Q Overview: For this assignment, you are to select a scholarly communication research article from an academic research journal, published within the last five years. Note: an article that summarizes a theory, or just discusses an idea is not a research article – the authors should be describing some type of research they conducted and sharing the results in the article you choose. Our library has research guides and other helpful links if you are unfamiliar with this process: https://www.unomaha.edu/criss-library/research-and-instruction/index.phpLinks to an external site. In addition, I have several research articles you might be interested in. Please email me if you would like a copy of these options. Guidelines: In a full, two-three page, write a summary of the most important components of the article. Your paper should address the following: 1) Give a full citation for the article using APA publication format. (If you are not familiar with the structure of this citation style, the link for our library above includes APA guidelines). 2) Clearly state and explain the hypothesis or research question(s) that drive the author’s study. The hypotheses or research questions may be found in the literature review, at the end of the literature review, or in the methods section depending on the article you choose. 3) Describe how the author conducted her or his research. For example, did the author(s) ask participants to complete a survey? Did the author(s) interview participants? Was this an ethnographic study? Items to include would be procedures for the research, number of participants, and any surveys used. 4) What results or findings does the author claim? And, what are the implications and/or relevance of those findings, according to the author? 5) Comment on what you see as the strengths and weaknesses of the article. Specifically, what did you like about the author’s research and reporting, and why? Also, what parts of the study and write-up do you feel could be improved, and how? 6) The easiest way to format this paper is to include each of the required elements as a heading – so for example these would be my headings: Hypothesis or Research Question(s), Research Method and Design, Results, Implications, Strengths and Weaknesses, Analysis and Conclusion (your opinion on the article). You will notice I don’t have a heading for the article name, because this should be at the top of the paper with a full citation. Rubric Social Sciences Rubric v2 Social Sciences Rubric v2 Criteria Ratings Pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAnalyzes implications threshold: 3.0 pts 3 pts Master: Thoroughly analyzes implications, conclusions, or consequences of the theory, perspective, or issue by providing exacting detail and depth 2 pts Satisfactory: Sufficiently analyzes the implications, conclusions, or consequences of the theory, perspective, or issue providing adequate detail and depth 1 pts Emerging: Superficially analyzes the implications, conclusions, or consequences of the theory, perspective, or issue with few details or depth. 0 pts Not Demonstrated: Fails to analyze implications, conclusions, or consequences of the theory, perspective, or issue -- This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDescribes signature theories, perspectives, or issues threshold: 3.0 pts 3 pts Master: Thoroughly describes relevant signature theories, perspectives, or issues in the discipline 2 pts Satisfactory: Sufficiently describes relevant signature theories, perspectives, or issues in the discipline 1 pts Emerging: Superficially describes relevant signature theories, perspectives, or issues in the discipline 0 pts Not Demonstrated: Does not describe relevant signature theories, perspectives, or issues in the discipline -- This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeEvaluates evidence of truth claims threshold: 3.0 pts 3 pts Master: Identifies all important evidence and rigorously evaluates it, but also provides new information for consideration 2 pts Satisfactory: Identifies all important evidence for truth-claims and rigorously evaluates its credibility. 1 pts Emerging: Successfully identifies data and information that counts as evidence for truth-claims but fails to thoroughly evaluate its credibility 0 pts Not Demonstrated: Fails to identify data and information that counts as evidence for truth-claims. -- Total Points: PreviousNext