HLT 362V Week 4 Discussion Question 1 If The Result Of An ANOVA Experiment

HLT 362V Week 4 Discussion Question 1 If The Result Of An ANOVA Experiment

Sample Answer for HLT 362V Week 4 Discussion Question 1 If The Result Of An ANOVA Experiment Included After Question

HLT 362V Week 4 Discussion Question 1 If The Result Of An ANOVA Experiment

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: HLT 362V Week 4 Discussion Question 1 If The Result Of An ANOVA Experiment Was “not Significant” 

If the result of an ANOVA experiment was “not significant”, was the experiment a failure? Provide reasoning and examples (real or hypothetical) to support your argument.

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: HLT 362V Week 4 Discussion Question 1 If The Result Of An ANOVA Experiment Was “not Significant”

Grading Rubric Guidelines

Performance Category 10 9 8 4 0
Scholarliness

Demonstrates achievement of scholarly inquiry for professional and academic decisions.

  • Provides relevant evidence of scholarly inquiry clearly stating how the evidence informed or changed professional or academic decisions
  • Evaluates literature resources to develop a comprehensive analysis or synthesis.
  • Uses valid, relevant, and reliable outside sources to contribute to the threaded discussion
  • Provides relevant evidence of scholarly inquiry but does not clearly state how the evidence informed or changed professional or academic decisions.
  • Evaluates information from source(s) to develop a coherent analysis or synthesis.
  • Uses some valid, relevant, reliable outside sources to contribute to the threaded discussion.
  • Discusses using scholarly inquiry but does not state how scholarly inquiry informed or changed professional or academic decisions.
  • Information is taken from source(s) with some interpretation/evaluation, but not enough to develop a coherent analysis or synthesis.
  • Little valid, relevant, or reliable outside sources are used to contribute to the threaded discussion.
  • Demonstrates little or no understanding of the topic.
  • Discusses using scholarly inquiry but does not state how scholarly inquiry informed or changed professional or academic decisions.
  • Information is taken from source(s) without any interpretation/evaluation.
  • The posting uses information that is not valid, relevant, or reliable
  • No evidence of the use of scholarly inquiry to inform or change professional or academic decisions.
  • Information is not valid, relevant, or reliable
Performance Category  10 9 8 4 0
Application of Course Knowledge –

Demonstrate the ability to analyze, synthesize, and/or apply principles and concepts learned in the course lesson and outside readings and relate them to real-life professional situations

  • Posts make direct reference to concepts discussed in the lesson or drawn from relevant outside sources;
  • Applies concepts to personal experience in the professional setting and or relevant application to real life.
  • Posts make direct reference to concepts discussed in the lesson or drawn from relevant outside sources.
  • Applies concepts to personal experience in their professional setting and or relevant application to real life
  • Interactions with classmates are relevant to the discussion topic but do not make direct reference to lesson content
  • Posts are generally on topic but do not build knowledge by incorporating concepts and principles from the lesson.
  • Does not attempt to apply lesson concepts to personal experience in their professional setting and or relevant application to real life
  • Does not demonstrate a solid understanding of the principles and concepts presented in the lesson
  • Posts do not adequately address the question posed either by the discussion prompt or the instructor’s launch post.
  • Posts are superficial and do not reflect an understanding of the lesson content
  • Does not attempt to apply lesson concepts to personal experience in their professional setting and or relevant application to real life
  • Posts are not related to the topics provided by the discussion prompt or by the instructor; attempts by the instructor to redirect the student are ignored
  • No discussion of lesson concepts to personal experience in the professional setting and or relevant application to real life
Performance Category  5 4 3 2 0
Interactive Dialogue

Replies to each graded thread topic posted by the course instructor, by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT, of each week, and posts a minimum of two times in each graded thread, on separate days.

(5 points possible per graded thread)

  • Exceeds minimum post requirements
  • Replies to each graded thread topic posted by the course instructor, by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT, of each week, and posts three or more times in each graded thread, over three separate days.
  • Replies to a post posed by faculty and to a peer
  • Summarizes what was learned from the lesson, readings, and other student posts for the week.
  • Replies to each graded thread topic posted by the course instructor, by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT, of each week, and posts a minimum of two times in each graded thread, on separate days
  • Replies to a question posed by a peer

Summarizes what was learned from the lesson, readings, and other student posts for the week.

  • Meets expectations of 2 posts on 2 different days.
  • The main post is not made by the Wednesday deadline
  • Does not reply to a question posed by a peer or faculty
  • Has only one post for the week
  • Discussion posts contain few, if any, new ideas or applications; often are a rehashing or summary of other students’ comments
  • Does not post to the thread
  • No connections are made to the topic
  Minus 1 Point Minus 2 Point Minus 3 Point Minus 4 Point Minus 5 Point
Grammar, Syntax, APA

Note: if there are only a few errors in these criteria, please note this for the student in as an area for improvement. If the student does not make the needed corrections in upcoming weeks, then points should be deducted.

