Coughlan, Cronin, and Ryan (2007) provided a step-by-step guide to critiquing quantitative literature. Using these criteria, critique the article by Barnett. What are the important markers to look for when critiquing a quantitative study?
Hello this is the topic that has to be done. qualitative and quantitative research which means: Quantitative research uses statistical and logical observations to get the conclusion whereas the qualitative search relies on the verbal and written data. In short, quantitative research is generally expressed in numbers or represented using graphs, whereas qualitative research is expressed using the words for the given
data sets
. I’m using the easer method Quantitative research.
In Topic 3, you read three articles about the skills of the researcher. In this assignment, you will identify three themes common to the articles and write a synthesis paper about research skills using evidence from the articles to support your themes. Use the skills you developed in RES-815 while completing the Emerging Writer Worksheet in which you identified themes, supported them with evidence from the articles, built a thesis claim, and outlined your paper.
General Requirements:
Use the following information to ensure successful completion of the assignment:
· Review the articles by Lindsay (2015); Lee, Chang, and Bryan (2020); and Klocko, Marshal, and Davidson (2015) located in the Topic Resources.
· This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
· Doctoral learners are required to use APA style for their writing assignments. The APA Style Guide is located in the Student Success Center.
· Refer to the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association for specific guidelines related to doctoral-level writing. The manual contains essential information on manuscript structure and content, clear and concise writing, and academic grammar and usage.
· You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. A link to the LopesWrite technical support articles is located in Class Resources if you need assistance.
Directions:
Write a paper (1,000-1,250 words) that synthesizes the Lindsay (2015); Lee, Chang, and Bryan (2020); and Klocko, Marshal, and Davidson (2015) articles. Your paper should include the following:
1. An introduction that introduces and provides context for the topic. This includes presenting a clear thesis statement.
2. Identification of and support for three themes with evidence from each article. Synthesize your discussion of the topic to support your thesis.
3. A conclusion that demonstrates support of your thesis statement, briefly summarizes the main points from your three themes, and makes recommendations for future research on the topic.
Synthesis Paper – Researcher Skills – Rubric
Collapse All Synthesis Paper – Researcher Skills – RubricCollapse All
Introduction
33 points
Criteria Description
Introduction
5. 5: Excellent
33 points
An introduction is thoroughly presented and vividly contextualizes the topic.
4. 4: Good
30.03 points
An introduction is present and adequately contextualizes the topic.
3. 3: Satisfactory
27.06 points
An introduction is presented, but does not contextualize the topic well.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
24.09 points
An introduction is present, but incomplete or illogical.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
An introduction is either missing or not evident to the reader.
Support of Common Themes
44 points
Criteria Description
Support of Common Themes
5. 5: Excellent
44 points
Support of common themes is thoroughly presented with rich detail.
4. 4: Good
40.04 points
Support of common themes is present and thorough.
3. 3: Satisfactory
36.08 points
Support of common themes is presented, but is cursory and lacking in depth.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
32.12 points
Support of common themes is present, but inaccurate or illogical.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Support of common themes is either missing or not evident to the reader.
Discussion of Conclusions
33 points
Criteria Description
Discussion of Conclusions
5. 5: Excellent
33 points
A discussion of the conclusions is thoroughly presented including an overall summary of themes found in the articles and is strongly connected to the thesis statement.
4. 4: Good
30.03 points
A discussion of the conclusions is presented and includes an overall summary of themes found in the articles and reasonably connects to the thesis statement.
3. 3: Satisfactory
27.06 points
A discussion of the conclusions is presented, but it does not include an overall summary of themes found in the articles or does not connect well to the thesis statement.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
24.09 points
A discussion of the conclusions is presented, but inaccurate or illogical.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
A discussion of the conclusions is not presented.
Synthesis and Argument
66 points
Criteria Description
Synthesis and Argument
5. 5: Excellent
66 points
Synthesis of source information is present and scholarly. Argument is clear and convincing, presenting a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.
4. 4: Good
60.06 points
Synthesis of source information is present and meaningful. Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.
3. 3: Satisfactory
54.12 points
Synthesis of source information is present, but pedantic. Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
48.18 points
Synthesis of source information is attempted, but is not successful. Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
No synthesis of source information is evident. Statement of purpose is not followed to a justifiable conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses non-credible sources.
Thesis Development and Purpose
22 points
Criteria Description
Thesis Development and Purpose
5. 5: Excellent
22 points
Thesis and/or main claim are clear and comprehensive; the essence of the paper is contained within the thesis.
4. 4: Good
20.02 points
Thesis and/or main claim are clear and forecast the development of the paper. They are descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.
3. 3: Satisfactory
18.04 points
Thesis and/or main claim are apparent and appropriate to purpose.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
16.06 points
Thesis and/or main claim are insufficiently developed and/or vague; purpose is not clear.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.
