Chapter 10: Experimental Designs Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research Edition 5 John W. Creswell © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved By the end of this chapter, you should be able to:       Define experimental research, and describe when to use it, and how it developed Identify the key characteristics of experiments State the types of experimental designs Recognize the potential ethical issues in experimental research Describe the steps in conducting an experiment Evaluate the quality of an experiment Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 10-2 Experimental Research   In an experiment, you test an idea (or practice or procedure) to determine whether it influences an outcome or dependent variable. Experimental design process  Determine if an experiment is the appropriate research approach for your study  Determine activities with which to “experiment”  Assign individuals to experience the experiment (and have some individuals experience something different)  Determine whether those who experienced the activities (or practice or procedure) performed better on some outcome than those who did not experience the same thing Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 10-3 When to Use Experimental Procedures   Used to establish probable cause and effect  Between independent and dependent variables  Control for all variables that might influence the outcome Used when comparing two or more groups Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 10-4 Causal Comparative Research  Determines whether an association exists between groups (independent variable) and the outcome (dependent variable)     No experimental manipulation Select two groups differing on variable of interest Compare groups on one or more dependent variables Practical but cannot establish probably cause and effect Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 10-5 The Development of Experiments       Psychological experiments (late 19th, early 20th century) Procedures for comparing groups (McCall, 1925) Statistics for comparing groups (e.g., chi-square) Identification of types of experimental designs (Campbell and Stanley,1963) Types of basic designs and threats (Cook and Campbell, 1979) Complicated experiments with many variables (since 1980) Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 10-6 Characteristics of Experimental Designs       Random assignment Control over extraneous variables Manipulation of the treatment conditions Outcome measures Group comparisons Guard against threats to validity Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 10-7 Random Assignment    Randomly assign individuals to conditions or to groups Random assignment equates groups and distributes variability between or among groups and conditions Different from random selection which is selection of participants at random Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 10-8 Control Over Extraneous Variables    Extraneous variables: Influences in participant selection, procedures, statistics, or the design likely to affect the outcome and provide an alternative explanation of results than what was expected Random assignment of participants before beginning the experiment Other control procedures:  Pretests and posttests  Covariates  Matching participants  Homogenous samples  Blocking variables Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 10-9 Pretests and Posttests Intervention Time 1 Time 2 Pretest Posttest Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 10-10 Controlling for Covariates No Covariates Independent Variable Dependent Variable Covariate Introduced Independent Variable: Type of Instruction Dependent Variable: Rates of Smoking Covariate: Parents Who Smoke Variance Removed Variance Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 10-11 Matching Process Based on Gender John Jim James Josh Jackson Jane Johanna Julie Jean Jeb Experimental Group Control Group Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 10-12 Manipulation of the Treatment Conditions    Identify a treatment variable Identify the conditions or levels of the treatment variable Manipulate the treatment conditions Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 10-13 The Experimental Manipulation of a Treatment Group Independent variables Dependent variable 1. Age (cannot manipulate) 1. Frequency of smoking 2. Gender (cannot manipulate) 3. Types of instruction (can manipulate) a. Lecture (control) b. Lecture + hazard instruction (comparison) c. Lecture + hazard instruction + slides of damaged lungs (experiment) Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 10-14 Outcomes    Criterion or effect variable Outcome variable Measured on a continuous scale Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 10-15 Group Comparisons in an Experiment Phase 1: Relationship Picture Error Correction Treatment Spelling Accuracy Phase 2: Timeline Picture Test 1 Test 2 Test 3 Class A: Regular Spelling Practice (control) 6 Weeks 6 Weeks 6 Weeks Class B: Reduced Word List (comparison) 6 Weeks 6 Weeks 6 Weeks Error Correction Treatment Class C: Error Correction (experimental) 6 Weeks 6 Weeks 6 Weeks * p < .05 Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 10-16 Group Comparisons in an Experiment (cont’d) Phase 3: Statistical Comparisons Test 1 Test 2 Test 3 Class A 0.3 Class B10.8 (3.6) 10.7 (3.3) 11.1 (3.3) (4.3) 10.6 (3.8) 10.3 (3.6) Class C F value 9.9 (3.9) 13.9 (4.2) 13.1 (3.8) 0.27 4.90* 3.31* *p < .05 * p < .05 Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 10-17 Threats to Internal Validity Internal validity: The observed changes that took place are a result of your intervention or your program and are not the result of other causes.       History Maturation Regression Selection Mortality Interactions with selection       Diffusion of treatments Compensatory equalization Compensation rivalry Resentful demoralization Testing Instrumentation Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 10-18 Threats to External Validity External validity: The degree to which the findings are generalizable to a population    Interaction of selection and treatment Interaction of setting and treatment Interaction of history and treatment Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 10-19 Types of Experiments: Between-Groups  True experiments    Quasi-experiments    Pre- and posttest Posttest only Pre- and posttest Posttest only Factorial designs Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 10-20 Factorial Designs    Involve two or more categorical, independent variables, each examined at two or more levels Main effects: the influence of each independent variable on the outcome in an experiment Interaction effects: exist when the influence on one independent variable depends on the other independent