational or patient issue for which a collaborative interdisciplinary team approach would help achieve a specific improvement goal.
  • Summarize an evidence-based interdisciplinary plan to address an organizational or patient issue.
  • Explain how the interdisciplinary plan could be implemented and how the human and financial resources would be managed.
  • Propose evidence-based criteria that could be used to evaluate the degree to which the project was successful in achieving the improvement goal.
  • Communicate the PowerPoint presentation of the interdisciplinary improvement plan to stakeholders in a professional manner, with writing that is clear, logically organized, and respectful with correct grammar and spelling using current APA style.
  • There are various ways to structure your presentation; following is one example:
  • Part 1: Organizational or Patient Issue.
    • What is the issue that you are trying to solve or improve?
    • Why should the audience care about solving it?
  • Part 2: Relevance of an Interdisciplinary Team Approach.
    • Why is using an interdisciplinary team relevant, or the best approach, to addressing the issue?
    • How will it help to achieve improved outcomes or reach a goal?
  • Part 3: Interdisciplinary Plan Summary.
    • What is the objective?
    • How likely is it to work?
    • What will the interdisciplinary team do?
  • Part 4: Implementation and Resource Management.
    • How could the plan be implemented to ensure effective use of resources?
    • How could the plan be managed to ensure that resources were not wasted?
    • How does the plan justify the resource expenditure?
  • Part 5: Evaluation.
    • What would a successful outcome of the project look like?
    • What are the criteria that could be used to measure that success?
      • How could this be used to show the degree of success?
  • Again, keep in mind that your audience for this presentation is a specific group (or groups) at your interviewee’s organization and tailor your language and messaging accordingly. Remember, also, that another person will ultimately be giving the presentation. Include thorough speaker’s notes that flesh out the bullet points on each slide.
    Additional Requirements
  • Number of slides: Plan on using one or two slides for each part of your presentation as needed, so the content of your presentation will be 8–12 slides in length. Remember that slides should contain concise talking points, and you will use presenter’s notes to go into detail. Be sure to include a reference slide as the last slide of your presentation.
  • Number of references: Cite a minimum of 3 sources of scholarly or professional evidence that support your central ideas. Resources should be no more than five years old.
  • APA formatting: Make sure that in-text citations on your slides and in your notes pages and reference slide reflect current APA Style and Format.
  • Portfolio Prompt: Remember to save the final assessment to your ePortfolio so that you may refer to it as you complete the final Capstone course.

Research and Data Analysis

/in /by

Alesix Tieku

Dr. Hossein Zare,

Research and Data Analysis

HMGT 400 (7980)

March 20, 2019

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Week 1, Exercise:

The attached dataset, provides some information about hospitals in 2011 and 2012, download the data and then complete the descriptive table. Please use the following format to report your findings.

Table 1. Descriptive statistics between hospitals in 2011 & 2012

Variables20112012p-value
 NMeanSt. DevNMeanSt. Dev 
Hospital beds1505376.6086560.89981525376.8579.8366< 2.2e-16
Number of paid Employee14981237.2761615.79715151491.1211961.637< 2.2e-16
Number of non-paid Employee3039.97372.588053044.7697681.298616.653e-05
Total hospital cost15052168733223045707221525214748023294143536< 2.2e-16
Total hospital revenues15052287063193233398111525229978391321273114< 2.2e-16
Available Medicare days149916739.1619214.29151617110.1419765.74< 2.2e-16
Available Medicaid days14845301.1999207.69915015366.3339340.373< 2.2e-16
Total Hospital Discharge15009492.32610898.615179544.05110994.17< 2.2e-16
Medicare discharge14993230.6243388.95715163598.2483785.675< 2.2e-16
Medicaid discharge14811130.7271757.15814981119.5471740.423< 2.2e-16

 

Based on your findings in which years hospitals had better performance? Please write a short paragraph and describe your findings.

The hospitals had better performance in 2012 compared to 2011. The mean number of hospital beds in 2012 was slightly higher than the mean number of hospital beds in 2011. In terms of revenue, the mean revenue in 2012 was higher than the mean revenue in 2011. The total cost in 2011 was also higher than the total cost in 2012. For these variables, the p. Value is less than 0.05 hence the null hypothesis is not rejected at 95% confidence interval. This implies that the means between the two groups are not different.