Mechanics of Writing
11 points
Criteria Description
Mechanics of Writing
5. 5: Excellent
11 points
Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
4. 4: Good
10.01 points
Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used.
3. 3: Satisfactory
9.02 points
Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
8.03 points
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, and/or word choice are present.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Mechanical errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are used.
APA Format
11 points
Criteria Description
APA Format
5. 5: Excellent
11 points
The document is correctly formatted. In-text citations and a reference page are complete and correct. The documentation of cited sources is free of error.
4. 4: Good
10.01 points
Required format is used, but minor errors are present (e.g. headings and direct quotes). Reference page is present and includes all cited sources. Documentation is appropriate and citation style is usually correct.
3. 3: Satisfactory
9.02 points
Required format is generally correct. However, errors are present (e.g. font, cover page, margins, and in-text citations). Reference page is included and lists sources used in the paper. Sources are appropriately documented though some errors are present.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
8.03 points
Required format elements are missing or incorrect. A lack of control with formatting is apparent. Reference page is present. However, in-text citations are inconsistently used.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Required format is rarely followed correctly. No reference page is included. No in-text citations are used.
1
5
Researcher Skills
Your Name here
College of Doctoral Studies, Grand Canyon University
RES820A: The Literature Landscape: Organizational Leadership
Dr. Davis
Assignment Due Date
Researcher Skills
This is the introduction. It should capture the reader’s interest and introduce the topic about to be discussed and it should be SUPPORTED BY ACADEMIC RESEARCH with in-text citations. This is your opportunity to add creativity and your own unique style to the paper. Although I am using “you” and “I” right now,
NEVER USE THE WORD “YOU” IN AN ACADEMIC PAPER.
“One” is not much better, either.
Avoid using first person language
. Some authors do it, so you will see it in academic journals, but at this stage of the game, practice writing in the third person. When you have mastered academic writing in the third person (after your dissertation), or if future professors tell you it’s acceptable, then you can use first person until then avoid first person writing at all costs!
You SHOULD NOT introduce the articles by title, author, etc. Instead, you should present your ideas with support from the articles. You should not include a separate section for the synthesis rather the synthesis should occur throughout. Also, each time you cite the authors, you must include the year of publication. For works with 1-2 authors, cite each author’s name on each citation. For works for 3+ authors, cite the first author’s last name followed by et al. from the first citation.
Do not quote the assignment directions or include a separate section for the synthesis. In fact, do not mention the assignment directions OR EVEN THE WORD SYNTHESIS.
Synthesis is something which should occur throughout your paper not in a particular location. The skills that you learned in RES-815 to established themes will be used in writing this paper.. Pretend that you are presenting your analysis of these three articles for a conference of academic peers, and write for that audience. You should assume that your reader has never read the articles and has no background knowledge. Provide enough information that despite no prior knowledge the reader will be informed based upon your writing.
You need to include both a purpose and thesis statement within your paper. NO, THEY ARE NOT THE SAME THING. A purpose statement sets the actual purpose of the paper. In more basic terms it is where you literally say – The purpose of this paper is XYZ. It sets the intention and gives the overall idea of the topic(s) that will be covered. It is a declarative statement and provides guidance to what will be presented. A thesis statement is a SINGLE sentence at the END of the introduction section. It should be the very last sentence of the section. A thesis statement should forecast the contents of the paper to the reader while being precise about the topic and predicting how it will be developed. Remember the thesis statement should “telegraph” what the reader should expect to see in your paper BUT that takes a position that will be “proven” within the paper.
Theme You Have Identified
DO NOT use Theme 1 as your header – use a 2-4 word header that identifies your theme. You will do the same thing with themes 2 and 3. The synthesis paper should include three common themes identified by a header and addressed within that particular section and a conclusion that will present overall message of the group of articles. Please note that section headings are centered, in bold face, and are in Title Case. The three body sections will be followed by your conclusion. Please remember that your conclusion should not discuss the conclusions of the studies but rather the overall message of the three articles if they are taken together as a single entity.
In this section, discuss the first theme that you have identified as common amongst the three articles. You must include evidence (in-text citations) from EACH of the articles to show that this theme was present in ALL THREE OF THE ARTICLES. While this is a shorter paragraph, your paragraphs should be between 90-150 words.
Your Second Theme Here
This section should include your second identified theme. Again, note that headings are centered, bold face, and are in Title Case as they are Level 1 headings. You must include evidence (in-text citations) from EACH of the articles to show that this theme was present in ALL THREE OF THE ARTICLES.