variable in an experiment Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 10-21 Factorial Design Example Type of Instruction Depression Low Medium High Health lecture Mean rate of smoking Mean rate of smoking Mean rate of smoking Standard lecture Mean rate of smoking Mean rate of smoking Mean rate of smoking Main Effects of Depression Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 10-22 Main Effects of Type of Instruction Types of Experiments: Within-Group  Time series experiments    Interrupted time series Equivalent time series Repeated measures experiments  Measure  Treatment #1 Measure  Treatment #2  Measure Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 10-23 Single Subject Design Features        Use within a planned intervention Intra-participant research Notation: A (baseline phase), B (behavior under intervention), C, etc. Target behavior: outcome Analysis focuses on whether behavior changed from target to intervention Data collection sheets: situational information, performance, summary of behavior Outcome: magnitude of effect of intervention on target Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 10-24 Single Subject Designs    A-B designs: observe and measure behavior during a trial period (A), administer an intervention, and observe and measure the behavior during the intervention (B) Multiple baseline design: series of stacked AB designs with varying baseline length Alternating treatment design: examine relative effects of two or more interventions Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 10-25 Potential Ethical Issues in Experiments      Withholding experimental treatment from individuals Whether random assignments are ethical Not concluding an experiment when it is necessary Whether the experiment will provide the best answer to a problem Whether stakes are high in conducting an experiment Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 10-26 Steps in Conducting Experimental Research 1. Decide if an experimental design fits research problem 2. Form hypotheses to test cause-and-effect 3. Select experimental unit and identify study participants 4. Select an experimental treatment and introduce it Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 10-27 Steps in Conducting Experimental Research (cont’d) 5. Choose a type of experimental design 6. Conduct the experiment 7. Organize and analyze the data 8. Develop an experimental research report Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 10-28 Criteria for Evaluating Experimental Research       The experiment has substantial intervention Participants gain from the intervention The researcher systematically selects and adequate number of participants The researcher uses valid, reliable, and sensitive measures The researcher controls for extraneous factors that might influence the outcome. The researcher addresses threats to internal and external validity Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 10-29 Chapter 9: Reporting and Evaluating Research Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research Edition 5 John W. Creswell © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved By the end of this chapter, you should be able to:     Define the purpose of a research report and identify the types Identify how to structure your research report Identify good sensitive, ethical, and scholarly writing practices List criteria for evaluating a research report Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 9-2 What Is a Research Report? A research report is a completed study that reports an investigation or exploration of a problem, identifies questions to be addressed, and includes data collected, analyzed, and interpreted by the researcher. Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 9-3 The Audience for Your Report   Audiences have different standards Audiences for research       Faculty including advisors or committees Journal reviewers Policy makers Practicing educators Conference paper reviewers The researcher Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 9-4 The Types of Research Reports       Dissertations and theses Dissertation and thesis proposals Journal articles Conference papers Conference proposals Reports for policy makers or school leaders and personnel Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 9-5 Identifying the Structure of Research Reports  Examine:     The levels of heading in a study The six steps in the research process The research questions or hypotheses and the answers The structures or different types of reports, qualitative and quantitative Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 9-6 Structure of a Quantitative and Qualitative Proposal Quantitative Format Qualitative Format Title page Abstract Introduction Review of the literature Methods Timeline, budget, and preliminary chapter outline References Appendices Title page Abstract Introduction Procedure Preliminary findings Anticipated outcomes and tentative literature review (optional) Timeline, budget, and preliminary chapter outline References Appendices Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 9-7 Variations in Structure of a Qualitative Study       Scientific approach Storytelling approach Thematic approach Descriptive approach Theoretical approach Experimental, alternative, or performance approach Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 9-8 How Do You Write Your Report in a Sensitive and Scholarly Way?  Use language that reduces bias  Describe individuals at an appropriate level of specificity  Be sensitive to labels for individuals or groups  Acknowledge participation of people in a study Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 9-9 Writing in a Scholarly Way      Encode scholarly terms Use standard quantitative and qualitative terms appropriately Balance research and content Interconnect sections and be consistent for the reader Advance a concise title Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 9-10 Ethical Report and Writing Research       Report honestly Share reports with others Refrain from duplicate and piecemeal publication of data Give credit for using someone else’s work Do not engage in research that represents a conflict of interest Give credit for authorship-negotiate early Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 9-11 Evaluating the Quality of a Research Report      Does it meet publication standards? Will it be useful in our school? Will it advance policy discussions? Will it add scholarly knowledge about a topic or research problem? Will it help address some pressing educational problem? Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 9-12 Signs of a Poor Quantitative Research Study     Validity and reliability of data-gathering procedures Inappropriate research design or problems in research design Limitations of study not stated Inappropriate sampling Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 9-13 Signs of a Poor Quantitative Research Study (cont’d)      Results of analysis not clearly reported Inappropriate methods to analyze data Unclear writing Assumptions not clearly stated Data-gathering methods not clearly described Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 9-14 Three Perspectives on Standards for Qualitative Research    The philosophical ideas behind the research The procedures of data collection and analysis The participatory/advocacy writers’ focus on collaboration and persuasion Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 9-15 Qualitative Standards: Lincoln’s (1995) Philosophical Criteria     Standards set in inquiry community (guidelines for publication) Positionality (“text” honest and authentic) Community (serves community purposes) Voice (participants heard) Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 9-16 Qualitative Standards: Lincoln’s (1995) Philosophical Criteria (cont’d)     Critical subjectivity (researcher heightened selfawareness/creates social transformation) Reciprocity (between researcher and participants) Sacredness of relationships (respect for participants) Sharing privileges (sharing of rewards with participants) Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 9-17 Qualitative Standards: Creswell’s (2013) Procedural Criteria         Rigorous data collection (multiple forms, extensive data) Consistent with philosophical assumptions of qualitative research (evolving design, multiple perspectives) Employs tradition of inquiry (e.g., case study, grounded theory, narrative) Starts with focus on central phenomenon Written persuasively Multiple levels of analysis Narrative engages the reader Includes strategies to confirm accuracy Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 9-18 Qualitative Standards: Richardson’s (2000) Participatory Advocacy Criteria      Substantive contribution (significant understanding of social life) Aesthetic merit (practices open up text, artistically shaped, not boring) Reflexivity (adequate self-awareness, selfexposure to reader) Impact (affects the reader emotionally, intellectually, moved to action) Expression of reality (seems “true”) Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 9-19 Process Criteria to Use for All Research        Title for the study Research problem The literature review The purpose statement and questions/hypotheses The data collection The data analysis The report writing Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 9-20 Chapter 8: Analyzing and Interpreting Qualitative Data Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research Edition 5 John W. Creswell © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved By the end of this chapter, you should be able to:        Identify the six steps in the process of analyzing and interpreting qualitative data Describe how to prepare and organize the data for analysis Describe how to explore and code the data Use codes to build description and themes Construct a representation and reporting of qualitative findings Make an interpretation of the qualitative findings Advance validation for the accuracy of your findings Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 8-2 Six Steps in Analyzing Qualitative Data       Preparing and organizing the data for analysis Exploring the data through coding Using codes to develop description and themes Representing the findings through narratives and visuals Making an interpretation of the meaning of the findings Using strategies to validate the accuracy of the findings Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 8-3 The Process of Data Analysis Codes the text for description to be used in the research report Codes the text for themes to be used in the research report The researcher codes the data (locates text segments and assigns a code to label them) Iteractive The researcher reads through data (obtains general sense of material) Simultaneous The researcher prepares data for analysis (transcribes fieldnotes) The researcher collects data (a text file, such as fieldnotes, transcriptions, optically scanned material) Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 8-4 Preparing and Organizing the Data      Develop a matrix or table of sources that can be used to organize the material Organize material by type (all interviews, all documents, etc) Keep duplicate copies of materials Transcribe data Prepare data for hand or computer analysis (and select computer program) Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 8-5 Use of Qualitative Computer Programs      Do NOT analyze data for you Store data, such as transcripts Organizes data Provides features to assign codes Facilitates searching through your data Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 8-6 Exploring the Data    Obtain a general sense of the data by performing a preliminary exploratory analysis Read through fieldnotes and interviews several times to get a sense of the interview and the observation Write memos in the margins of interviews, fieldnotes, or images of your initial reflections on the data Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 8-7 Coding the Data      Read through all transcripts Start with one document Ask, “What is this person saying?” Identify text segments Assign code word  One, two, or three words that describe what is being said  When possible use a participant’s actual words (in vivo code)  Terms from the literature can be used  Practice lean coding (e.g., 10-15 codes for 20 pg transcript) Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 8-8 Coding the Data (cont’d)   Reduce redundancy  Take out codes that are duplicate ideas  Reduce to a manageable list (usually 25–30) Collapse codes into themes  The major ideas that emerge from the data  The ideas the participants most frequently discuss, are unique or surprising, have the most evidence to support them, or those you might expect to find when studying the phenomenon  Identify 5–7 themes Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 8-9 A Visual Model of the Coding Process in Qualitative Research Initially read through data Many pages of text Divide text into segments of information Many segments of text Label segments of information with codes 30–40 codes Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 8-10 Reduce overlap and redundancy of codes Codes reduced to 20-25 Collapse codes into themes Codes reduced to 5–7 themes Using Codes to Build Description  Describe     People Places Events Describe in detail to build a portrait Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 8-11 Building a Descriptive Passage Type of Description Description builds from broad to narrow Situate the reader in the place Provide