Literature Review Program Transcript

/in /by

Literature Review

© 2017 Laureate Education, Inc.

1

Literature Review Program Transcript

[MUSIC PLAYING]

NARRATOR: Have you ever thought about a literature review as representing your intellectual heritage or intellectual genealogy? In his exploration of the purpose of a literature review, Dr. Patton explains this interesting perspective. He also points out common errors to avoid when undertaking a literature review.

MICHAEL QUINN PATTON: One of the things that we do as scholar practitioners is look at the knowledge created by other people. And we draw on that knowledge as a way of positioning our own work and understanding where our contribution to knowledge, our own research, fits in that larger tradition. This is often referred to as the literature review. And the way that you go about knowing the knowledge that others have generated, that you’re going to build on and contribute to, is to conduct a literature review.

I tend not to like that terminology, because it sounds like the purpose is to review the literature. Literature review is actually a means to another end. And it’s that end, it’s that purpose of conducting the literature review that I want to focus on.

The purpose is for you to understand your intellectual heritage, your intellectual genealogy. Anytime we undertake an inquiry into a particular issue, we are building on the knowledge of others. And we need to know what that knowledge is. It’s part of our obligation as scholars, is to understand what work has come before us, what concepts we’ve inherited, what methods we’ve inherited, what measures we’ve inherited. Some of which we’ve adopted, some of which we’ve parted from. But we need to know that.

Because at the end of a program of study, a master’s degree, a program of doctoral inquiry, you’re going to be expected to be able to locate your work within that tradition. And so it means that you need to be able to establish the people who formulated the basic distinctions that you’re drawing on.

Let me share with you some of the mistakes that I, from my point of view, find students engaging in when they undertake the literature review. One of these is to simply do an internet search to see how many articles they can find on a topic. Where they think that the game is how many citations you can come up with to show that you’ve done the literature review.

This isn’t a quantitative game. It’s not something where the number of sources is important. It’s the quality of those sources and your engagement with them, that you are able to engage with what other people have done and understand what’s relevant, what’s not relevant to your own area of inquiry. So that you’re positioning yourself out of those traditions that others have engaged in.

 

 

Literature Review

© 2017 Laureate Education, Inc.

2

A second error is to think that the game is to position your work as unique. It is to try to find something that nobody else has ever done, to say nobody else has ever studied this before. Likewise, for any given field, there are burning questions that have defined that field.

In sociology, which is my own field, all sociology derives from what we call the Hobbesian question of order. What holds society together? Why doesn’t society fall apart? Every sociological question stems from that question that Hobbes asked. And therefore, if you look at sociology articles in the premier journals, the American Sociological Review, the American Journal of Sociology, you’ll find that they typically begin with a reference to Hobbes or to Durkheim time or to Weber or to Marx who were asking the original burning questions in psychology and sociology.

In psychology, you’ll find original references to Freud and to Adler and to Jung that go back to things like the notion of the unconscious. And whether you agree or disagree with various aspects of Freudian theory, the notion that there’s an unconscious mind and that that unconscious mind makes a difference in what we do is a part of what has framed modern psychology.

And so you stand on the shoulders of people who are trying to understand how the mind works, and who have divided off from those original classical theorists and researchers about how the mind works. The burning question in psychology is, why do we behave as we behave? How do we think and feel? How do we know and engage the world? And so you need to know who the classic people were who were asking those questions, who their disciples were, what were the splits along the world, along the journey where one group went in this direction and another group went in another direction?

Up to the more recent published research, and up to the kind of work that’s now going on that may not yet be published, where you can get in touch with those people who are engaged in research now. Find out what the funded research is from the National Institutes of Health, the National Institutes of Mental Health, the major foundations. And find out what cutting edge work is going on so that you have a full scale genealogy of what your intellectual tradition is.

