Assignment: Annotated BibliographySubmit: Annotated BibliographyThis week culminates in your submission of an annotated bibliography that should consist of an introduction, followed by two quantitative article annotations, two qualitative article annotations, and two mixed methods article annotations for a total of six annotations, followed by a conclusion.An annotated bibliography is a document containing selected sources accompanied by a respective annotation. Each annotation consists of a summary, analysis, and application for the purpose of conveying the relevance and value of the selected source. As such, annotations demonstrate a writer’s critical thinking about and authority on the topic represented in the sources.In preparation for your own future research, an annotated bibliography provides a background for understanding a portion of the existing literature on a particular topic. It is also a useful precursor for gathering sources in preparation for writing a subsequent literature review.Please review the assignment instructions below and click on the underlined words for information about how to craft each component of an annotation.Please use the document "Annotated Bibliography Template with Example" for additional guidance. It is recommended that you use the grading rubric as a self-evaluation tool before submitting your assignment. Use the Walden library databases to search for quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods research articles from peer-reviewed journals on your topic of interest.Before you read the full article and begin your annotation, locate the methodology section in the article to be sure that it describes the appropriate research design.For quantitative research articles, confirm that a quantitative research design, such as a quasi-experimental, casual comparative, correlational, pretest–posttest, or true experimental, was used in the study.For qualitative research articles, confirm that a qualitative research design or approach, such as narrative, ethnographic, grounded theory, case study, or phenomenology, was used in the study.For mixed methods research articles, confirm that a mixed methods research (MMR) design was used in the study. There are several design classifications in MMR; some examples of MMR types or families of design are parallel, concurrent, sequential, multilevel, or fully integrated mixed methods design.Prepare an annotated bibliography that includes the following:A one-paragraph introduction that provides context for why you selected the six research articles you did: two quantitative, two qualitative, and two MMR.A reference list entry in APA Style for each of the six articles that follows proper formatting. Follow each reference list entry with a three-paragraph annotation that includes:An application as illustrated in this exampleAn analysisA summaryA one-paragraph conclusion that presents a synthesis of the six articles.Format your annotated bibliography in Times New Roman, 12-point font, double-spaced. A separate References list page is not needed for this assignment.Submit your Annotated Bibliography.https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/a...Learning ResourcesRequired ReadingsTeddlie, C., & Yu, F. (2007). Mixed methods sampling: A typology with examples. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(1), 77–100. Mixed Methods Sampling: A Typology with Examples by Teddlie, C., & Yu, F., in Journal of Mixed Methods Research, Vol. 1/Issue 1. Copyright 2007 by Sage Publications Inc. Reprinted by permission of Sage Publications Inc. via the Copyright Clearance Center.Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Collins, K. M. (2007). A typology of mixed methods sampling designs in social science research. The Qualitative Report, 12(2), 281–316. Retrieved from http://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/vol12/iss2/9Drost, E. A. (2011). Validity and reliability in social science research. Education Research and Perspectives, 38(1), 105–124.Walden University: Center for Research Quality. (2015a). Data resources & support: Home. Retrieved from http://academicguides.waldenu.edu/researchcenter/dataresources Download the “Sources of Data for Research: A Research Primer” document.Walden University: Center for Research Quality. (2015d). Research resources: Walden University participant pool. Retrieved from http://academicguides.waldenu.edu/researchcenter/resources/participantpool Walden University. (2015a). How do I find an article that reports on research that uses a specific methodology? Retrieved from http://academicanswers.waldenu.edu/faq/72633 Walden University: Writing Center. (2015). Common course assignments: Annotated bibliographies. Retrieved from http://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/assignments/annotatedbibliographies Rubric DetailSelect Grid View or List View to