details Detail to create a sense of “being there” Use of action verbs and vivid modifiers and adjectives The Incident and Response The incident occurred on the campus of a large public university in a Midwestern city. A decade ago, this city had been designated an “all-American city,” but more recently, its normally tranquil environment has been disturbed by an increasing number of assaults and homicides. Some of these violent incidents have involved students at the university. The incident that provoked this study occurred on a Monday in October. A fortythree-year-old graduate student, enrolled in a senior-level actuarial science class, arrived a few minutes before class, armed with a vintage Korean War military semiautomatic rifle loaded with a thirty-round clip of thirty caliber ammunition. He carried another thirty-round clip in his pocket. Twenty of the thirty-four students in the class had already gathered for class, and most of them were quietly reading the student newspaper. The instructor was en route to class. The gunman pointed the rifle at the students, swept it across the room, and pulled the trigger. The gun jammed. Trying to unlock the rifle, he hit the butt of it on the instructor’s desk and quickly tried firing it again. Again it did not fire. By this time, most students realized what was happening and dropped to the floor, overturned their desks, and tried to hide behind them. After about twenty seconds, one of the students shoved a desk into the gunman, and students ran past him out into the hall and out of the building. The gunman hastily departed the room and went out of the building to his parked car, which he had left Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 8-12 Using Codes to Identify Themes     Ordinary themes Unexpected themes Hard-to-classify themes Major and minor themes Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 8-13 Developing Themes in Narrative Passage Safety Title for theme based on words of participant Evidence for themes based on multiple perspectives of participants Within themes are subthemes The violence in the city that involved university students and the subsequent gun incident that occurred in a campus classroom shocked the typically tranquil campus. A counselor aptly summed up the feelings of many: “When the students walked out of that classroom, their world had become very chaotic; it had become very random, something had happened that robbed them of their sense of safety.” Concern for safety became a central reaction for many informants. When the chief student affairs officer described the administration’s reaction to the incident, he listed the safety of students in the classroom as his primary goal, followed by the needs of the news media for details about the case, helping all students with psychological stress, and providing public information on safety. As he talked about the safety issue and the presence of guns on campus, he mentioned that a policy was under consideration for the storage of guns used by students for hunting. Within 4 hours after the incident, a press conference was called during which the press was briefed not only on the details of the incident, but also on the need to ensure the safety of the campus. Soon thereafter the university administration initiated an informational campaign on campus safety. A letter, describing the incident, was sent to the university board members. (One board member asked, “How could such an incident happen at this university?”) Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 8-14 Layering and Interrelating Themes  Layering organizes themes   minor  major  broader themes Interrelating themes involves interconnecting themes into    Chronology Sequence of events Theoretical or conceptual models Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 8-15 Representing the Findings      Comparison table: A table used to compare groups on one theme Hierarchical tree: A diagram that visually represents themes and their interconnections Figures/diagrams: A visual depiction that shows the connections between themes Drawings: Maps of the physical layout of the site Demographic table: A table of demographics on individual participants or research site Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 8-16 Reporting the Findings       Multiple perspectives and contrary evidence Metaphors and analogies Report quotes from interviews Write in detail Tensions and contradictions Include a dialogue to support themes Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 8-17 Interpreting the Findings      Summarize the findings Include personal reflections about the meaning of the data Compare findings with the literature, perhaps including personal views Address limitations of the study Make suggestions for future research Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 8-18 Validating the Accuracy of the Findings    Triangulation: Using corroborating evidence Member checking: Asking members to check the accuracy of the account External audit: Hiring the services of an individual outside the study to review the study Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th Ed. © (2015, 2012, 2008) by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved 8-19 Interactive Assessment Grading Rubric Excellent Good Acceptable A Level B Level C Level Criteria 5 points Frequency 5 points Initial Post 25 points Needs Improvement D-F Level 4 points Participates frequently throughout the unit 3.5 points 0 points Participates several Participates 1-2 times but postings times on the same Does not participate not distributed over day time 25 points 20 points Posts well developed assignment that fully addresses and develops all aspects of the task. Posts well developed assignment that addresses all aspects of the task; lacks full development of concepts. 17.5 points Posts adequate assignment with 0 points superficial thought and preparation; Not completed doesn’t address all aspects of the task. 20 points Follow-up Postings 20 points Demonstrates analysis of others’ posts; extends meaningful discussion by building on previous posts. 14 points 16 points Elaborates on an existing posting with further comment or observation. Posts shallow contribution to discussion (e.g., agrees or disagrees); does not enrich discussion. 24 points 21 points Posts information that is factually correct; lacks full development of concept or thought. Repeats but does not add substantive information to the discussion. 0 points Not completed 30 points Posts factually Content Contribution correct, reflective and 30 points substantive contribution; advances discussion. 