Paper on Qualitative Nursing Research

/in /by

Question Description

For this Assignment, be sure to view this week’s Qualitative Research Design PowerPoint webinar and pay close attention to its content on the basic elements of qualitative research methods (e.g., sample selection, data collection, plans for interpretive analysis). Then, review the two research studies presented in this week’s resources for this assignment.

Note: While not a required resource, you might find the definitions in the Encyclopedia of Nursing Research helpful for this assignment. 

This assignment involves identifying and describing different elements of the research method used in the Walsh et al. (2015) article.

  • Focus on the research design, sample selection, data collection methods, and plan for data analysis as discussed in the Walsh et al. (2015) article.
  • Identify at least two strengths and two weaknesses of the article’s research method based on trustworthiness. You must provide support for your explanation with citations from additional sources.
  • Use the Journal Club Template for Qualitative Research located in this week’s resources.
  • The template includes an area for each element discussed in the study.
  • Be brief, paraphrase and summarize each of the elements clearly on the form

RESEARCH DESIGN–

Levels of Achievement: Excellent 14 (14%) – 15 (15%)  

Student provided a fully developed explanation of the research design with insightful analysis of concepts and related issues.

 Proficient 12 (12%) – 13 (13%)  

Student provided a developed discussion of the research design with reasonable analysis of concepts and related issues.

 Basic 11 (11%) – 11 (11%)  

Student provided a minimally-developed discussion of the research design with limited analysis of concepts and related issues.

 Needs Improvement 0 (0%) – 10 (10%)  

Student provided a under-developed discussion of the research design with little or no analysis of concepts and related issues.

Feedback:

SAMPLE SELECTION–

Levels of Achievement: Excellent 14 (14%) – 15 (15%)  

Student provided a fully developed explanation of the sample selection with insightful analysis of concepts and related issues.

 Proficient 12 (12%) – 13 (13%)  

Student provided a developed explanation of the sample selection with insightful analysis of concepts and related issues.

 Basic 11 (11%) – 11 (11%)  

Student provided a minimally developed explanation of the sample selection with insightful analysis of concepts and related issues.

 Needs Improvement 0 (0%) – 10 (10%)  

Student provided an under developed explanation of the sample selection with insightful analysis of concepts and related issues.

Feedback:

DATA COLLECTION METHODS–

Levels of Achievement: Excellent 14 (14%) – 15 (15%)  

Student provided a fully developed explanation of the data collection methods with insightful analysis of concepts and related issues.

 Proficient 12 (12%) – 13 (13%)  

Student provided a developed explanation of the data collection methods with insightful analysis of concepts and related issues.

 Basic 11 (11%) – 11 (11%)  

Student provided a minimally developed explanation of the data collection methods with insightful analysis of concepts and related issues.

 Needs Improvement 0 (0%) – 10 (10%)  

Student provided an under developed explanation of the data collection methods with insightful analysis of concepts and related issues.

Feedback:

PLAN FOR DATA ANALYSIS–

Levels of Achievement: Excellent 14 (14%) – 15 (15%)  

Student provided a fully developed explanation of the plan for data analysis with insightful analysis of concepts and related issues.

 Proficient 12 (12%) – 13 (13%)  

Student provided a developed explanation of the plan for data analysis with insightful analysis of concepts and related issues.

 Basic 11 (11%) – 11 (11%)  

Student provided a minimally developed explanation of the plan for data analysis with insightful analysis of concepts and related issues.

 Needs Improvement 0 (0%) – 10 (10%)  

Student provided a under developed explanation of the plan for data analysis with insightful analysis of concepts and related issues.

Feedback:

IDENTIFIES AND DESCRIBES THE STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES OF THE RESEARCH METHOD USED BASED ON THE ELEMENTS OF TRUSTWORTHINESS.

(REVIEW AWE 3000 WRITING EXPECTATIONS, PARAPHRASING, SUMMARIZING AND SCHOLARLY WRITING LINK BELOW.)–

Levels of Achievement: Excellent 23 (23%) – 25 (25%)  

Student provided a fully developed discussion of at least two strengths and two weaknesses of the research methods based on the elements of trustworthiness.

