Utilizing the Checklist for Critiquing a Research Report in our textbook, critique an article selected from the APUS Online Library.

Be specific with your explanations and write at least 2-3 sentences for each.

Your initial post should be minimum of 400 words and your two required replies to your classmates' initial posts should be minimum of 250 words.

Step 1 Completion Example

Step 1. The Problem

• Is the problem clearly and concisely stated?

• Is the problem adequately narrowed down into a researchable problem?

• Is the problem significant enough to warrant a formal research effort?

• Is the relationship between the identified problem and previous research clearly described?

Step 2. Literature Review

• Is the literature review logically organized?

• Does the review provide a critique of the relevant studies?

Yes No

• Are gaps in knowledge about the research problem identified?

• Are important previous research studies relevant to the topic included in the literature review?

• Are all cited works included in the reference list?

• Are all works included in the reference list cited in the literature review or elsewhere in the report?

Step 3. Theoretical or Conceptual Framework

• Is the theoretical or conceptual framework clearly applicable to the problem (as opposed to being a "stretch" in which the framework is only marginally relevant to the problem)?

• If a conceptual framework is used, are the concepts adequately defined, and are the relationships among these concepts clearly identified?

Step 4. Research Variables

• Are any independent and dependent variables operationally defined?

• Are any confounding variables present? If so, are they identified?

Step 5. Hypotheses

• Are hypotheses clear, testable, and specific?

• Does each hypothesis describe a predicted relationship between two or more variables included in the hypothesis?

• Do the hypotheses flow logically from the theoretical or conceptual framework?

Step 6. Sampling

• Is the sample size adequate?

• Is the sample representative of the defined population?

• Is the method for selecting the sample appropriate?

• Is any sampling bias in the method acknowledged?

• Are the criteria for selecting the sample clearly identified?

Step 7. Research Design

• Is the research design clearly described?

• Is the design appropriate for the research problem?

• Does the research design address issues related to the internal and external validity of the study?

Step 8. Data Collection Methods

• Are data collection methods appropriate for the study?

• Are data collection instruments adequately described?

• Do measurement tools have reasonable validity and reliability?

Step 9. Data Analysis

• Is the Results section clearly and logically organized?

Yes No

• Are analyses appropriate for each set of quantitative and qualitative data? For example, is each analysis of quantitative data appropriate for the type of measurement scale (nominal, ordinal, interval, ratio) that the data reflect?

• Are tables and figures clear and understandable?

• Is each analysis relevant to answering the research question?

Step 10. Interpretation and Discussion of the Findings

• Does the investigator clearly distinguish between actual findings and interpretations?

• Are the interpretations based on the data obtained?

• Are the findings discussed in relation to previous research and to the theoretical/conceptual framework?

• Are all generalizations warranted and defended?

• Are limitations of the results and interpretations identified?

• Are implications of the results discussed?

• Are recommendations for future research identified?

• Are the conclusions justified?