Assignment Literature Review: Body

Assignment Literature Review: Body
In the previous assignment, you created an outline of the literature review (Chapter 2) for your dissertation. The next step is to draft the body of the literature review. The body of the literature review is its primary segment. It is here that the actual review of the literature takes place. In this assignment, you will construct a draft of the body of the literature review (Chapter 2) for your proposal and dissertation.
General Requirements:
Use the following information to ensure successful completion of the assignment:
Refer to the most recent dissertation prospectus template in the DC (dc.gcu.edu) for details and criteria for the literature review (Chapter 2).
Instructors will be using a grading rubric to grade the assignments. It is recommended that learners review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment in order to become familiar with the assignment criteria and expectations for successful completion of the assignment.
Doctoral learners are required to use APA style for their writing assignments. The APA Style Guide is located in the Student Success Center.
Directions:
Prepare a draft literature review (Chapter 2) of 1,750-2,000 words for your dissertation. You will not address all of the themes in your outline in this assignment.
1. Select two of the major themes from the outline of your dissertation literature review that you created in the previous assignment.
2. For each major theme, identify at least three empirical or scholarly articles (six articles total) related to the theme.
3. For each empirical article, state the article title, the author, the research question(s), the research sample, the research methodology, the gaps in the study (what questions does the study raise?), and the research findings of the study. For scholarly, non-empirical articles, state the article title and author, and provide a brief contextual summary of the article.
4. Identify at least three sub-themes that relate to each theme (six sub-themes total).
5. Identify at least three empirical or scholarly articles related to each sub-theme (18 articles total).At least one article must demonstrate a quantitative methodology.
6. For each empirical article, state the research question(s), the research sample, the research methodology, the gaps in the study (what questions does the study raise?), and the research findings of the study. For scholarly, non-empirical articles, state the article title and author, and provide a brief contextual summary of the article.
7. Select one of the quantitative empirical articles used in the sub-themes section of this assignment and identify the following elements:
Alternative and null hypotheses associated with the research question.
Sampling method (How were the participants recruited?).
Variables and the type of scale for each variable.
Inferential statistical tests for hypothesis testing (used to determine if the null hypothesis is retained or rejected).
Level of significance set by the researcher to test the hypothesis.
esults of the statistical tests performed (Was the result of each statistical test significant or not?).
Descriptive statistics for the sample or the data (mean, median, etc.).
Procedures taken to ensure reliability and validity of the data.
Write statements that synthesize the three studies of each sub-theme based on the information you stated above. You will write six synthesis statements.
Literature Review: Body
1
Unsatisfactory
0.00% 2
Less than Satisfactory
74.00% 3
Satisfactory
79.00% 4
Good
87.00% 5
Excellent
100.00%
100.0 %Criteria
20.0 % Identification of Major Themes and Related Scholarly Sources The identification of major themes and related scholarly sources is either missing or incomplete. Major themes to be included in the literature review are present, but the sources cited do not relate to the themes or are not from scholarly sources. Major themes to be included in the literature review are present, and the sources cited distantly relate to the themes. Sources cited are from both scholarly and non-scholarly sources. Major themes to be included in the literature review are present, and the sources cited relate to the themes. Sources cited are from scholarly sources though some sources may be outdated. Major themes to be included in the literature review are present, and the sources cited directly and clearly relate to the themes. Sources cited are from current scholarly sources.
30.0 % Identification of Sub-Themes, Related Scholarly Sources, and Quantitative Research Elements The identification of sub-themes, related scholarly sources, and quantitative research elements is either missing or incomplete. Sub-themes to be included in the literature review are present, but the sources cited do not relate to the themes or are not from scholarly sources. The quantitative research elements are incorrectly identified. Sub-themes to be included in the literature review are present, and the sources cited distantly relate to the themes. Sources cited are from both scholarly and non-scholarly sources. The quantitative research elements are correctly identified. Sub-themes to be included in the literature review are present, and the sources cited relate to the themes. Sources cited are from scholarly sources though some sources may be outdated. The quantitative research elements are correctly identified. Sub-themes to be included in the literature review are present, and the sources cited directly and clearly relate to the themes. Sources cited are from current scholarly sources. The quantitative research elements are correctly identified.
20.0 % Synthesis of the Research in Each Sub-Theme The synthesis of the research in each sub-theme is either missing or does not address all of the required components. The synthesis of the research in each sub-theme incompletely or inaccurately conveys to the reader what is known and what is not known. It does not demonstrate that the learner has a solid grasp of existing literature on the topic. The synthesis of the research in each sub-theme provides a cursory review that conveys to the reader what is known and what is not known. It demonstrates a superficial understanding of existing literature on the topic. The synthesis of the research in each sub-theme provides a solid review that conveys to the reader what is known and what is not known. It demonstrates a moderate understanding of existing literature on the topic. The synthesis of the research in each sub-theme provides a thorough review that conveys to the reader what is known and what is not known. It demonstrates a thorough grasp of existing literature on the topic.
7.0 % Thesis Development and Purpose Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim. Thesis and/or main claim are insufficiently developed and/or vague; purpose is not clear. Thesis and/or main claim are apparent and appropriate to purpose. Thesis and/or main claim are clear and forecast the development of the paper. It is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose. Thesis and/or main claim are comprehensive. The essence of the paper is contained within the thesis. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.
8.0 % Argument Logic and Construction Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources. Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility. Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis. Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative. Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.
5.0 % Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are used. Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, and/or word choice are present. Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used. Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used. Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
5.0 % Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly. Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent. Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present. Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style. All format elements are correct.
5.0 % Research Citations (In-text citations for paraphrasing and direct quotes, and reference page listing and formatting, as appropriate to assignment and style) No reference page is included. No citations are used. Reference page is present. Citations are inconsistently used. Reference page is included and lists sources used in the paper. Sources are appropriately documented, although some errors may be present. Reference page is present and fully inclusive of all cited sources. Documentation is appropriate and citation style is usually correct. In-text citations and a reference page are complete and correct. The documentation of cited sources is free of error.
100 % Total Weightage