You will need to support your contention of the common theme by presenting evidence from the articles. This evidence from the text should be cited using the author’s name and year of publication rather than using the title of the article or referring to the articles as Article 1, Article 2, and Article 3. This is especially the case when we are presenting specific information e.g. research questions, sample, outcomes etc. from multiple sources. Imagine discussing 5, 10, 15 articles at once in a paper and referring to each by number. Further, situating the authors firmly within sentences and throughout your discussion addresses academic integrity.
Your Third Theme Here
This section should include your second identified theme. Again, note that headings are centered, bold face, and are in Title Case. Just as in the prior section, make sure that you introduce the contents of this section prior to jumping into your narrative. You must include evidence (in-text citations) from EACH of the articles to show that this theme was present in ALL THREE OF THE ARTICLES.
You need to develop these sections thoroughly. While in this template only includes one to two paragraphs for each of the sections, which would not necessarily constitute a thorough presentation within your paper. Remember, you need to assume your reader has not read this articles.
Conclusion
What are your conclusions after comparing these three articles? What commonalities or differences were most striking or meaningful? If you consider all three articles to be a single entity, what conclusions can you draw from their combined research? What is the overall message of the articles, and why is that important?
The conclusion should relate back to your introduction and provide your reader with a concise and reflective summary of your analysis. The conclusion should be at MINIMUM 2-3 paragraphs. While this assignment has a word count in the directions of 1,000 – 1,250 words, one must ask themselves if what has been present represents a thorough presentation of the articles. However, I would challenge you to keep your paper under 2, 000 words. This is a great time to work on being more clear and concise.
References
Klocko, B. A., Marshal, S. M., & Davidson, J. F. (2015). Developing practioner-scholar doctoral candidates as critical writers. Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice, 15(4). 21-31. http://www.na-businesspress.com/JHETP/KlockoBA_Web15_4_
Lee, H., Chang, H., & Bryan, L. (2020). Doctoral students’ learning success in online-based
leadership programs: Intersection with technological and relational factors. International
Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 21(1), 61-81.
Lindsay, S. (2015). What works for doctoral students in completing their thesis? Teaching in Higher Education, 20(2). 183-196. http://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2014.974025
1
7
Researcher Skills
Student Exemplar Paper
College of Doctoral Studies, Grand Canyon University
RES820A: The Literature Landscape: Organizational Leadership
Dr. Davis
Assignment Due Date
Researcher Skills
Some would argue that academic writing is the most essential skill a researcher possesses, while certain studies demonstrate confident intrinsic behaviors, critical inquiry, and networking as the most valuable (Klocko et al., 2015). Scholarly networking encourages communication, increased self-esteem, cultural awareness, and professional development while navigating independent research skills (Lindsay, 2015). Doctoral students desire to feel united with faculty and peers, even in higher online education, to combat aloneness and feeling like a part of a community (Lee et al., 2020). Simplifying an atmosphere that encourages the use of critical inquiry augments students’ perspectives and produces well-reasoned analysis and understanding, further enhancing individual research skills (Lindsay, 2015). Academic socialization, amongst others, allows the opportunity for growth by sharing the latest research trends while combating the feeling of disconnection or apprehension (Lee et al., 2020). Students must have the ability, knowledge, and the acquired skills to succeed as researchers (Klocko et al., 2015). Doctoral students who proficiently apply critical inquiry, mastery of intrinsic behaviors, and scholarly networking demonstrate expert research abilities.
Critical Inquiry
Developing critical inquiry at the doctoral level appears indispensable to producing a self-determining researcher by progressing in their skills (Lindsay, 2015). Students exercise critical thinking within the context of academic writing and leadership development programs (Lee et al., 2020). Understandably, doctoral candidates demonstrate problem-solving through their writing acumen, proven during the ultimate writing task, a dissertation (Klocko et al., 2015). Learners from arguments by displaying evidence that contributes to thesis writing through critical inquiry and analysis of careful consideration of evidence (Lindsay, 2015). The essential research skill of analysis is vital, especially for initial thesis writing efforts and pursuing scholarly writing (Lindsay, 2015).
Students are challenged to questions and analyze their writing and research findings (Lee et al., 2020). Creative expansion, interrogation, and critical thinking of initial knowledge through inquiry are crucial (Klocko et al., 2015). A forward-thinker question’s perceived ability rejects opinions that lack authenticity and examines viable source information (Lindsay, 2015). With this, doctoral students gain knowledge and skills that enhance their ability to think critically and creatively (Lee et al., 2020). Doctoral students exercise critical inquiry by gathering, evaluating ideas and assumptions from various sources to formulate new ideas (Klocko et al., 2015).