change the rubric's layout.Name: RSCH_8110_Week10_Assignment_RubricDescription: RSCH 7110 Assignment Week 10 Rubric – RSCH 6110 Assignment Week 10 RubricGrid ViewList View EXCELLENTGOODFAIRPOORAccuracy/ Appropriateness of Six Articles18 (4.5%) - 20 (5%)Student has selected six research articles: two quantitative, two qualitative, and two mixed methods articles. All six articles are current (i.e., published within the last 5 years), from peer-reviewed journals and all six contain gathered and analyzed empirical evidence (e.g. they are not opinion pieces or theoretical works).16 (4%) - 17.8 (4.45%)Student has selected six research articles: two quantitative, two qualitative, and two mixed methods articles. All six articles are from peer-reviewed journals and all six contain gathered and analyzed empirical evidence (e.g. they are not opinion pieces or theoretical works). Some of the articles may be older (e.g., published over 5 years ago).14 (3.5%) - 15.8 (3.95%)Student has selected six research articles, but there may be misalignment in one or more of these areas: in study design (e.g., there may be too few of the required quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods articles), in peer-reviewed status, in overall content (e.g. one or more of the articles is an opinion piece or a theoretical work), and/or in publication date (e.g., published over 5 years ago).0 (0%) - 13.8 (3.45%)Student has fewer than the 6 required research articles, and those that are selected are either not peer-reviewed or are not representative of the required qualitative, quantitative, and mixed method designs.Introduction to the Annotated Bibliography18 (4.5%) - 20 (5%)Student provides a clear and concise one-paragraph introduction that explains the context for why all six research articles were selected.16 (4%) - 17.8 (4.45%)Student provides a clear introduction that explains the context for why all six research articles were selected, but the rationale is too long and is lacking in synthesis (i.e., it is more of a “laundry list” of why each separate article was chosen; it does not present a unified “whole” picture for why all six articles, collectively, were germane to the student’s interests).14 (3.5%) - 15.8 (3.95%)Student provides an introduction that references all six articles, but the explanation is poorly written and does not adequately explain why some or all of the articles were chosen.0 (0%) - 13.8 (3.45%)The introduction is either missing altogether or is so poorly written that the rationale for the article(s)’ inclusion is difficult or impossible to understand.Summary of Articles90 (22.5%) - 100 (25%)Paper provides an excellent overview of all important information from the sources, including the topic of the sources, the methods each source employed, the theoretical or conceptual basis of each study, and the conclusions.80 (20%) - 89 (22.25%)Paper provides an overview of the important information from the sources, although some aspects of the sources’ descriptions (e.g., the methods, the theoretical or conceptual framework, the conclusions) are less detailed than others.70 (17.5%) - 79 (19.75%)Paper provides only a cursory review of the sources. Several important domains within each source are either missing altogether or are insufficiently explained.0 (0%) - 69 (17.25%)Paper provides little to no information about what the sources were about. The sources’ topic, methods, framework, and/or conclusions are either absent or very unclear.Critique of Articles90 (22.5%) - 100 (25%)Paper provides a thorough and dispassionate critique or analysis of the sources, addressing both the good and bad qualities. The critique addresses how aligned the research questions are to the existing body of knowledge, the appropriateness of the theoretical or conceptual framework within each study, the sufficiency of the methods and design of each study, and the generalizability/transferability of each study’s results in other contexts. The paper also provides a critical analysis of the social change implications of each study’s findings.80 (20%) - 89 (22.25%)Paper provides a critique of the sources, addressing both its good and bad qualities, but does not cover all important aspects of the sources (e.g., might be missing a critique of the methods, designs, framework, or conclusions).70 (17.5%) - 79 (19.75%)Paper provides a critique of the sources but is missing several important domains or some of the critiques are emotionally laden, not dispassionate.0 (0%) - 69 (17.25%)Paper’s critique is inappropriate. It is either based on a weak understanding of each source’s methods, or it is not based on empirical evidence (e.g., it is based on an emotional reaction to the source’s content).Application of Articles90 (22.5%) - 100 (25%)Paper provides a clear justification for how each source is applicable to one’s research question/research