HSC 5013 BUL Qualitative Article Critique Essay
Sample Answer for HSC 5013 BUL Qualitative Article Critique Essay Included After Question
HSC5013_AN_Assignment Guidelines SUMMATIVE ASSESSMENT Before reading this document, please ensure you check Module Moodle announcements to ensure you are aware of latest changes or announcements by the Module Leader or from the Module Team. A) Overview The student will undertake a systematic critique of one research paper from a choice of two provided by the module leader. The choice of paper is listed in Appendix section in this document. The student will critically discuss how this research paper fits with current evidence base, using the appraising tool provided. Assessing Learning Outcomes and Expectations I. The learning outcomes of this module will be assessed by the submission of a 3000-word essay based on a critical appraisal of a published research article relevant to the Adult Nursing practice. II. The student must use the specified critiquing tool along with one of the chosen research articles. III. The student must include a discussion of the relevance of this research to clinical practice. IV. The breadth and depth of application of the critiquing tool on the chosen research article, and the detailed discussion of the relevance of this chosen research article in clinical practice will assist the student to gain higher marks in this module assessment. V. Pass mark is 40% VI. The Marking Criteria is listed in Appendix, and can also be found on Module Moodle Site. What you need to complete this assessment: 1. Access to Moodle and Module Site 2. Marking Criteria 3. In receipt of your chosen research article out of two provided, and the critiquing tool. 1 Version 2_2022| HSC5013_AN_Assignment Guidelines B) COURSEWORK SUBMISSION Submission Route: One electronic copy to be submitted via Moodle according to the guidance below: • Instruction to students on submitting assignments electronically • All assignments will be submitted electronically through Moodle. • You must not include your name anywhere on the final submission document • The submitted assignment must have a footer which includes page numbers. • When you submit your paper electronically you will have the opportunity to save a receipt. • Please aim to submit your final version of the assignment before due date and time. Document Layout • 2.0 line spacing • Size 12 font Arial • Page number as footer on all pages You should not place your name on any part of the paper 2 Version 2_2022| HSC5013_AN_Assignment Guidelines C) Assignment Structure Clear Introduction o Provide a clear statement of intent and signpost the essay. o Tell the reader what will be included in this essay and in what order. o State why the topic is important to your field of nursing. o Outline the importance of research in nursing, critiquing research and link to evidence-based practice. o Define key terms which are relevant to your essay – ensure the definitions are relevant to your essay content (e.g., if using quantitative research, ensure your definition relates to the type of studies and methodology you are discussing). Main Body o Critique the research paper using the framework provided by the module leader (see below) identifying strengths and limitations of the study in relation to believability and robustness: Authenticity o Writing style, author credentials, title, abstract Robustness o Research problem/purpose significance of study o Literature review o Study design/methods/philosophical underpinnings/theoretical framework/ aim/hypothesis o Sampling o Ethical considerations o Data collection o Data analysis o Findings In doing this you will be showing an understanding of the research process. Discussion • Make sure that you support your discussion with relevant and latest references, identifying any implications of the issues identified. 3 Version 2_2022| HSC5013_AN_Assignment Guidelines • Demonstrate that you have conducted an appropriate inspection of the literature related to this topic • Summarise the significant findings, showing where this study fits in to the wider Evidence-base on the topic. This will help you to demonstrate wider reading and should show that you have undertaken an inspection of the relevant literature. Conclusion • Conclude your essay by summarising what you have discussed throughout this essay in a logical order. Do not just repeat your introduction. Start this by giving an overall summary – what have you done – what have you shown, how is this relevant to current practice, where does this need to go from here? Throughout your original work, you need to demonstrate • Evidence of original thought • Succinct writing: keeping within the word limit (3000 words) • Good presentation (see guidance below) with correct grammar and spelling • Correct referencing –this should follow university guidelines: https://my.lsbu.ac.uk/my/wcm/myconnect/c6be7b33-cfab-445ea87c34aab23d4d0e/harvard-referencing-helpsheet.pdf?MOD=AJPERES 4 Version 2_2022| HSC5013_AN_Assignment Guidelines D) Critiquing framework The use of one of the critiquing frameworks below is compulsory: For quantitative research: How to appraise quantitative research Xabi Cathala Calvin Moorley For qualitative research: How to appraise qualitative research Calvin Moorley Xabi Cathala You are reminded that London South Bank University has a policy on the late submission of work and on claiming extenuating circumstances. Specific details of these policies and others relating to assessment regulations can also be found in the Student Handbook. Please ensure you use the correct critiquing framework to critique your chosen research paper E) APPENDIX Qualitative Research Paper: Osbourne, L., Barnett, J. and Blackwood, L., 2022. Black students’ experiences of “acceptable” racism at a UK university. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/casp.2637 Quantitative Research Paper: Aiken, L.H., Sloane, D.M., Ball, J., Bruyneel, L., Rafferty, A.M. and Griffiths, P., 2021. Patient satisfaction with hospital care and nurses in England: an observational study. BMJ open, 8(1), p.e019189. https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/bmjopen/8/1/e019189.full.pdf Marking Criteria (see below) 5 Version 2_2022| HSC5013_AN_Assignment Guidelines 6 Version 2_2022|
| Excellent | Good | Fair | Poor | ||
| Main Postinga | 45 (45%) – 50 (50%)
Answers all parts of the discussion question(s) expectations with reflective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.
Supported by at least three current, credible sources.
Written clearly and concisely with no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. |
40 (40%) – 44 (44%)
Responds to the discussion question(s) and is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.
At least 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth.
Supported by at least three credible sources.
Written clearly and concisely with one or no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. |
35 (35%) – 39 (39%)
Responds to some of the discussion question(s).
One or two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed.
Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.
Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.
Post is cited with two credible sources.
Written somewhat concisely; may contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors.
Contains some APA formatting errors. |
0 (0%) – 34 (34%)
Does not respond to the discussion question(s) adequately.
Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria.
Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.
Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.
Contains only one or no credible sources.
Not written clearly or concisely.
Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors.
Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style. |
|
| Main Post: Timeliness | 10 (10%) – 10 (10%)
Posts main post by day 3. |
0 (0%) – 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not post by day 3. |
|
| First Response | 17 (17%) – 18 (18%)
Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.
Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.
Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. |
15 (15%) – 16 (16%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. |
13 (13%) – 14 (14%)
Response is on topic and may have some depth.
Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.
Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited. |
0 (0%) – 12 (12%)
Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are missing.
No credible sources are cited. |
|
| Second Response | 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)
Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.
Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.
Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. |
14 (14%) – 15 (15%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. |
12 (12%) – 13 (13%)
Response is on topic and may have some depth.
Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.
Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited. |
0 (0%) – 11 (11%)
Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are missing.
No credible sources are cited. |
|
| Participation | 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days. |
0 (0%) – 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days. |
|
| Total Points: 100 | |||||