代写 401011 Nursing & Midwifery

  • 100%原创包过,高质代写&免费提供Turnitin报告--24小时客服QQ&微信:120591129
  • 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