0 points Information is incorrect, irrelevant or off topic 15 points 12 points 10.5 points References 0 points and Support Uses Incorporates some Uses personal No references or references to references from experience, but no Score 15 points literature, readings, or personal experience to support comments. Uses professional and peerreviewed sources. literature and personal experience. references to readings or research. supporting evidence 4 points 3.5 points 0 points Contributes valuable information to discussion with minor clarity or mechanics errors Communicates in friendly, courteous and helpful manner with some errors in clarity or mechanics. Posts long, unorganized content that may contain multiple errors or may be inappropriate. References are from layperson sources 5 points Clarity, Mechanics and Style 5 points Contributes to discussion with clear, concise comments formatted in an easy to read style that is free of grammatical or spelling errors. Total Score Search and Find and Analyzing Research Assignments Grading Rubric Excellent Good Acceptable Needs Improvement A Level B Level C Level D-F Level Category Score 50 points Quality of Information 50 points Organization 10 points 40 points 35 points Information clearly relates to the main topic. It includes several supporting details and/or examples. Information clearly relates to the main topic. It provides 1-2 supporting details and/or examples. Information clearly relates to the main topic. Insufficient details and/or examples are given. 10 points 8 points 7 points Information is very organized with wellconstructed paragraphs and Information is organized with wellconstructed paragraphs. Organization of information and construction of paragraphs need 0 points Information has little or nothing to do with the main topic. 0 points The information is disorganized. subheadings. Amount of Information 15 points improving. 15 points 12 points 10.5 points All subtopics are addressed and all questions answered with strong elaboration. All subtopics are addressed and most questions answered with adequate elaboration. 0 points All subtopics are addressed, and most One or more questions answered subtopics were not with minimal addressed. elaboration. 8 points 7 points All sources (information and graphics) are accurately documented in the desired format. All sources (information and graphics) are accurately documented, but a few are not in the desired format. All sources (information and graphics) are accurately documented, but many are not in the desired format. 0 points 15 points 12 points 10.5 points 0 points No grammatical, spelling or punctuation errors. Almost no A few grammatical, grammatical, spelling spelling, or or punctuation errors punctuation errors. 10 points Sources 10 points Mechanics 15 points Some sources are not accurately documented; format is incorrect. Many grammatical, spelling, or punctuation errors. Total Score Mini-Proposal Introduction Grading Rubric Excellent Good Acceptable Needs Improvement A Level B Level C Level D-F Level Category Score 5 points Title page includes: 4 points Title Page 5 points · Title of the proposed project Title page is missing · Your Name one of the requested · Course number components. · Submission date Introductory 10 points Section Topic is described clearly 10 points with supporting literature 3.5 points Title page is missing two of the requested components. 0 points Title page is not included. 8 points 7 points 0 points Topic is described well but lacks Topic is described Topic is vague and unclear; supporting citations. adequate supporting adequately but literature citations. includes no supporting literature citations. literature is missing. 16 points 14 points 0 points Problem and purpose are described in the requested style. Problem and purpose are described adequately. Lacks either a problem or purpose statement and/or is missing both. 20 points · Problem and purpose statements are clearly described and supported. · The problem section begins with a single Problem and declarative sentence, “The problem is . . . .”(Avoid Purpose words such as should, 20 points must, needs, because, etc. Simply state the problem. Do not include a cause of the problem or a solution. · The purpose section begins with a single declarative sentence, “The purpose of this project is. . . .“ 10 points · The need, importance, or significance of the proposed project 8 points is clearly described. Significance Significance of the of the Study · Includes why the study is missing one study is important to the 10 points of the requested local level. elements. · Explains how the project may connect to a larger population or problem. 10 points 8 points 7 points Significance of the study is missing two of the requested elements. 0 points Significance of the study is either underdeveloped or not included. 7 points Organization Information is very organized with well10 points constructed paragraphs and subheadings. Information is organized with wellconstructed paragraphs. Organization of 0 points information and The information is construction of disorganized. paragraphs need improving. APA 10 points (References · All references and and 8 points 7 points 0 points All sources All sources Some sources are Citations) 10 points citations are in accordance (information and with APA. graphics) are accurately · Reference list is in documented, but a alphabetical order few are not in the according to the last name desired format. of the first author in any source. (information and not accurately graphics) are documented; format accurately is incorrect. documented, but many are not in the desired format. 10 points · Paragraphs are indented a full ½ inch. · Line spacing is standard and consistent: double spacing throughout including the spaces between headings, paragraphs, and 8 points APA references. (General Paper adheres to Formatting) · Margins are most of the consistent (1 inch top, formatting 10 points bottom, and right, 1.5 inch requirements. left) 7 points Paper adheres minimally to formatting requirements. 0 points Few of the formatting requirements are followed. · Formatting of block quotes is consistent with APA format. · Font style is consistent throughout (size 12 Times New Roman is recommended) 10.5 points 15 points Mechanics 15 points 10 points 0 points A few Almost no grammatical, No grammatical, spelling or grammatical, spelling spelling, or punctuation errors. or punctuation errors punctuation errors. 10 points Overall Rating 12 points 8 points Topic is relevant for Topic selected is an educators. especially important one for Introduction may educators. Introduction need more provides a complete picture clarification on what of what the researcher the researcher hopes to accomplish by the hopes to accomplish study. by the study. Many grammatical, spelling, or punctuation errors. 