Critical Appraisal
This assessment for this part of the Qualitative and Blended stream of the Research Methods module is a 1,250-word critical appraisal (+/- 10%) of a research paper provided by the module leader reporting applied qualitative research in the context of public health and social care.
It counts for 50% of the RM module final grade. The purpose of this is to develop your skills of critical appraisal and specifically in relation to qualitative research. While you may not be interested in conducting qualitative research yourself, given its growing use in public health, social care services and research as well as the wider recognition of its value as part of the evidence base, it is important you are able to both understand and appraise its methodological quality.
To be critical does not mean to be negative. The intention within this coursework is to encourage you to question information and opinions presented in material which you use professionally, ultimately using this process to present your evaluation or judgement of the research area or series of texts.
Your critique should follow the framework provide (see Appendix A) which is a modified version of the well-known CASP criteria and include a commentary on all aspects of the chosen paper including overall design, sampling, data collection methods, reflexivity, ethics, analysis and interpretation, and the overall credibility and generalizability of the findings. There should also be a short commentary on the potential for application of the findings in a public health/social care context.
Tips
• Avoid binary answers (yes or no). You must expand on your answers.
• Avoid copying and pasting directly from the article. Use your own words
• Check for your similarity score prior to the submission
• Always prove read your work before submission As stated in the module handbook you need to submit an electronic copy of your assignment by 20th of December 2019 before 23:30pm
Marking Grid (Critical Appraisal)
Descriptor
Question one
Ambiguity and confusion present, vague/ largely irrelevant or inadequate answer, major omissions or factual errors.
Student defines qualitative research or give reasons why qualitative research is used without answering the question fully.
Student gives one reason why an author may choose to use qualitative research, but does not give adequate example from the paper.
[Subjective, window in time, it answers questions such as why, explores issues in depth, explores perceptions and individual’s socio-cultural contexts which affect decision making]
Student gives good reason for using qual research but gives an example from another source
Clearly answers both sections of the paper giving one example of why an author may choose to use qualitative research and gives a relevant example from the paper.
Tick 1 mark 2 marks 3 marks 4marks 5 marks
Question two
Student states implied aims and RQ
Answer states students implied Aim and RQ and links them to the implied reasons why the researcher carried out research design through stated methods, but answer does not critique whether the research design and methods used were clear justified and/ or appropriate
Answer states whether Aim and objectives of research are stated, and answers if either the research design or methods used were justified or there was an implied link to aim of research.
Answer states whether Aim and objectives of research are stated, and answers clearly if the research design and methods used were appropriate.
Clear critique of Aims and objectives in relation to the methods used and research design stated. Tick 1 mark 2 marks 3 marks 4 marks 5 marks
Question three
Answer states perceived sampling approach used by the author without critique.
Answer critiques sampling approach or selection approach included in paper.
Answer critiques sampling and selection approach used and states if any justification is included.
Sampling and recruitment are partly analysed in regards to how they were described and the critique includes analysis of author’s justification.
All elements of sampling and recruitment are clearly analysed in regards to how they were described, carried out and justified.
Tick 1 mark 2 marks 3 marks 4 marks 5 marks
Question four
Student states which methods were used to collect data
Clear critique of data collection methods
Critique of data collection methods stating either strengths or weaknesses of these.
Clear explanation of the methods of data collection and analysis used by the researcher to collect information is given including some strengths and weaknesses.
Comprehensive explanation of the methods of data collection and analysis used by the researcher to collect information, including all strengths and weaknesses Tick 1 mark 2 marks 3 marks 4 marks 5 marks
Descriptor
Question five
Student answers yes or no to this question only.
Is there any evidence of the author acknowledge their role in the research or the impact of the research on the researcher?
Answer critiques whether the researcher acknowledged their own role in the research giving at least one example.
Answer includes two or more examples of how the researcher could influence the research and findings.