When you have finished that inquiry over a period of time, you’re able to then say, these are the people on whose shoulders I stand. These are the intellectual traditions that I’m a part of. This is my intellectual DNA. Here is what I’ve drawn on. Here are the places where I’m departing from others. And here is where I’m going to make my contribution. That’s the purpose of a literature review. You’re positioning yourself in a stream of knowledge, in a flow of knowledge.

As a part of that work, a third error that I think students often make is to only read second-hand and third-hand accounts of the classics. The classics got to be

 

 

Literature Review

© 2017 Laureate Education, Inc.

3

classics for a reason. People over the years read those works and found the thinking in them profound.

Yes, in some cases, the findings may be out of date. But a part of what you ought to be learning as you engage in a literature review and in your intellectual history is not just the specific findings. You are learning how scholars think. You’re learning how scientists think. You’re learning how a researcher thinks.

So read those works not only for what they found out. Read them for their methods. Look for the methods-findings linkage. How did particular findings yield and come from particular methods? How did those methods develop over time? And how did the classic writers think about things, inquire into things?

So as you’re engaging in that, it has two streams that you’re paying attention to. One is the theoretical stream. What are the findings? What are the constructs that you’ve inherited? And the other is the methodological stream. What are the methods of inquiries, the measures, the instrumentation, the ways of going about recording what you observe that we’ve inherited?

Both of those are your rich inheritance as scholar practitioners. And one of the things that you ought to come out of your education with is knowing what that intellectual heritage is, both conceptual and methodological, and then where you’re going to make your contribution.

Assessment practices in counseling

/in /by

Week 9 ~

Here is some food for thought!

A while back I wrote a book chapter on assessment in counseling and included information about program evaluations.  It’s really interesting because program evaluation can be considered research and assessment and just plain program evaluation

Here is a case study that was included.  This may help you think about some of the aspects of program evaluation:

The agency needs to “prove its worth”!

You were recently hired at a non-profit counseling center as a quality assurance counselor and as part of your role it is your responsibility to conduct a program evaluation.  You are vaguely aware that you need to collect some data but where to begin is the question.  The goal of program evaluation is to create a systematic assessment which will work to improve the quality of services or the programs of the agency.  The first step involves determining your goal and then creating a plan to collect objective and subjective information.  There are several questions you must ask as you create the program evaluation.  Who are your stakeholders? Are you focusing on specific programs with the agency?  Are you going to utilize a formative or summative evaluation?  Would using test results be helpful?  Will you utilize surveys, interviews, observations, or focus groups?  Questions such as these guide the evaluation with the goal of accountability for the counseling profession.

 

References:

Foster, L.H. (2020). Assessment practices in counseling. In D. Capuzzi and D. Gross (Eds.), Introduction to the counseling profession (8th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Assessment Evaluation Instructions

/in /by

EDUC 622

Assessment Evaluation Instructions

 

Overview: The purpose of this assignment is to research, evaluate, and understand valid, reliable, fair, and appropriate assessment tools used in schools to screen, diagnose, and measure student academic achievement.

 

Critically analyze the measures, addressing strengths and weaknesses. There is a data collection template provided to ease the process of collecting information. This template is submitted with the assignment. Each critical analysis should include the following:

· A Summary of the assessment instrument with clear, specific information unique to the instrument, including the population who could be tested with the instrument.

· An analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of the measure. There must be a minimum of 2 reasons to support each one.

· Justification for why the measurement would be an appropriate measure for different populations.

2. Use a separate data collection template for each instrument. Save each as a Microsoft Word document labeled: instrumentname.doc

NOTE: When submitting the evaluation, these separate templates must be compiled, along with all other items, into 1 Word document.

3. Other resources for research are listed in the syllabus and may be used in addition to Buros. If using the testing instrument manual, list it in the references. Buros is directly accessible through the JLF library database for your convenience.

 

Step 2 – Written Report

1. Organize and format each assessment instrument with the headings and subheadings outlined below. Do not write the questions or statements from the data collection template. Write in well-formed paragraphs that flow logically from one topic to the next.

2. Each instrument review should contain a minimum of 2 pages of content, including the data collection template, in addition to the cover page and reference page. Format the paper in current APA. The data collection template will be used as a chart in the report at the end of each instrument review.