interests. The paper addresses the extent to which each source’s topic is similar to one’s research interests, how each source’s method is applicable to one’s research, and how each source helps to guide one’s own research. Overall, the application of this source to one’s research is very clear.80 (20%) - 89 (22.25%)Paper provides a justification for how each source is applicable to one’s research, but there is some uncertainty about how one or more of each source provides a framework for one’s research (e.g., the connection between the source’s method, framework, or conclusions to one’s research is not clear).70 (17.5%) - 79 (19.75%)Paper provides some justification for how each source is similar to one’s research, but its application is unclear.0 (0%) - 69 (17.25%)There is very little connection between each source and one’s research interests. There is little to no explanation about why each source was chosen or how it will inform one’s research plan.Conclusion of the Annotated Bibliography18 (4.5%) - 20 (5%)Student provides a clear one-paragraph conclusion that synthesizes all six chosen articles.16 (4%) - 17.8 (4.45%)Student provides a clear conclusion that synthesizes all six chosen articles, but the conclusion is lacking in concision (e.g., it is longer than one paragraph).14 (3.5%) - 15.8 (3.95%)Student provides a conclusion, but it is either too long (e.g., it is more of a bulleted list for why each individual article was chosen and is not a synthesis of all six articles) or is too short (e.g., it is missing in important detail on one or more of the articles).0 (0%) - 13.8 (3.45%)Student either does not provide a conclusion at all or the writing is so poor that it is difficult or impossible to understand.Writing36 (9%) - 40 (10%)Paper is well organized, uses scholarly tone, follows APA Style, uses original writing and proper paraphrasing, contains very few or no writing and/or spelling errors, and is fully consistent with graduate-level writing style. Paper contains multiple, appropriate, and exemplary sources expected/required for the assignment.32 (8%) - 35.6 (8.9%)Paper is mostly consistent with graduate-level writing style. Paper may have some small or infrequent organization, scholarly tone, or APA Style issues, and/or may contain a few writing and spelling errors, and/or somewhat less than the expected number of or type of sources.28 (7%) - 31.6 (7.9%)Paper is somewhat below graduate-level writing style, with multiple smaller or a few major problems. Paper may be lacking in organization, scholarly tone, APA Style, and/or contain many writing and/or spelling errors, or shows moderate reliance on quoting versus original writing and paraphrasing. Paper may contain inferior resources (number or quality).0 (0%) - 27.6 (6.9%)Paper is well below graduate-level writing style expectations for organization, scholarly tone, APA Style, and writing, or relies excessively on quoting. Paper may contain few or no quality resources.Total Points: 400Name: RSCH_8110_Week10_Assignment_RubricDescription: RSCH 7110 Assignment Week 10 Rubric – RSCH 6110 Assignment Week 10 Rubric

PART I Discussion Question:Describe two historical events that have influenced the development of ethical codes and regulations for nursing and healthcare research. Explain how each event has impacted ethical codes and regulations.Your initial posting should be at least 400 words in length and utilize at least one scholarly source other than the textbook.PART IIAssignment:Ethics and Evidence-Based ResearchWrite a 1250-1500 word essay addressing each of the following points/questions. Be sure to completely answer all the questions for each bullet point. There should be three main sections, one for each bullet below. Separate each section in your paper with a clear heading that allows your professor to know which bullet you are addressing in that section of your paper. Support your ideas with at least two (2) sources using citations in your essay. Make sure to cite using the APA writing style for the essay. The cover page and reference page in correct APA do not count towards the minimum word amount. Review the rubric criteria for this assignment.Part 1: Describe why ethical safeguards designed for clinical research may not be feasible or appropriate for evidence-based practice or evidence-based practice implementation projects.Part 2: Review the sectioned headed, Two Ethical Exemplars in Chapter 22 of the textbook (Melnyk and Fineout-Overholt, 2015, pages 518-519). Discuss three main ethical controversies related to implementing Evidence-Based Quality Improvement (EBQI) Initiatives. Describe how these controversies relate to the four core ethical principles.Part 3: Identify which ethical principles may be in conflict with the concept of “patients having an ethical responsibility in improving healthcare.” Discuss how these conflicts may be resolved.