7 points Topic is somewhat unclear or inappropriate for a study. Reader might not be able to ascertain what the researcher 0 points Topic is unclear. Reader will have difficulty ascertaining what the researcher hopes to accomplish by the study. hopes to accomplish by the study. Total Score Literature Review Grading Rubric Excellent Good Acceptable Needs Improvement A Level B Level C Level D-F Level Category Score 15 points Contains all the following elements: · Includes at least 10 sources · Sources are selected from peerreviewed journals or books (may be online journals form professional organizations). 12 points Selection of 10.5 points · Web-based Sources Contains three of Contains two of the sources are from the requested 15 points requested elements. professional elements. organizations, government agencies, or other reputable sources – may not exceed 20% of total sources) 0 points Does not include the requested elements. · Majority of sources must be published within the past five years. (Seminal/landmark studies and theoretical foundation information is the exception to this) Introduction 10 points 10 points 8 points 7 points 0 points Literature review begins with a well-written, clear introduction; connects to the topic and purpose Introduction is mostly clear and connects to the topic and purpose Introduction is underdeveloped and some or part of it does not connect to Introduction is unclear and does not connect to the topic and purpose Key Topics 20 points identified in the previous paper. of previous paper. topic and purpose of previous paper. 20 points 16 points · Each primary topic and subtopic related to the proposed project is addressed with headings and strong elaboration. · All topics and subtopics are addressed with adequate elaboration. · The basic theory or conceptual foundation for the proposal is presented and documented. · Theory or conceptual foundation is directly connected to purpose identified in the previous paper. · Basic theory or conceptual foundation is presented; adequately documented and connected to purpose identified in previous paper. 10 points 8 points Appropriate transitions between topics are clearly evident. Information is organized with well-constructed paragraphs. Transitions between topics are mostly evident. 10 points 8 points Information is very organized with wellOrganization constructed paragraphs and subheadings. 10 points identified in the previous paper. 14 points 0 points · Most subtopics are addressed with · One or more minimal elaboration. topics or subtopics are not addressed. · Basic theory and/or conceptual · Basic theory foundation is and/or conceptual minimally foundation is not documented and may documented and not not be directly connected to connected to purpose purpose identified in identified in previous previous paper. paper. 7 points Organization of information and construction of paragraphs need improving. Transitions between topics minimal. 0 points The information is disorganized. No transitions between topics evident. 7 points 0 points APA · All references and (References citations are in and accordance with APA. Citations) · Reference list is in 10 points alphabetical order according to the last name of the first author in any source. All sources (information and graphics) are accurately documented, but a few are not in the desired format. All sources (information and graphics) are accurately documented, but many are not in the desired format. 8 points 7 points Paper adheres to most of the formatting requirements. Paper adheres minimally to formatting requirements. Some sources are not accurately documented; format is incorrect. 10 points APA · Left margin (General alignment with ½ inch Formatting) paragraph indentions. 10 points · Line spacing is standard and consistent; double spacing 0 points Few of the formatting requirements are followed. throughout, including spaces between headings, paragraphs, and references. · Margins are consistent (1 inch top, bottom, and right; 1.5 inch lest) · Formatting of block quotes is consistent with APA format. 12 points Mechanics 15 points 10.5 points 15 points Almost no A few grammatical, No grammatical, spelling grammatical, spelling, or or punctuation errors. spelling or punctuation errors. punctuation errors 0 points Many grammatical, spelling, or punctuation errors. 8 points Overall Rating 10 points 10 points Selected literature was pertinent for study with connections made to problem and purpose. Selected literature was mostly relevant for the proposed study and is connected to problem and purpose. 7 points 0 points Some of the selected literature was not relevant for study, and/or connections are unclear. Literature review was underdeveloped and not representative of graduate-level work. Total Score Design and Methodology Plan Grading Rubric Excellent Good Acceptable Needs Improvement A Level B Level C Level D-F Level Category Score 20 points 16 points · Describes the project methodology: Describes both the methodology and the project design but does not have literature to support choice of design. Description of the Proposed o Qualitative Project Design o Quantitative o Mixed Methods 20 points · Describes the project design: o Action research 14 points Methodology and project design are described but needs improvement. 0 points Either project methodology and/or project design are missing. o o o o o o Case study Phenomenology Comparative Descriptive Correlational Quasi-experimental · Supports choice of design with literature. 10 points · Describes the tool(s) you will use to collect your data. o Survey of teacher perceptions o Archived student standardized test scores? o Interviews with parents or others? Instrumentation o Observation checklists? o Other? 10 points 8 points 7 points Description of Description of tools used to tools used to collect data are collect data are · Description is specific. described well. somewhat unclear. o Is it self-designed? o Is it from another source?(If it is from another source, such as a standardized test used in your school, a survey you found online, etc., be sure to list the source clearly and place it in the references.) 0 points Description of tools used to collect data is either missing or very unclear. 10 points · Clearly describes the “setting” for the proposed study. Setting and Participants 10 points o Where will your study take place? o What does the school, organization, or community “look like”? 8 points Describes both the setting and the participants with an answer · Clearly describes the to all the participants for the proposed questions. study. o Who will participate in your study? Students, teachers, parents, etc.? o What does the participant group “look like” 7 points Describes the setting and the participants but does not provide the answer to all the questions. 