3. The total paper (10 pages) should be presented in this order:

· Title Page (1 page)

· 8 Pages of Content

· Assessment Evaluation (AE) 1

· Completed AE 1 template

· AE 2

· Completed AE 2 template

· AE 3

· Completed AE 3 template

· AE 4

· Completed AE 4 template

· Reference Page (1 page) – All assessments should be referenced in current APA format.

4. Format each written assessment evaluation with the title, “Analysis of Assessment Name,” using the following headings.

· Summary of Assessment

· Strengths and Weaknesses of the Assessment

· Justification and Use of the Assessment

· Insert data collection template as a chart

Page 1 of 2

You work for Quantigration, Inc., a semiconductor manufacturing plant headquartered in the United States. Capitalizing on advancements in its product, Quantigration has aggressively expanded and acquired fabrication plants and workers around the world.

/in /by

Scenario

You work for Quantigration, Inc., a semiconductor manufacturing plant headquartered in the United States. Capitalizing on advancements in its product, Quantigration has aggressively expanded and acquired fabrication plants and workers around the world.

In an effort to be more of a thought leader (an organization that is viewed as authoritative and influential in its industry), the company is starting a new public blog, and the organizers are currently taking proposals for regular columns.

 

Your manager, Gregory Russo, wants to propose a regular history column that focuses specifically on manufacturing. As a bit of a history buff, he wants to share his passion with others and thinks it could distinguish the company’s voice from that of its peers.

Gregory has already started a proposal and gathered lots of research on some potential topics for an accompanying sample article. Unfortunately, he just got assigned to an important project with a tight deadline and doesn’t have time to put it all together. He’s given you access to his notes and asked you to finish his proposal and write a sample article to be submitted to the organizers.

Directions

Part 1: Column Proposal

Gregory has already started a proposal but has asked you to finish it because he doesn’t have enough time. Using the partially completed draft in the Deliverables section, fill out the areas that he has marked. He’s specifically asked you to:

• Using your understanding of historiography, explain how a company perspective like Quantigration’s can affect the study of the history of manufacturing. In other words, how might historians examine these blog posts in 20-30 years?

• Outline a research process for future bloggers to follow

Part 2: Sample Article

In addition to the proposal, Gregory wants to submit a sample article to the company blog to be used as the first in a series. He’s already gathered some research on two topics and would like you to write a sample article on one of the topics he’s chosen.

1. Start by looking over Gregory’s research and choosing the topic that interests you most. You can review the primary and secondary sources he has gathered in the Gregory’s Research document in the Deliverables section. He has gathered information on:

o The Triangle Shirtwaist Company

o The Ford Assembly Line

2. Read through all of the sources on your chosen topic and start to consider information or ideas that stand out to you so that you can develop a research question. Gregory has asked you to develop a research question that is “appropriately sized,” meaning:

o It is more complex than a yes-or-no question, or something that can be answered with a fact (For example, “Who founded the Ford Motor Company” would be too small. “What was the impact of [factor] on [outcome]” would require further interpretation of the evidence.)

o It provokes discussion and leads to more questions

o It can be explored using the sources he’s provided

3. Choose at least four sources from your chosen topic to support your article. Gregory has asked you to include authoritative sources of information, and to use a balance of primary and secondary sources.

4. Write a (1,000- to 1,100 words) article on your chosen topic. Your article should synthesize perspectives from your sources, both primary and secondary, to form a cohesive historical narrative. It should also effectively communicate this narrative in a way that is supported by evidence from your research. Gregory recommended using the following outline to structure your article:

o State your research question.

o Write a brief description of each source and its author, identifying it as primary or secondary.

o Write a narrative description of the events supported by evidence from your research. (This will be the largest part of your article.)

o Finish with a conclusion in which you restate your research question and offer a tentative answer.

What to Submit:

Every project has a deliverable or deliverables, which are the files that must be submitted before your project can be assessed. For this project, you must submit the following:

1. Part 1: Column Proposal (Short responses, based on Gregory’s draft see attached file)

Finish Gregory’s email to the blog organizer using his draft letter as a basis.

