The goal of this assignment is to give you an opportunity to apply whatever you learned in this module in evaluating a research paper. This activity is not simply summarizing a research article but to evaluate a research article from a methodology perspective.

For this assignment, you summarize and evaluate an educational research article of your choice. After completing your critique, you should submit:
Your article critique including a summary of the article.
The article you have chosen for the critique.

This assignment could be done individually. In the summary section, you should write a brief (up to 250 words) summary of the article in your own words. Don’t use copy and paste try to rephrase. In the critique section, you evaluate the article using the following grading criteria.

Grading criteria for research critique
The critique part should be 5 pages (1250 words) similar to the following examples in APA style. Your grade on this assignment is based on your answer to the following questions.
There is a long list of questions. You don’t have to address all questions. However, you should address highlighted (BOLD and ITALIC) questions. Some questions are relevant to the article you selected and some are not. The questions are listed simply because it will enable you to learn what to look for in evaluating a research article.
The format of your paper should NOT be like a Q & A list. Instead, you should integrate your answers into an essay format.
Main questions including:
What is (are) the research problem(s)?
What is (are) the research question(s) (or hypothesis)?
Is the research important? Why?
In your own words what methods and procedures were used? Evaluate the methods and procedures.
Describe the sample used in this study.
Describe the reliability and validity of all the instruments used.
What type of research is this? Explain.
How was the data analyzed?
What is (are) the major finding(s)? are these findings important?
What do you suggest to improve this research?
Is there a statement of the problem?
Is the problem “researchable”? That is, can it be investigated through the collection and analysis of data?
Is background information on the problem presented?
Is the educational significance of the problem discussed?
Does the problem statement indicate the variables of interest and the specific relationship between those variables which are investigated? When necessary, are variables directly or operationally defined?

Research Problem

Review of Related Literature
Is the review comprehensive?
Are all cited references relevant to the problem under investigation?
Are most of the sources primary, i.e., are there only a few or no secondary sources?
Have the references been critically analyzed and the results of various studies compared and contrasted, i.e., is the review more than a series of abstracts or annotations?
Does the review conclude with a brief summary of the literature and its implications for the problem investigated?
Do the implications discussed form an empirical or theoretical rationale for the hypotheses which follow?
Are specific questions to be answered listed or specific hypotheses to be tested stated?
Does each hypothesis state an expected relationship or difference?
If necessary, are variables directly or operationally defined?
Is each hypothesis testable?
Hypotheses

Sampling
Are the size and major characteristics of the population studied described?
If a sample was selected, is the method of selecting the sample clearly described?
Is the method of sample selection described one that is likely to result in a representative, unbiased sample?
Did the researcher avoid the use of volunteers?
Are the size and major characteristics of the sample described?
Does the sample size meet the suggested guideline for minimum sample size appropriate for the method of research represented?

Instruments
Is the rationale given for the selection of the instruments (or measurements) used?
Is each instrument described in terms of purpose and content?
Are the instruments appropriate for measuring the intended variables?
Is evidence presented that indicates that each instrument is appropriate for the sample under study?
Is instrument validity and reliability discussed?
If an instrument was developed specifically for the study, are the procedures involved in its development and validation described?
If an instrument was developed specifically for the study, are administration, scoring or tabulating, and interpretation procedures fully described?

Design and Procedure
Is the design appropriate for answering the questions or testing the hypotheses of the study?
Are the procedures described in sufficient detail to permit them to be replicated by another researcher?
Are proper justifications given for the design used?
If a pilot study was conducted, are its execution and results described as well as its impact on the subsequent study?
Are the control procedures described?
Did the researcher discuss or account for any potentially confounding variables that he or she was unable to control for?

Results
Are appropriate descriptive or inferential statistics presented?
Was the probability level, α, at which the results of the tests of significance were evaluated, specified in advance of the data analyses?
Are the tests of significance described appropriate, given the hypotheses and design of the study?
Was every hypothesis tested?
Are the results clearly presented?
Are the tables and figures (if any) well organized and easy to understand?
Are the data in each table and figure described in the text?

Discussion (Conclusions and Recommendation)
Is each result discussed in terms of the original hypothesis to which it relates?
Is each result discussed in terms of its agreement or disagreement with previous results obtained by other researchers in other studies?
Are generalizations consistent with the results?
Are the possible effects of uncontrolled variables on the results discussed?
Are theoretical and practical implications of the findings discussed?
Are recommendations for future action made?
Are the suggestions for future action based on practical significance or on statistical significance only, i.e., has the author avoided confusing practical and statistical significance?
Are recommendations for future research made?