Student will locate and review three (3) peer-reviewed research articles on one (1) topic of their personal or professional interest. Next, student will identify an array of reseach concepts within the articles and write a critique of the three articles in a paper that compares and contrasts research elements from each article. Student will summarize, evaluate, and respond to three (3) articles selected using the following criteria:
• Accessible through any of the Porter Henderson Library’s online databases
• Published as a peer-reviewed article (i.e., not a book review, issue introduction, or editorial) in an academic journal (i.e., not a newspaper, magazine, or professional periodical)
• Focuses on a social work, sociological, psychological, or medical problem or topic found in professional social work practice
• Published within the past five (5) years.
Students will select three articles on a similar topic of their personal or professional interest. After reading each article, students will critique the articles as a collection, comparing and contrasting how they feel the authors executed and presented a variety of research elements outlined below. In addition to assessing elements judged to be inadequately addressed or missing, students should also assess elements they judge to be adequately addressed or well done. The following outline should be used as a guide and students should also use their academic expertise to determine if additional items should be included in their overall critique.
Type of articles critiqued Are the articles a research study, a literature review, or a meta-analysis? Purposes of the articles critiqued What are the claims made/hypotheses posited? Do the each of the articles’ authors achieve their purposes (in your own estimation)? Summaries of the articles critiqued Do each of the articles include all necessary components of a research study? Were any of the article biased? How did you reach your conclusions about bias? Critiques of the article.
Do each of the articles’ literature reviews support their respective hypotheses and findings?
• Was adequate evidence established in each literature review?
• Does each article identify a theory or theories to guide its study?
• Were theoretical bases (if any) appropriately applied to each article’s focus?
• Was each article’s evidence based in research and/or rooted in facts?
• Was each article’s evidence accurate?
• Did evidence logically and adequately support the claim(s) made?
Was the methodology adequately described?
• Was the research qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods?
• Was the methodology rigorous and sound (e.g., internal validity, external validity, reliability of measurements, criteria used for sample selection)?
• Was the description sufficient to demonstrate replicability and falsifiability?
• Was the data analysis appropriately chosen based on the purpose/claims/hypotheses?
Do the conclusion and discussion of the article match the purpose of the article and the findings of the data analysis?
• What were the results of data analysis and were they understandable?
• Were authors’ assumptions founded by the results of the analyses?
• Were the strengths and limitations adequately identified and discussed?
• Were conclusions logically reached?
• Were counterarguments acknowledged/weaknesses identified?
Any citation style (APA, MLA, Chicago/Turabian, Harvard)
Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.
You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.