2. Part 2: Sample Article (1,000–1,100 words)

Write a sample article on one of the topics noted in Gregory’s research (file is attached). The Gregory’s Research Notes document contains a collection of resources that Gregory has gathered for this sample article. This would be used for your references

Please review the attached rubric to be sure to meet all requirements 

Project Rubric – HIS-20023-XK102 Historical Inquiry

/in /by

Project Rubric – HIS-20023-XK102 Historical Inquiry 19DA10

https://learn.snhu.edu/d2l/le/content/304873/viewContent/6820042/View 1/2

Project Rubric

 

The following rubric will be used to assess your project. The rubric is a detailed list of

the specific expecta�ons your project submission must meet to demonstrate mastery of

the competency. You may resubmit the project un�l you have demonstrated mastery of

each rubric row.

This competency has a Learning Resources area. This area includes units with resources

such as readings and videos, which have been provided to help support your work on

this project. You may be wondering how what you’re working on in the project fits

together with these units. The following table shows how the different rubric rows align

to the units.

If you need more help with a par�cular rubric row, you can use the resources in the

matching unit to help support your work.

Project Rubric

Column Proposal

Explains how company’s perspec�ve can affect the

study of this historical topic

☐ Mastered ☐ Not Yet

Unit Resou

Unit Resou

Unit Resou

Outlines a research process using historical

methods for future bloggers to follow

☐ Mastered ☐ Not Yet

Unit Resou

Unit Resou

Unit Resou

Listen

HIS-20023-XK102 Historical Inquiry 19DA10

 

 

12/5/2019 Project Rubric – HIS-20023-XK102 Historical Inquiry 19DA10

https://learn.snhu.edu/d2l/le/content/304873/viewContent/6820042/View 2/2

Reflect in ePortfolio Download Print

Open with docReader

 

Sample Ar�cle

Develops an appropriately sized research ques�on ☐ Mastered ☐ Not Yet

Unit Resou

Unit Resou

Unit Resou

Synthesizes perspec�ves from mul�ple

authorita�ve sources, both primary and secondary,

to form a cohesive historical narra�ve

☐ Mastered ☐ Not Yet

Unit Resou

Unit Resou

Effec�vely communicates historical narra�ve that is

supported by evidence from research

☐ Mastered ☐ Not Yet

Unit Resou

Unit Resou

General

Wri�en answers are clear; use correct grammar,

sentence structure and spelling; and show an ☐ Mastered

Academic

Task: View this topic

Activity Details

This is the rubric for your project. This rubric shows how you can be successful in

your project submission. As you prepare your project for submission, compare it

against this rubric to make sure you have included all of the required elements.

 

Research Critical Analysis of a Journal Article

/in /by

Please no plagiarism and make sure you are able to access all resource on your own before you bid. Main references come from Balkin, R. S., & Kleist, D. M. (2017) and/or American Psychological Association (2014). Assignments should adhere to graduate-level writing and be free from writing errors. I have also attached my assignment rubric so you can see how to make full points. Please follow the instructions to get full credit and use the attached worksheet as required. I need this completed by 09/21/19 at 7pm.

Assignment – Week 4

Research Critical Analysis of a Journal Article

The purpose of this assignment is to allow you to practice the critical analysis of the contents of research articles. When you identify a research article, you want to begin by assessing whether the source of the article is scholarly and current. Once you have verified these elements, it is important to determine what the researchers were attempting to investigate, how the study was carried out, and what the outcomes were.

For this Assignment, you will critically examine the elements of a scholarly article. Because you will need to choose research articles that represent each type of methodology when you create your Final Project Annotated Bibliography, it is essential for you to understand the contents of a research article.

To Prepare

  • Review the media programs and blog found in the Learning Resources which will introduce you to the critical elements of a scholarly article, how to identify them, and how to read scholarly articles.
  • Review the Kenny, M. C., & Winick,      C. B. (2000) article found in the Learning Resources. You will use this article to complete this Assignment.
  • Review the Scholarly Article Content Analysis Preparation Guide, the Scholarly Article Content      Analysis Worksheet including the briefcase conceptualization found in the      Learning Resources and consider the “client” for any counseling implications. Note: You will use this Worksheet to complete this Assignment.

