RES5115 REVIEW Assignment: Critically review a research article
This is worth 45 % of the marks for the unit. DUE DATE: Sunday 11:59 pm 10th May 2020.
Submit through TURNITIN.
Overview: This assignment requires you to analyse a specified article and then answer a series of questions
to demonstrate you can apply the key concepts taught in the CORE Module.
The focus of this assignment is to assess your understanding and ability to apply ideas presented in the core
module of this unit. To be successful, you will need to complete all the required readings from both the text
book and from the additional readings on argument and critical thinking that can be found on the Reading
List (available via a link on the Blackboard site) for this unit. You need to show that you have applied your
learning from the unit material to the task.
Instructions
Step 1: Choose ONE of the following peer reviewed journal articles, access the article from the library.
The articles selected for analysis are taken from peer-reviewed journals which present academic research to
the research community. To complete this assignment, you are not expected to be an expert on the topic or
research the subject matter discussed in the article. To ensure fairness to all students, no marks will be
awarded for additional research on the subject matter of the article. You MUST draw upon the readings from
this unit, including the textbook and electronically available readings.
• Jacobs, R., Abbott, F., Urquhart, L., & Price, D. (2019). Performing the future: an artist-led project
engaging with risk, uncertainty and environmental change. Journal of Risk Research, 22(9), 1171-
1185.
• Wahlström, V., Fjellman-Wiklund, A., Harder, M., Slunga Järvholm, L., & Eskilsson, T. (2020).
Implementing a Physical Activity Promoting Program in a Flex-Office: A Process Evaluation with a
Mixed Methods Design. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(1),
23.
• Chen, J., McGuire, K. J., & Stewart, R. D. (2020). Effect of soil water-repellent layer depth on postwildfire hydrological processes. Hydrological Processes, 34(2), 270-283.
• Snaith, N., Rasmussen, P., Schultz, T., & Proeve, M. (2020). The practicability and relevance of
developing a yoga intervention for mental health consumers: A qualitative study. International
Journal of Mental Health Nursing.
• Cummings, J. R., Gearhardt, A. N., Ray, L. A., Choi, A. K., & Tomiyama, A. J. (2020). Experimental and
observational studies on alcohol use and dietary intake: a systematic review. Obesity Reviews, 21(2),
e12950.
Step 2: Read the article you have chosen from the list above and answer ALL five questions below.
In answering these questions you must demonstrate your learning about literature, research, publication and
research design by applying the concepts presented in the CORE teaching material. The text for these five
questions should not exceed 2000 words and you must demonstrate your use of sound and valid reasoning
in responding to these questions. In other words your purpose should be clear, and your
conclusions/positions on a question need to be supported by reasons/premises.
1. State the research questions being addressed in the study? Pay attention to whether a main
‘umbrella’ question is supported by sub-questions.
2. How is literature used to express the importance of the research questions?
3. What attributes make the study suitable for publication in the chosen journal?
4. Identify, with examples, the main argument techniques used in the article to reach the author’s
conclusion. Have any fallacious techniques or forms of rhetoric been used?
5. Evaluate the type of research design used by the author, outlining its strength, limitations and
suitability for the purpose of the study. Suggest changes to study design or reasoning to improve the
study.
