Examining Methodology and design

Examining Methodology and design

(Examining Methodology and design)

Question description

Details:

The DNP must have a basic knowledge of methodology and design. With this knowledge the DNP can identify how methodology and design can be used to evaluate the validity of research studies. This assignment will allow you to describe your understanding of methodology and design while examining external and internal validity of three studies.

General Requirements:

Use the following information to ensure successful completion of the assignment:

  • Use at least three additional scholarly research sources published within the last 5 years. Provide citations and references for all sources used.
  • Doctoral learners are required to use APA style for their writing assignments. The APA Style Guide is located in the Student Success Center.
  • This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
  • You are required to submit this assignment to Turnitin. Please refer to the directions in the Student Success Center.

Directions:

Using the Grand Canyon University Library, locate three articles, one quantitative, one qualitative, and one mixed-method related to your DPI topic.

Create a comparison table, using correct APA formatting, to describe the methodology and design used within each article. The table will be provided as an Appendix to the paper.

Write a 1,000 to 1,250 word paper discussing the different methodologies and designs used in each study.

Discuss the external and internal validity issues associated with each methodology and design.

  1. Discuss the external and internal validity issues associated with each methodology and design.
  2. Describe how using a different methodology or design might have been beneficial for each study and describe why.
  3. Summarize the paper.

My DPI PROJECT ” IS HOURLY ROUNDING MORE EFFECTIVE THAN BED ALARM IN PREVENTING FALLS AND INJURY IN THE ACUTE CARE SETTING?

PLEASE SEE RUBIC BELOW(Examining Methodology and design)

Unsatisfactory
0.00%
2
Less than Satisfactory
74.00%
3
Satisfactory
79.00%
4
Good
87.00%
5
Excellent
100.00%
70.0 %Content
10.0 %Comparison Table: A Comparison of Methodology A comparison of the methodology used in each study is not included. A comparison of the methodology used in each study is incomplete or incorrect A comparison of the methodology used in each study is included but lacks detail. A comparison of the methodology used in each study is complete and includes supporting detail. A comparison of the methodology used in each study is extremely thorough, with substantial supporting detail.
10.0 %Comparison Table: A Comparison of Design A comparison of the design used in each study is not included. A comparison of the design used in each study is incomplete or incorrect. A comparison of the design used in each study is included but lacks detail. A comparison of the design used in each study is complete and includes supporting detail. A comparison of the design used in each study is extremely thorough, with substantial supporting detail
15.0 %External and Internal Validity Issues A description of the external and internal validity issues associated with each methodology and design is not included. A description of the external and internal validity issues associated with each methodology and design is incomplete or incorrect. A description of the external and internal validity issues associated with each methodology and design is included but lacks supporting detail. A description of the external and internal validity issues associated with each methodology and design is complete and includes supporting detail. A description of the external and internal validity issues associated with each methodology and design is extremely thorough, with substantial supporting detail.
15.0 %Methodology and Design Benefits A description of how a different methodology or design might have been beneficial for each study is not included. A description of how a different methodology or design might have been beneficial for each study is incomplete or incorrect. A description of how a different methodology or design might have been beneficial for each study is included but lacks supporting detail A description of how a different methodology or design might have been beneficial for each study is complete and includes supporting detail. A description of how a different methodology or design might have been beneficial for each study is extremely thorough, with substantial supporting detail.
15.0 %Summary A summary of the paper is not included. A summary of the paper is incomplete or incorrect. A summary of the paper is included but lacks supporting detail. A summary of the paper is complete and includes supporting detail. A summary of the paper is extremely thorough, with substantial supporting detail.
5.0 %Two Additional Scholarly Research Sources With In-Text Citations The required elements (two topic-related scholarly research sources and two in-text citations) are not present. Not all required elements are present. One or more element is missing or included sources are not scholarly research or topic-related. All required elements are present. Scholarly research sources are topic-related, but the source and quality of one reference is questionable. All required elements are present. Scholarly research sources are topic-related, and obtained from reputable professional sources. All required elements are present. Scholarly research sources are topic-related, and obtained from highly respected, professional, original sources.
20.0 %Organization and Effectiveness
7.0 %Thesis Development and Purpose Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim. Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear. Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose. Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.
20.0 %Organization and Effectiveness
8.0 %Argument Logic and Construction Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility. 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. Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.
20.0 %Organization and Effectiveness
5.0 %Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used. Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied. Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed. Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech. Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
10.0 %Format
5.0 %Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly. Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent. Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style. All format elements are correct.
5.0 %Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) Sources are not documented. Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors. Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present. Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct. Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.
100 %Total Weightage
 
Do you need a similar assignment done for you from scratch? Order now!
Use Discount Code "Newclient" for a 15% Discount!