Mastery of Intrinsic Behavior
Using stimulating feedback and supportive networks, students in higher education can expel negativity (Lindsay, 2015). Due to academic pressure placed on doctoral students, self-efficacy can cause a student to self-destruct or motivate a student to surpass expectations to achieve excellence (Lee et al., 2020). Pressures of coursework, criticism and cognitive dissonance between staff and students elicit feelings of anxiety and a lack of self-efficiency, demonstrating the importance of students mastering their intrinsic behavior as a researcher skill (Klocko et al., 2015). In addition, students face difficulty balancing home, family, and work-life, interrupting the research abilities and flexibility required to continue pursuing a doctorate (Lindsay, 2015). The social atmosphere can permit cognitive and teaching while creating more profound academic meaning, but researchers must dedicate themselves to analyzing, collecting data, and report writing (Lee et al., 2020).
Lack of institutional support and negative peer pressure can cause students to wrestle with forfeiting their journey to advance their research capability and complete a doctorate (Lindsay, 2015). Some doctoral students experience low self-confidence in research writing skills and maintaining their voice because of constructive criticism from peers and faculty (Klocko et al., 2015). Feedback from instructors promptly is essential for doctoral candidate’s self-confidence (Klocko et al., 2015). Intrinsic behaviors guide doctoral learners’ motivation, organization, and scheduling techniques (Lindsay, 2015). Doctoral students that are highly intrinsically motivated tend to grasp concepts quicker while showing a greater understanding of the subject matter (Lee et al., 2020).
Scholarly Networking
The research skill of exercising academic consorting with others illustrates better graduation rates for completing the doctorate program (Lee et al., 2020). Engaging in scholarly communication and collaboration with supervising instructors and communities of practice contribute to the student’s overall adaptation of research skills (Klocko et al., 2015). Feedback between students, faculty, and targeted professionals is present within the doctoral program and social practices (Lindsay, 2015). Historically, theorists have depicted that integrating social involvement with faculty, peers, and targeted professionals could improve doctoral student retention (Lee et al., 2020). A grounded study correlates the lack of interaction from supported sources as the primary reason the doctoral students fail to complete their studies (Klocko et al., 2015).
Interaction from others is a critical motivator that proves to have an immense effect on doctoral student’s overall educational accomplishment (Lindsay, 2015). Although peer review is helpful, postgraduate students must learn to provide constructive and substantial feedback to their peers (Klocko et al., 2015). Peer reviewing and editing is an appreciated tool, but students rarely take advantage of it although it is desired (Klocko et al., 2015). Scholarly networking encourages doctoral learners to solve problems and formulate their thoughts, questions, and ideas (Lindsay, 2015). Therefore, social integration between students and supervisors is empirical to feeling connected and less isolated in higher educational programs (Lee et al., 2020). Scholarly networking emerges imperiously to doctoral students’ ability to encourage research skills, societal affiliation, and a sense of belonging while navigating academic activities (Lindsay, 2015).
Conclusion
Critical inquiry, monitoring intrinsic behavior, and educationally networking are three major themes derived from scholarly sources that targeted necessary succession tools toward higher education programs (Lindsay, 2015). It is essential to identify the patterns and themes within each source read to discover existing knowledge gaps and what has already been said in literature (Klocko et al., 2015). Many commonalities are present within the readings, such as relationships being the leading cause of success or high attrition rates in doctoral programs (Lee et al., 2020). Students should focus on repetition, communication, planning, positive thinking, and preparation while exercising critical inquiry on the path to further developing researcher skills (Klocko et al., 2015).
While the skill of scholarly networking is exceptional, students must be intrinsically motivated to dedicate the time necessary to advance critical thinking skills, organization, planning, and devotion to the doctoral program (Lindsay, 2015). As a result, universities of higher education experience an excessive attrition rate (Lee et al., 2020). For example, a study conducted on higher education universities in the United States and Canada resulted in only a 56.6% completion rate of doctoral students (Lee et al., 2020). Moving forward, researchers should use a mixed-method approach and larger sample sizes with various demographic factors to permit the opportunity to diversify findings (Lindsay, 2015). In addition, researchers should limit interface with members while observing at a distance (Klocko et al., 2015). The recommendations mentioned above could explain why and how researchers had specific outcomes.
References
Klocko, B. A., Marshal, S. M., & Davidson, J. F. (2015). Developing practitioner-scholar doctoral candidates as critical writers. Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice, 15(4). 21-31. http://www.na-businesspress.com/JHETP/KlockoBA_Web15_4_
Lee, H., Chang, H., & Bryan, L. (2020). Doctoral students’ learning success in online-based
leadership programs: Intersection with technological and relational factors. International
Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 21(1), 61-81.
Lindsay, S. (2015). What works for doctoral students in completing their thesis? Teaching in Higher Education, 20(2). 183-196. http://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2014.974025
Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:
Turnitin Report
Formatting
Title Page
Citation
Outline
