Designs and Sampling in collaborative environment

October 1, 2022

Designs and Sampling in collaborative environment

Order ID:89JHGSJE83839

Style:APA/MLA/Harvard/Chicago

Pages:5-10

Instructions:

Designs and Sampling in collaborative environment

Purpose: Summarize and appraise an article for bias and validity in a collaborative environment.

Assessment: The DBs are worth 38 points. It will be graded based on word count and quality of 3 posts made on 3 different days. Please see the grading rubric embedded below for complete criteria.

Instructions: Carefully read, summarize, and appraise your group’s assigned article. The discussion board for this week should cover the following concepts in order to have a complete draft by the end of the week. Apply the concepts discussed in the lecture and the readings. As you provide input to your peers, be sure to state a rationale for your claims.

Identify and discuss the following:
what is known/not known about the topic and the gap in knowledge the study is intended to fill.
the research design, purpose of the study, and setting.
information about the sample:
method.
Size.

iii. inclusion/exclusion criteria,

attrition/loss to follow up/response rate, if any.
important characteristics of the sample.
Appraise and debate the sampling methods and determine the quality of the sampling procedures in reducing bias. Consider the following questions:
Were inclusion/exclusion criteria adequate to reduce sampling bias? Why or why not?
Was the sample size adequate? Why or why not?
Was there a decrease in sample size? If so, did the researchers identify decreases early and attempt to reduce the impact? Was a decrease, if any, adequately explained by the researchers? Why or why not?

RUBRIC

Excellent Quality

95-100%

Introduction

45-41 points

The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.

Literature Support

91-84 points

The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.

Methodology

58-53 points

Content is well-organized with headings for each slide and bulleted lists to group related material as needed. Use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. to enhance readability and presentation content is excellent. Length requirements of 10 slides/pages or less is met.

Average Score

50-85%

40-38 points

More depth/detail for the background and significance is needed, or the research detail is not clear. No search history information is provided.

83-76 points

Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is little integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are included. Summary of information presented is included. Conclusion may not contain a biblical integration.

52-49 points

Content is somewhat organized, but no structure is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. is occasionally detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met.

Poor Quality

0-45%

37-1 points

The background and/or significance are missing. No search history information is provided.

75-1 points

Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is no integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are not included in the summary of information presented. Conclusion does not contain a biblical integration.

48-1 points

There is no clear or logical organizational structure. No logical sequence is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects etc. is often detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met