0 points Does not provide a description of the setting or participants of the proposed study. in terms of age, demographics, grade level in school, etc.? 10 points Clearly describes how 8 points Data Collection · the data will be collected for Describes how and Analysis each research question. Procedures data will be · Clearly describes how collected and 10 points the data will be analyzed for analyzed. 7 points Describes how data will be collected but not how it will be analyzed. 0 points Data collection and analysis procedures are not included in the plan. each research question. 10 points Organization 10 points Information is Information is very organized organized with with well-constructed wellparagraphs and constructed subheadings. paragraphs. 10 points APA (References and Citations) 10 points 8 points 8 points All sources (information and graphics) are accurately · Reference list is in documented, alphabetical order according but a few are to the last name of the first not in the author in any source. desired format. · All references and citations are in accordance with APA. 7 points Organization of 0 points information and The information is construction of disorganized. paragraphs need improving. 7 points All sources (information and graphics) are accurately documented, but many are not in the desired format. 0 points Some sources are not accurately documented; format is incorrect. 10 points APA (General Formatting) 10 points · Left margin alignment with ½ inch paragraph indentions. · Line spacing is standard and consistent; double spacing throughout, including spaces between headings, paragraphs, and references. · Margins are consistent (1 inch top, bottom, and right; 1.5 inch lest) · Formatting of block quotes is consistent with APA format. Mechanics 10 points 10 points No grammatical, spelling or 8 points 7 points Paper adheres to most of the formatting requirements. Paper adheres minimally to formatting requirements. Few of the formatting requirements are followed. 8 points 7 points 0 points Almost no grammatical, A few grammatical, Many grammatical, spelling, or 0 points punctuation errors. spelling or punctuation errors 10 points Overall Rating 10 points spelling, or punctuation errors. punctuation errors. 7 points Design and methodology plan is appropriate for topic selected. Instrumentation is clearly described, and plan demonstrates scholarly work. 8 points Plan is clear and appropriate for study and well written. Plan is somewhat 0 points unclear and research design Plan is unclear and may not be poorly written. appropriate for the topic. Total Score Final Mini-Proposal Project Grading Rubric Excellent Good Acceptable Needs Improvement A Level B Level C Level D-F Level Category Score 5 points • Abstract 5 points • • • Provides an overall summary of the project including purpose, significance, and design Identifies who will benefit from the study Maximum 300 words Block format – not indented – double spaced 4 points 0 points Two of the Abstract adheres requested to the requested Abstract is not guidelines for the guidelines with included. abstract were not one exception. followed. 5 points Table of Contents 5 points Introduction 3.5 points 3.5 points · Table of Contents is complete with appropriate level 1 and 2 headings · Ellipsis dots between text of heading and page numbers · Includes any tables, figures, and appendices 4 points Table of Contents is mostly well presented. Table of Contents does 0 points not include headings, and/or Table of Contents is not included. ellipsis dots, or page numbers. 5 points 4 points 3.5 points 0 points Several of the Requested revisions · Reflects all revisions Most of the 5 points noted in the introductory paper requested revisions from the introductory · Includes a statement paper are made; of the importance of the significance project by identifying clearly precisely why the study is established. important at both the local level and for a larger population Statement of the Problem 5 points and Purpose of Reflects all revisions noted the Proposed in the problem and purpose Study section 5 points requested not made. revisions were not made, and/or significance of study is incomplete. 4 points 3.5 Points Most of the requested revisions were made. Several of the requested revisions were not made. 0 points Requested revisions not made. 10 points Literature Review 10 points · The final literature review must reflect all revisions noted in previous papers. · Should include any additional literature sources identified through the methodology/design paper. 8 points Most of the requested revisions were made. Citations for additional sources were provided. 4 points Research 5 points Questions and Most of the This section must reflect all Hypothesis requested revisions noted in previous revisions were 5 points sections. made. 7 points Several of the requested revisions were not made. 0 points Requested revisions not made. 3.5 points Several of the requested revisions were not made. 0 points Requested revisions not made. 5 points · Describes precisely and in detail the proposed intervention, change, or innovation you plan to implement. · This intervention plan must align with the research methodology/design and research questions. 4 points 3.5 points 0 points Description of proposed intervention is described and aligned with methodology and design plan. Description of proposed intervention or innovation is present but not clearly described. Description of proposed intervention or innovation is not present in the study. Instrumentation 5 points 4 points 3.5 points 0 points 5 points Description for Description for Instrumentation is Description of Proposed Intervention, Innovation 5 points Instrumentation is clearly Methodology and Design 5 points Setting and Participants 5 points and succinctly described with any/all revisions noted in the methodology and design paper. instrumentation is mostly clear with requested revisions made. instrumentation somewhat unclear and/or few revisions made. 5 points 4 points 3.5 points Methodology and design are clearly described with any/all revisions noted in the methodology/design paper. Methodology and design are mostly clear and requested revisions made. Methodology and design somewhat unclear; and/or a few revisions not made. 5 points 4 points Setting and participants are clearly described with any/all revisions noted in the methodology/design paper. Setting and participants are described with all revisions requested. 5 points Data Collection All data collection and and Analysis analysis strategies are Plan clearly presented and delineated for each 5 points research question with any/all revisions noted in methodology/design paper. 3.5 points Setting and participants not clearly described and/or some revisions not made. 3.5 points 4 points Data collection and analysis clearly described with revisions. not described in this project. 