Qualitative Research Analysis 1 Assignment
Order ID 53563633773 Type Essay Writer Level Masters Style APA Sources/References 4 Perfect Number of Pages to Order 5-10 Pages Description/Paper Instructions
Qualitative Research Analysis 1 Assignment
QUALITATIVE RESEARCH ANALYSIS 1
QUALITATIVE RESEARCH ANALYSIS 2
Welch, M. & Plaxton-Moore, S. (2017). Faculty development for advancing community
engagement in higher education: Current trends and future directions. Journal of Higher
Education Outreach and Engagement, 21(2), 131-165.
Qualitative Research Group Analysis
Problem Statement
According to the researchers, there has been an increase in the area of community engagement in higher education. This results in a need for professional development and technical support for faculty members. Current research does not provide detailed descriptions of how facilities are able to design and implement community engagement programs. So the problem statement of this study implies there is “a need for further exploration to understand what is currently being done to advance community engagement as well as to identify what is not taking place in this important work,” (Welch & Plaxton-Moore, 2017, p.131).
Research Focus
The focus of the study is to identify features and trends of existing faculty development programs that are designed to advance service-learning and community engagement. This was an attempt to learn more about the content, format, duration, and impact of these programs. They did this by using a qualitative research method consisting of following an idea through a review of literature and then collecting, organizing, analyzing, and disseminating the findings. The second part of the study consisted of conducting a survey to learn about current practices (trends, formats, topics) used in faculty development in regards to strategies that advance community engagement in higher education. Research Questions
The conceptual literature review of the study consisted of four main questions regarding faculty development programs designed to advance community engagement in higher education. These included:
1) Do current programs incorporate theoretical frameworks for adult learning?
2) What types of information about faculty development programs already exist in the literature?
3) What are the current formats, topics, and practice of programs? What skills are taught in the programs?
4) What new directions should the field pursue in order to support these programs?
When implementing the survey part of the study, researchers wished to know “how and which (if any) competencies, knowledge, and skill sets are currently disseminated through professional development,” (Welch & Plaxton-Moore, 2017, p.132).
Appropriateness of Research Design
This study began with an overview of the theoretical frameworks for adult learning through faculty development on community engagement in higher education. “The theoretical framework and proposed knowledge and skill sets formed the basis of this investigation’s research questions and the structure of the content analysis coding of the articles as well as the survey questions,” (Welch & Plaxton-Moore, 2017, p.133). The review process was based on other studies. Since the researchers reviewed as much of the past research as possible, and also attempted to conduct their own research based on current practices, this study had a very appropriate research design and procedures.
Characteristics of Population Researchers began the literature review with any articles appearing in a database of peer-reviewed journals between 2000-2015 that contained a variety of search terms that related to faculty development of community engagement programs. This resulted in 50 articles. Researchers then reviewed each article’s abstract to determine if it directly related to the topic and elmintated ones that did not. They ended up with 28 total articles. 57% of the articles described faculty development programs and 25% were guides on how to assist faculty in developing service-learning courses. This formed the sample they used for the literature review.
When dispersing the survey, researchers began by using an electronic database from the New England Resource Center for Higher Education. They attempted to send surveys to a variety of higher education institutions in the U.S, totaling 609. Only 83 surveys were successfully completed and submitted back to the researchers.
Researchers recognized the use of one database search engine and limited number of
survey responses were limitations of the study. They also identified that future research might investigate ways to support professional development for their trainers.
Results of Data Analysis
Results were divided into two parts, that of the literature review and of the survey results. The literature review was analyzed by type of article, design or method used in the research, the outcomes measured, and the theoretical framework. The results were presented in table format. The researchers then explained each section in depth. The survey results were also presented in several tables to show the responses and gave explanations for each section. These included: characteristics of the responding institutions, faculty development formats, number and type of participants involved in faculty development, faculty development curriculum, theoretical framework for faculty development, incentives for participation in faculty development, and assessing outcomes of faculty development.
Reference
Welch, M. & Plaxton-Moore, S. (2017). Faculty development for advancing community
engagement in higher education: Current trends and future directions. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, 21(2), 131-165.