Students states examples of how the reflexivity could have been strengthened? Tick 1 mark 2 marks 3 marks 4 marks 5 marks
Question six
Student answers the question with a yes or no answer only.
Answer states how ethics are addressed in the paper.
Answer includes some critique of how ethics were addressed in the paper.
Answer comprehensively critiques how effective the author addresses ethics in paper
Answer includes all of previous answers and includes ideas of how to improve how bias is addressed Tick 1 mark 2 marks 3 marks 4 marks 5 marks
Question seven
Student answers first part of question only with a yes or a no.
Answer includes partial analyses of how the findings are presented.
Answer states clearly if the findings are appropriately presented?
Answer critiques if findings presented answer the research questions or aim of the study.
Student explains how the research findings could be improved. Tick 1 mark 2 marks 3 marks 4 marks 5 marks
Question eight
Student answers question with a yes or a no.
Student gives one reason why research could be relevant in context of public health
Answer gives two reasons why the findings reported could have wider relevance
Answer gives two or three reasons why the findings reported could have wider relevance
Answer gives critique of how paper could have wider relevance including changes that could strengthen its relevance and impact Tick 1 mark 2 marks 3 marks 4 marks 5 marks
Question nine
Answer discusses paper changes without answering question clearly
Answer correctly Identifies one aspect of the paper that could be improved without linking it to criteria (framework)
Answer correctly Identifies one aspect of the paper that could be improved in relation to the criteria (framework)
Answer correctly Identifies one aspect of the paper that could be improved in relation to the criteria (framework), describing how this change could improve paper
Answer correctly Identifies one aspect of the paper that could be improved in relation to the criteria (framework), describing how and why this change could have such impact Tick 2 marks 4 marks 6 marks 8 marks 10 marks Mark (For 100% multiply mark by 2)
Overall Assessment Criteria
Mark
Fluent academic writing, good structure, correct use of Harvard referencing.
Questions 1 – 5 are addressed
i.e. overall design, sampling, data collection methods
Questions 6 – 9 addressed
i.e. reflexivity, ethics, analysis and interpretation
Question 10 is addressed
i.e. commentary on the potential for application
Distinction
70+
Excellent presentation with a high level of professionalism and accuracy.
Correct Harvard referencing used.
The five questions
are answered correctly, demonstrating effective use of the sub-questions and their application to the article.
The four questions
are answered correctly, demonstrating effective use of the sub-questions and their application to the article.
The question is answered in full addressing all three sub-questions (as relevant) and coming to a conclusion about the value of this research paper, in relation to public health. Excellent links made to the students own field of expertise.
High Merit
65% – 69%
The paper is very well presented in an engaging style and complies with all the conventions of academic writing. Correct Harvard referencing used.
The five questions
are answered correctly, demonstrating effective use of some of the sub-questions and their application to the article.
The four questions
are answered correctly, demonstrating effective use of some of the sub-questions and their application to the article.
The question is answered in full addressing all three sub-questions and coming to a conclusion about the value of this research paper. Some links are made to the wider topic area of students work.
Low Merit
60% – 64%
The paper is written clearly, has a clear structure, and is grammatically correct. Correct Harvard referencing used.
The five questions
are answered with some of the sub-questions as a guide
All four questions
are answered correctly with some of the sub-questions used as a guide
The question is answered addressing some of the three sub-questions and coming to a conclusion about the value of this research paper. No wider references are made.
High Pass
55% -59%
The paper is written with clarity in parts and it has a structure, with English mostly grammatically correct.
All five questions answered, but not correctly with sub-questions not addressed.
All of four questions are answered but not correctly and sub-questions not addressed effectively.
The question is answered coming to a conclusion about the value of this research paper but not addressing some of the three sub-questions.
Pass
54%-40%
Paper has a structure but weak grammar or clarity.
Most of the five questions answered, but not correctly with sub-questions not addressed.
Most of the four questions are answered but not correctly, sub-questions are not addressed.
