Content Assessment Assignment 2 (Research Article 2)

You are to select a NEW (different from your last selection) scholarly communication article from a peer-reviewed, academic research journal, published within the last ten years.

WHAT IS THIS ASSIGNMENT

You will be reviewing/assessing a DIFFERENT peer-reviewed communication journal article. This allows you to further familiarize yourself with the discipline and social science journal publishing norms.

WHERE DO I GET AN ARTICLE?

You are to select a scholarly communication article from a peer-reviewed, academic research journal, published within the last ten years. I highly suggest using Google Scholar to search for articles.

You may also select articles from the Communication Department page by looking up different faculty pages. Some of the faculty pages have direct links to their research articles, for others, you may be able to copy/paste the reference in Google Scholar to locate the article.

I HIGHLY suggest that you search while using the UCD Library VPN, otherwise, you will not have free access to the majority of these articles. Please DO NOT pay for any article your UCD tuition pays for access, again, using the library VPN will be needed for free access.

SUBMISSION DETAILS

There is no need to add your name, class name, section, or any other information at the top of your submission. We have all of this information when you submit through Canvas.

Your submission should be: one- to two-page write up in essay format, single-spaced, 12-point Times New Roman font, 1-inch margins all around. Submissions must be in Word or PDF, you may also copy/paste from Word to the assignment submission box in Canvas instead of attaching a file. Free access to these can be found on the IT. We can’t read submissions in other formats. Submissions we can’t read won’t be graded. Also, all submissions must be via Canvas, not email.

WHAT DO I WRITE ABOUT?

In your write-up/essay be sure to include the most important components of the article by addressing the following:

• Clearly state and explain the hypothesis and/or research question(s) that drive the author’s study. What communication aspects is the author addressing?
• Describe how the author(s) conducted their research. That is, what was the design of the study used by the author(s) to answer the research question(s)/assess their hypothesis? What methods did they use to address their hypothesis/research questions?
• What results or findings do the author(s) claim? And, what are the implications and/or relevance (importance) of those findings, according to the author(s)?
• Comment on what you see as the strengths and weaknesses of the article. That is to say, what did you like about the research and reporting, and why? Also, what parts of the study and write-up do you feel could be improved, and how?

A full submission will also include:

• Provide a full citation for the article using APA publication format. If you are not familiar with the structure of this citation style or need some guidance, please use the OWL Purdue site for help. This should be added to the bottom of the last page of your write-up.
• Provide a link or PDF of the article you are reviewing, list this after the citation. Research Article ReviewResearch Article ReviewCriteriaRatingsPtsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAPA Citation
  

  2 ptsFull MarksIt is in proper APA format, without errors.

  1 ptsAlmost ThereIt is in proper APA format, with minor error(s).

  0 ptsMissed ItImproper format and/or too many errors (more than 3).

  2 pts
  This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeArticle Access

  1 ptsFull MarksThe CORRECT link to the article is provided and attached to the submission.

  0 ptsMissed ItThe link is missing, the link is incorrect, the link doesn’t work, etc.

  1 pts
  This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAssessment

  5 ptsFull MarksStudent completes all article assessment pieces. The assessment is well thought out and thorough.

  4 ptsAlmost ThereOne element needs further development.

  3 ptsCloseTwo or more elements need further development.

  2 ptsNeeds ImprovementOne element is missing or three elements need further development.

  5 pts
  This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWriting Quality

  2 ptsFull MarksPaper is well organized and well written.

  1 ptsAlmost TherePaper needs improvement in clarity and/or organization. Grammar and spelling errors distract from the paper.

  0 ptsNo MarksPaper is difficult to read due to lack of clarity, organization. The grammar and spelling errors severely detract from the paper.

  2 pts
  Total Points: 10