Assignment

  • Complete the Scholarly Article      Content Analysis Worksheet for the Kenny and Winick (2000) article.
  • Analyze the contents of the article and apply the findings to the case conceptualization included in the worksheet.
  • Critically analyze the article  and identify all components:
    • Is the article scholarly?
    • What is the problem/purpose?
    • What is(are) the research question(s)?
    • Who are the participants?
    • What are the ethical/cultural considerations?
    • What data /information was collected from participants?
    • How did the researchers describe the results/answer to the research question?
    • How does this research apply to the case study?

Required Resources

Kenny, M. C., & Winick, C. B. (2000). An integrative approach to play therapy with an autistic girl. International Journal of Play Therapy, 9(1), 11–33. doi:10.1037/h0089438

Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.

Raff, J. (2018, January 3). How to read and understand a scientific article [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://violentmetaphors.files.wordpress.com/2018/01/how-to-read-and-understand-a-scientific-article.pdf

Walden University. (n.d.). How do I verify that my article is peer reviewed? Retrieved August 1, 2019, from https://academicanswers.waldenu.edu/faq/72613  

Walden University Library. (n.d.). Verify peer review. Retrieved August 1, 2019, from https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/library/verifypeerreview  

Document: Scholarly Article Content Analysis Preparation Guide (PDF) 

Document: Scholarly Article Content Analysis Worksheet (Word document)

Required Media

Walden University Library. (n.d.). Anatomy of a research article. Retrieved from https://waldencss.adobeconnect.com/anatomyofaresearcharticle/ 

Note: if you are having difficulty viewing the required media above using Google Chrome as your browser, please visit http://academicanswers.waldenu.edu/faq/239615 for instructions on how to enable Flash.

Laureate Education (Producer). (2016). Literature review [Video file]. Baltimore, MD: Author.

Note: The approximate length of this media piece is 8 minutes.

Accessible player  –Downloads– Download Video w/CC Download Audio Download Transcript

Credit: Provided courtesy of the Laureate International Network of Universities.

Laureate Education (Producer). (2017k). Purpose of research [Video file]. Baltimore, MD: Author.

Note: The approximate length of this media piece is 15 minutes. This media piece is also in the resources of Week 2.

Accessible player  –Downloads– Download Video w/CC Download Audio Download Transcript

Credit: Provided courtesy of the Laureate International Network of Universities.

The thesis is a claim reflecting your interpretation of the play that is informed by the supporting criticism.   

/in /by

In a 5-6 page essay following MLA formatting, analyze some aspect of the play that intrigues you.  Your topic may be drawn from the list of topics for further study but can be any topic that interests you.

Part of this assignment is for you to find supportive material through library research.  As such, you are required to use at least two sources to support your analysis.

  • Of the two sources, one can be background information (about Elizabethan England or Cyprus, etc.),
  • One of them must be literary criticism/analysis of the play or of Shakespeare’s plays

For example, if you are researching/writing about the roles of women in Othello, you must include in your paper support from at least one source that discusses the literary interpretation of women’s roles in Shakespeare or in Othello.  The other source might be information about women’s roles in Elizabethan England (i.e. historical rather than literary sources).

You must use quotes from the play and from outside critical literary sources. Please include a works cited page at the end.

– Find one to two articles of literary criticism that shed light on your area of interest regarding the play.

– The thesis is a claim reflecting your interpretation of the play that is informed by the supporting criticism.   

Here is an example:

 

Sample topic:

Romeo and Juliet are iconic characters, in part because of their longevity in the literary canon, but also it can be argued that this is because of their roles as archetypal figures.  Using the critical approach of archetypal theory, how well do the characters of Romeo and Juliet fit the archetypes of the hero and damsel in distress?

Sample working thesis:

Although Romeo and Juliet may not appear to be the typical hero and heroine, because of Romeo’s romantic nature and Juliet’s independent actions, they still fit the archetypal roles closely enough to have a resonance that draws in readers and play goers alike.