The question is answered but not correctly and only addressing some of the three sub-questions. Student comes to an incorrect conclusion re: value of this research paper.
0 – 39%
Below standard sentence construction, grammar and expression fail to give a clear picture. Correct Harvard referencing not used.
Poor attempt to address all five questions or the sub-questions.
Poor attempt to address all four questions or the sub-questions.
The question is not addressed in full with little to no evidence of drawing a conclusion regarding the value of the paper.
Appendix A. Framework for the Critical Appraisal
Question
Topic
Your own Answers
Question 1
(5 marks)
Give one reason why a researcher may choose qualitative methods for their research and illustrate your answer with one example
Consider:
• Is a qualitative methodology appropriate?
• Does the research seek to interpret or illuminate the actions and/or subjective experiences of research participants?
• Have the researchers justified the research design? (e.g. have they discussed how they decided which methods to use?)
Question 2
(5 marks)
In the chosen paper, was there a clear statement of the research question and/ or aims of the study? Do these match with the overall design and methods chosen?
Consider:
• what the goal of the research was
• why it is important
• its relevance
Question 3
(5 marks)
Were all elements of sampling and recruitment clearly described and justified?
Consider:
• if the researcher has explained how the participants were selected
• if they explained why the participants they selected were the most appropriate to provide access to the type of knowledge sought by the study
• if there are any discussions around recruitment (e.g. why some people chose not to take part)
• Was the recruitment strategy appropriate to the aims of the research?
Question 4
(5 marks)
Is there a clear explanation of the methods of data collection and analysis used by the researcher to collect information? Identify any strengths or weaknesses in these
Consider:
• if the setting for data collection was justified
• if it is clear how data were collected (e.g. focus group, semi-structured interview etc)
• if the researcher has justified the methods chosen
• if the researcher has made the methods explicit (e.g. for interview method, is there an indication of how interviews were conducted, did they used a topic guide?)
• if methods were modified during the study. If so, has the researcher explained how and why?
• if the form of data is clear (e.g. tape recordings, video material, notes etc)
• if the researcher has discussed saturation of data
• Were the data collected in a way that addressed the research issue?
Question 5
(5 marks)
Did the researcher acknowledge their own role in the research i.e. did they address reflexivity? If yes, how? If not, how do you think this might have influenced the findings?
Consider whether it is clear:
• if the researcher critically examined their own role, potential bias and influence during:
• formulation of research questions
• data collection, including sample recruitment and choice of location
• how the researcher responded to events during the study and whether they considered the implications of any changes in the research design
• Is there any conflict of interest?
• Has the relationship between researcher and participants been adequately considered?
Question 6
(5 marks)
Has the researcher addressed ethical issues? Were these comprehensively addressed?
Consider:
• if there are sufficient details of how the research was explained to participants for the reader to assess whether ethical standards were maintained
• if the researcher has discussed issues raised by the study (e. g. issues around informed consent or confidentiality or how they have handled the effects of the study on the participants during and after the study)
• if approval has been sought from the ethics committee
Question 7
(5 marks)
Are the findings appropriately presented? Do you consider that the findings presented answer the research questions or aim of the study?
Consider:
• if the findings are explicit
• if there is adequate discussion of the evidence
• both for and against the researcher’s arguments
• if the researcher has discussed the credibility of their findings (e.g. triangulation, respondent validation, more than one analyst.)
• if the findings are discussed in relation to the original research questions
Question 8
(5 marks)
After reading this paper, do you consider the findings reported to have any a wider relevance in the context of health or social care?
Consider:
• if the researcher discusses the contribution the study makes to existing knowledge or understanding (e.g. do they consider the findings in relation to current practice or policy, or relevant research-based literature?)
• if they identify new areas where research is necessary
• if the researchers have discussed whether or how the findings can be transferred to other populations or considered other ways the research may be used
Question 9
(10 marks)
Identify one aspect of the paper that you would improve in relation to the criteria specified above, describe how and why in your answer