 Proficient 20 (20%) – 22 (22%)  

Student provided a developed discussion of at least two strengths and two weaknesses of the research methods based on the elements of trustworthiness.

 Basic 18 (18%) – 19 (19%)  

Student provided a minimally developed discussion of at least two strengths and two weaknesses of the research methods based on the elements of trustworthiness.

 Needs Improvement 0 (0%) – 17 (17%)  

Student provided an under developed discussion of at least two strengths and two weaknesses of the research methods based on the elements of trustworthiness.

Feedback:

ACADEMIC WRITING EXPECTATIONS (AWE 2) 2000/3000 LEVEL–

Levels of Achievement: Excellent 9 (9%) – 10 (10%)  

Demonstrates fully developed sentence, paragraph, and essay level skills. Uses evidence from multiple sources to support content. Meets the 3000 AWE level with no writing issues and exceeds the minimum reference requirement.

 Proficient 8 (8%) – 8 (8%)  

Demonstrates developed sentence, paragraph, and essay level skills. Uses evidence from most sources to support content. Meets the 3000 AWE level with minimal writing issues and exceeds the minimum reference requirement.

 Basic 7 (7%) – 7 (7%)  

Demonstrates minimally developed sentence, paragraph, and essay level skills. Uses evidence from some sources to support content. Minimally meets the 3000 AWE level with several writing issues and meets the minimum reference requirement.

 Needs Improvement 0 (0%) – 6 (6%)  

Demonstrates limited sentence, paragraph, and essay level skills. Has limited use of evidence with few or no sources to support the content. Does not meet the 3000 AWE level of writing and does not meet the mimium reference requirement.

Feedback:

APA FORMATTING: COVER PAGE, TITLE OF PAPER ON SECOND PAGE, LEVEL HEADINGS, TIMES NEW ROMAN 12 FONT, 1″ MARGINS, AND PAGE NUMBERS. APA REFERENCES: USES IN-TEXT CITATIONS APPROPRIATELY AND FORMAT CORRECTLY. PARAPHRASES TO AVOID PLAGIARIZING THE SOURCE.–

Levels of Achievement: Excellent 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)  

Demonstrates fully developed APA formatting with no errors.

 Proficient 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)  

Demonstrates developed APA formatting with minimal formatting errors.

 Basic 3 (3%) – 3 (3%)  

Demonstrates minimally developed APA formatting with several formatting errors.

 Needs Improvement 0 (0%) – 2 (2%)  

Demonstrates limited APA formatting with multiple formatting errors.

Feedback:

Total Points: 100

REQUIRED READINGS

Grove, S. K., Burns, N., & Gray, J. R. (2013). The practice of nursing research: Appraisal, synthesis, and generation of evidence (7th ed.). St. Louis, MS: Elsevier.

  • Chapter 4, “Introduction to Qualitative Research” (pp. 57–71)
  • Chapter 12, “Qualitative Research Methodology” (pp. 264–293)

Bamm, E. L., Rosenbaum, P., Wilkins, S., Stratford, P., & Mahlberg, N. (2015). Exploring client-centered care experiences in in-patient rehabilitation settings. Global Qualitative Nursing Research, 2, 1–11.
Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.

Sarvestani, R. S., Moattari, M., Nasrabadi, A. N., Momennasab, M., & Yektatalab, S. (2015). Challenges of nursing handover: A qualitative study. Clinical Nursing Research, 24(3), 234–252.
Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.

Stiffler, D., Cullen, D., & Luna, G. (2014). Diabetes barriers and self-care management: The patient perspective. Clinical Nursing Research, 23(6), 601–626.
Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.

Walsh, A., Meagher-Stewart, D., & Macdonald, M. (2015). Persistent optimizing: How mothers make food choices for their preschool children. Qualitative Health Research, 25(4), 527–539.
Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.