Marking Rubric
| State the research questions being addressed in the study? Pay attention to whether a main ‘umbrella’ question is supported by sub-questions. 15% |
| Fail: Research questions not identified, relevant or understandable. Pass: Mostly correct questions. Credit: Identifies all questions correctly. Distinction: Identifies main thesis correctly and relevant sub-questions. HD: Identifies main thesis correctly and relevant sub questions. Correctly represents structure of argument. |
| How is literature used to express the importance of the research questions? 10% |
| Fail: Use of literature not identified or discussed in terms of importance/lecture concepts not used. Pass: Correctly identifies some of the uses of literature but not all. Credit: Correctly identifies and adequately explains the use of literature. Distinction: Identifies and very clearly discusses the use of literature. HD: Discussion and use of literature is well-crafted, clear and concise/lecture concepts used to excellent effect. |
| What attributes make the study suitable for publication in the chosen journal? 10% |
| Fail: Does not link the study with the scope of the journal. Pass: Highlights few aspects of the study that make it a fit with the journal scope. Credit: Highlights most aspects of the study that make it a fit with the journal scope. Distinction: Highlights all aspects of the study that make it a fit with the journal scope. HD: Highlights all aspects of the study that make it a fit with the journal scope in a well-considered and concise response. |
| Identify with examples the main argument techniques used in the article to reach the author’s conclusion. Have any fallacious techniques or rhetoric been used? 15% |
| Fail: No techniques correctly identified. Pass: Few techniques identified but with omissions. Credit: Most techniques identified and correctly referred to. Distinction: All techniques identified and correctly referred to. HD: All techniques identified and correctly referred to in a well-crafted, clear and concise manner. |
| Evaluate the type of research design used by the author, outlining its strength, limitations and suitability for the purpose of the study. Suggest changes to study design or reasoning to improve the study. 20% |
| Fail: Understanding of research design and suggestions not demonstrated or understandable. Pass: Some discussion of research design has been correctly identified. Poor suggestions for improvement not relevant or achievable. Credit: Discussion of research design is more complete. Suggestions for improved argument are sufficient. Distinction: Research design is correctly discussed in terms of strength, limitations and purpose. Suggestions to improve their argument are achievable and relevant. HD: Research design is correctly discussed in terms of strength, limitations and purpose in a well-crafted, clear and concise manner. Suggestions to improve their argument are achievable and relevant and response is well-crafted, clear and concise. |
| Structure, argument and presentation. 20% |
| Fail: The assignment does notconform to the structure of the assessment item. Nointroduction to the assessment. Poor or non existent paragraphing. No logical/cohesive developmentof ideas. No summation of key points in conclusion. Pass: Some aspects conform to thestructure of the assessment item. Weak introduction to the assessment. Limited paragraphing. Omits or poor summation of key points in conclusion. Credit: Adequate introduction of topic and summation of key points in conclusion. Good paragraphing, and logical/cohesive development of ideas. Distinction: Introduction adequately introduces topic and summarises key points in conclusion. Paragraphing is of high standard, and there is a logical/cohesive development of ideas in some of the assessment item. HD: Very good introduction of topic and summation of key points in the conclusion that reflects the student’s position and provides clear insights into the issue. Very good paragraphing, andlogical/cohesive development ofideas in most of assessment item. |
| Referencing. 5% |
| Fail: Referencing does not follow an ECU recognised referencing convention. In text and/or end-text referencing has multiple errors. Includes references in conclusion. Pass: Referencing poorly follows a recognised referencing convention. In text and/or end-text referencing has many errors. Includes references in conclusion. Credit: Mainly adheres to an ECU recognised referencing convention. In text and/or end-text referencing has some errors. Distinction: Complies with a recognised referencing convention. Follows specific assignment instructions as per Unit Semester Plan. Adheres to an ECU recognised referencing convention. In text and/or end-text referencing has few errors. HD: Complies with a recognised referencing convention to a very high standard. Follows specific assignment instructions as per Unit Semester Plan completely. Adheres to an ECU recognised referencing convention. In text and/or end-text referencing very few errors. |
| English Language Proficiency 5% |
| Fail: Multiple grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors were present throughout. Sentence structure poor making it difficult to determine meaning. Pass: Many grammatical spelling and punctuation errors present and needs improvement. Sentence structure needs improvement. Credit: Mostly correct grammar, spelling and punctuation evident throughout. Sentence structure acceptable but needs improvement. Distinction: Mainly correct grammar, spelling and punctuation. Very few errors. Sentence structure was of a good standard. HD: Grammar, spelling and punctuation were error free. Sentence structure of a high standard. Effective use of all sentence and paragraph writing conventions were clearly demonstrated. Logical application of arguments throughout paper. |
| Student: | Fail | Pass | Credit | Distinction | High Distinction |
Mark |
| State the research questions being addressed in the study? Pay attention to whether a main ‘umbrella’ question is supported by sub questions. 15% |
/15 | |||||
| How is literature used (in terms of canon, context etc…) to express the importance of the research questions? 10% |
/10 | |||||
| What attributes make the study suitable for publication in the chosen journal? 10% |
/10 | |||||
| Identify with examples the main argument techniques used in the article to reach the author’s conclusion. Have any fallacious techniques or rhetoric been used? 15% |
/15 | |||||
| Evaluate the type of research design used by the author, outlining its strength, limitations and suitability for the purpose of the study. Suggest changes to study design or reasoning to improve the study. 20% |
/20 | |||||
| Structure, argument and presentation. Introduction of topic and article, summation of key points and argument leading to conclusion. Paragraphing. Logical/cohesive development ofideas. 20% |
/20 | |||||
| Referencing. 5% | /5 | |||||
| English Language Proficiency 5% | /5 | |||||
| Comments / Total Mark | /100 |
The post RES5115 REVIEW Assignment appeared first on My Assignment Online.