0 points Methodology and design are unclear, and/or no revisions made. 0 points Setting and participants not included and/or none of the revisions made. 0 points Data collection and analysis are somewhat unclear, and/or may not reflect revisions. Data collection and analysis not present, and/or not reflective of requested revisions. 7 points 0 points Reflection includes responses to the majority of the questions. Reflection is not included and/or does not address the majority of the questions. 10 points Reflection responds to all of the following questions: Reflection 10 points · What are the legal and ethical considerations of this proposed study from a Christian worldview perspective? · What are the limitations of the proposed project? · Why is this project important? · Who will benefit from this project? · Who will receive the final report and what value will it be to these people, groups, or organizations? 8 points Reflection includes responses to all the questions with one exception. · What did you learn about yourself as a researcher? · What would you do differently the next time you design a project? Includes a summary/conclusion paragraph. Organization 5 points APA (References and Citations) 10 points 3.5 points 5 points 4 points Information is very organized with wellconstructed paragraphs and subheadings. Information is organized with well-constructed paragraphs. Organization of 0 points information and The information is construction of disorganized. paragraphs need improving. 10 points 8 points 7 points · All references and citations are in accordance with APA. · Reference list is in alphabetical order according to the last name of the first author in any source. All sources (information and graphics) are accurately documented, but a few are not in the desired format. All sources (information and graphics) are accurately documented, but many are not in the desired format. 4 points 3.5 points Paper adheres to most of the formatting requirements. Paper adheres minimally to formatting requirements. Few of the formatting requirements are followed. 4 points 3.5 points 0 points A few grammatical, spelling, or punctuation Many grammatical, spelling, or punctuation errors. 0 points Some sources are not accurately documented; format is incorrect. 5 points APA (General Formatting) 5 points Mechanics 5 points · Left margin alignment with ½ inch paragraph indentions. · Line spacing is standard and consistent; double spacing throughout, including spaces between headings, paragraphs, and references. · Margins are consistent (1 inch top, bottom, and right; 1.5 inch lest) · Formatting of block quotes is consistent with APA format. 5 points Almost no No grammatical, spelling or grammatical, punctuation errors. spelling or punctuation 0 points errors. errors. 5 points Overall Rating 5 points Mini-Proposal demonstrates scholarly work. Each section is clear and well written with appropriate transitions. Proposed research would contribute significantly to enhanced understanding of the research study topic. 3.5 points 4 points Mini-Proposal is well written for the most part and project would add to existing knowledge of selected topic. Some elements of the MiniProposal are vague; and/or may not flow smoothly from section to section. 0 points Mini-Proposal is not representative of scholarly work, is poorly written, and/or would not be acceptable for a research study. Total Score Mini-Proposal Presentation (Defense) Grading Rubric Excellent Good Acceptable Needs Improvement A Level B Level C Level D-F Level Category Score 10 points 8 points Overall Description 10 points · Presentation has 15-18 slides. · Contains a title slide that precisely identifies project title, course number, and student’s name. 7 points 0 points Presentation has between 12 and 14 slides; title identifies project and student researcher. Presentation has 811 and/or title slide does not include requested information. Presentation has fewer than 8 slides; title slide lacks the identifying information. 35 points 25 points 0 points Presentation is missing one of the requested research elements Presentation is missing two of the requested research elements. Presentation is missing more than two of the requested research elements. 40 points · Problem and purpose are listed in single declarative sentences. Research Elements 40 points · Includes a summary of the significance of the study · Includes a summary paragraph of the two or three keysources of literature from literature review that best support project. · Proposed design/methodology is presented. · Research questions and hypothesis (if any) are presented · Plan for collecting data is presented and connected to research questions. 10 points Organization Information is very organized with well10 points constructed paragraphs and subheadings. 8 points Information is organized with well-constructed paragraphs. 7 points Organization of information and construction of paragraphs need improving. 0 points The information is disorganized. 10 points · Contrast between font and background presents clear and easyto-read presentation Slide Design (even from a distance). 10 points · Graphics do not interfere with the information on the slide. 8 points Font is generally easy to read, graphics are appropriate for presentation, and slide transitions are not distracting. · Slide transitions are not distracting. 7 points Font and background make reading difficult in some locations; graphics may be distracting or inappropriate; slide transitions are distracting. 0 points Slides are difficult to read, graphics are inappropriate and slide transitions are distracting. 10 points 8 points · All references and APA All sources citations are in (References accordance with APA. (information and and graphics) are · Reference list is in accurately Citations) alphabetical order documented, but a 10 points according to the last few are not in the name of the first author desired format. in any source. 8 points Mechanics 10 points 10 points 7 points All sources (information and graphics) are accurately documented, but many are not in the desired format. 0 points 7 points 0 points Almost no A few grammatical, No grammatical, spelling grammatical, spelling, or or punctuation errors. spelling or punctuation errors. punctuation errors Some sources are not accurately documented; format is incorrect. Many grammatical, spelling, or punctuation errors. 10 points Overall Rating 10 points Presentation is well crafted; the reader comprehends the value of the study and has an overall favorable impression. 8 points Presentation is generally well crafted; reader has a favorable impression. 7 points 0 points Presentation is somewhat vague, and/or the reader may not understand the overall value of the study. Presentation is poorly crafted, and/or the reader may lack understanding of the overall view of the study. Total Score 
Purchase answer to see full attachment