RUBRIC
QUALITY OF RESPONSE NO RESPONSE POOR / UNSATISFACTORY SATISFACTORY GOOD EXCELLENT Content (worth a maximum of 50% of the total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 20 points out of 50: The essay illustrates poor understanding of the relevant material by failing to address or incorrectly addressing the relevant content; failing to identify or inaccurately explaining/defining key concepts/ideas; ignoring or incorrectly explaining key points/claims and the reasoning behind them; and/or incorrectly or inappropriately using terminology; and elements of the response are lacking. 30 points out of 50: The essay illustrates a rudimentary understanding of the relevant material by mentioning but not full explaining the relevant content; identifying some of the key concepts/ideas though failing to fully or accurately explain many of them; using terminology, though sometimes inaccurately or inappropriately; and/or incorporating some key claims/points but failing to explain the reasoning behind them or doing so inaccurately. Elements of the required response may also be lacking. 40 points out of 50: The essay illustrates solid understanding of the relevant material by correctly addressing most of the relevant content; identifying and explaining most of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology; explaining the reasoning behind most of the key points/claims; and/or where necessary or useful, substantiating some points with accurate examples. The answer is complete. 50 points: The essay illustrates exemplary understanding of the relevant material by thoroughly and correctly addressing the relevant content; identifying and explaining all of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology explaining the reasoning behind key points/claims and substantiating, as necessary/useful, points with several accurate and illuminating examples. No aspects of the required answer are missing. Use of Sources (worth a maximum of 20% of the total points). Zero points: Student failed to include citations and/or references. Or the student failed to submit a final paper. 5 out 20 points: Sources are seldom cited to support statements and/or format of citations are not recognizable as APA 6th Edition format. There are major errors in the formation of the references and citations. And/or there is a major reliance on highly questionable. The Student fails to provide an adequate synthesis of research collected for the paper. 10 out 20 points: References to scholarly sources are occasionally given; many statements seem unsubstantiated. Frequent errors in APA 6th Edition format, leaving the reader confused about the source of the information. There are significant errors of the formation in the references and citations. And/or there is a significant use of highly questionable sources. 15 out 20 points: Credible Scholarly sources are used effectively support claims and are, for the most part, clear and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition is used with only a few minor errors. There are minor errors in reference and/or citations. And/or there is some use of questionable sources. 20 points: Credible scholarly sources are used to give compelling evidence to support claims and are clearly and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition format is used accurately and consistently. The student uses above the maximum required references in the development of the assignment. Grammar (worth maximum of 20% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 5 points out of 20: The paper does not communicate ideas/points clearly due to inappropriate use of terminology and vague language; thoughts and sentences are disjointed or incomprehensible; organization lacking; and/or numerous grammatical, spelling/punctuation errors 10 points out 20: The paper is often unclear and difficult to follow due to some inappropriate terminology and/or vague language; ideas may be fragmented, wandering and/or repetitive; poor organization; and/or some grammatical, spelling, punctuation errors 15 points out of 20: The paper is mostly clear as a result of appropriate use of terminology and minimal vagueness; no tangents and no repetition; fairly good organization; almost perfect grammar, spelling, punctuation, and word usage. 20 points: The paper is clear, concise, and a pleasure to read as a result of appropriate and precise use of terminology; total coherence of thoughts and presentation and logical organization; and the essay is error free. Structure of the Paper (worth 10% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 3 points out of 10: Student needs to develop better formatting skills. The paper omits significant structural elements required for and APA 6th edition paper. Formatting of the paper has major flaws. The paper does not conform to APA 6th edition requirements whatsoever. 5 points out of 10: Appearance of final paper demonstrates the student’s limited ability to format the paper. There are significant errors in formatting and/or the total omission of major components of an APA 6th edition paper. They can include the omission of the cover page, abstract, and page numbers. Additionally the page has major formatting issues with spacing or paragraph formation. Font size might not conform to size requirements. The student also significantly writes too large or too short of and paper 7 points out of 10: Research paper presents an above-average use of formatting skills. The paper has slight errors within the paper. This can include small errors or omissions with the cover page, abstract, page number, and headers. There could be also slight formatting issues with the document spacing or the font Additionally the paper might slightly exceed or undershoot the specific number of required written pages for the assignment. 10 points: Student provides a high-caliber, formatted paper. This includes an APA 6th edition cover page, abstract, page number, headers and is double spaced in 12’ Times Roman Font. Additionally, the paper conforms to the specific number of required written pages and neither goes over or under the specified length of the paper. GET THIS PROJECT NOW BY CLICKING ON THIS LINK TO PLACE THE ORDER
CLICK ON THE LINK HERE: https://www.perfectacademic.com/orders/ordernow
Also, you can place the order at www.collegepaper.us/orders/ordernow / www.phdwriters.us/orders/ordernow
Do You Have Any Other Essay/Assignment/Class Project/Homework Related to this? Click Here Now [CLICK ME]and Have It Done by Our PhD Qualified Writers!!