代写 401011 Nursing & Midwifery
100%原创包过,高质量代写&免费提供Turnitin报告--24小时客服QQ&微信：273427
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