Points deducted for improper grammar, syntax and APA style of writing.

The source of information is the APA Manual 6th Edition

  • 2-3 errors in APA format.
  • Written responses have 2-3 grammatical, spelling, and punctuation errors.
  • Writing style is generally clear, focused, and facilitates communication.
  • 4-5 errors in APA format.
  • Writing responses have 4-5 grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors.
  • Writing style is somewhat focused.
  • 6-7 errors in APA format.
  • Writing responses have 6-7 grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors.
  • Writing style is slightly focused making discussion difficult to understand.
  • 8-10 errors in APA format.
  • Writing responses have 8-10 grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors.
  • Writing style is not focused, making discussion difficult to understand.
  • Post contains greater than 10 errors in APA format.
  • Written responses have more than 10 grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors.
  • Writing style does not facilitate communication.
  • The student continues to make repeated mistakes in any of the above areas after written correction by the instructor
0 points lost       -5 points lost
Total Participation Requirements

per discussion thread

The student answers the threaded discussion question or topic on one day and posts a second response on another day. The student does not meet the minimum requirement of two postings on two different days
Early Participation Requirement

per discussion thread

The student must provide a substantive answer to the graded discussion question(s) or topic(s), posted by the course instructor (not a response to a peer), by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT of each week. The student does not meet the requirement of a substantive response to the stated question or topic by Wednesday at 11:59 pm MT.

Also Read: HLT 362V Week 4 Assignment Workbook Exercise 18, 33 and 36  

A Sample Answer For the Assignment: HLT 362V Week 4 Discussion Question 1 If The Result Of An ANOVA Experiment

Title: HLT 362V Week 4 Discussion Question 1 If The Result Of An ANOVA Experiment

TOPIC 4 DQ 1: Experimental, Quasi-Experimental,  

and Non-Experimental Research 

GCU Library consists of different research papers, both qualitative and quantitative, which have been published for the purposes of studies. These research studies can be categorized as quasi-experimental, experimental, and non-experimental in nature. The research study, titled, “Effect of Self Care Education Based on Orem’s Nursing Theory on Quality of Life and Self-Efficacy in Patients with Hypertension” is one of the main examples of a quasi-experimental study. From the above research study, the researchers were trying to analyze the effects of self-care education on the treatment processes and the quality of the healthcare outcomes among the patients. The research study is based on the Orem’s theory. From the research process, there was the manipulation of both the dependent and independent variables i.e. the experimental variables without the indiscriminate engagement of the study participants in the investigational conditions (Flannelly et al., 2018). Quasi-experimental designs are often applied in scenarios where randomization is difficult or impossible (Borusyak et al., 2018). One of the main example of the

HLT 362V Week 4 Discussion Question 1 If The Result Of An ANOVA Experiment
HLT 362V Week 4 Discussion Question 1 If The Result Of An ANOVA Experiment

quasi-experimental research design is the time-series analysis. 

From the GCU library, an example of the experimental research is the one that was conducted by Claessen, Calder, Ebbels, and Leitaoa. There was the application of the single case methodology to evaluate or measure the efficiency of the shared or collective metalinguistic training and the grammar facilitation to advance regular past tense marking for the learners in the age between five and six and with language disorder. Number of respondents in the study was nine. In other words, the study has a sample size of nine. The experimental research incorporated the collection and analysis of data through adherence to the follow-up studies that were held at least twice every one week (Orero, 2018). The observation of study participants was done for about 20-30 minutes for each of the sessions.    

Finally, an example of the non-experimental study from the GCU library is: “Assessment of Quality Indicators in the Evaluation and Enrolment Process of the In-Patients in the Liver Transplant Program”. The whole process of the study involved the collection and analysis of data for a duration of two years or twenty-four months. Different approaches of data analysis such as hypothesis testing, were done to ensure effective statistical outcomes in the whole process of the research.   

 

References 

Borusyak, K., Hull, P., & Jaravel, X. (2018). Quasi-experimental shift-share research designs (No. w24997). National Bureau of Economic Research. 

Flannelly, K. J., Flannelly, L. T., & Jankowski, K. R. (2018). Threats to the internal validity of experimental and quasi-experimental research in healthcare. Journal of health care chaplaincy, 24(3), 107-130. 

Orero, P., Doherty, S., Kruger, J. L., Matamala, A., Pedersen, J., Perego, E., … & Szarkowska, A. (2018). Conducting experimental research in audiovisual translation (AVT): A position paper. JosTrans: The Journal of Specialised Translation, (30), 105-126.