Research Proposal Draft for Peer Review

Question Description

Compose a draft of your research proposal. You do not need to include the human subjects information. The five- to six-page proposal should include:

Introduction – 1/2 page
Problem Statement and Hypothesis – 1 page
Literature Review – 1/2 page per article x 5 articles = 2 1/2 pages
Methods – 1 page

Your title page, references, and appendices are not included in the 5-6 pages.

Failure to complete this assignment on time will result in a grade of “0” for the entire peer review process (Modules 8 and 9).

It would be beneficial to submit your draft to the University Writing Center for feedback prior to submitting it at the end of this module for peer review.

Competencies:
1. Select quantitative and qualitative data collection methods appropriate for a given public health context.
2. Analyze quantitative and qualitative data using biostatistics, informatics, computer-based programming and software, as appropriate.
3. Interpret results of data analysis for public health research, policy, or practice.
5. Design a population-based policy, program, project, or intervention.
6. Propose strategies to identify stakeholders and build coalitions and partnerships for influencing public health outcomes.
7. Advocate for political, social, or economic policies and programs that will improve health in diverse populations.
8. Select communication strategies for different audiences and sectors.
9. Communicate audience-appropriate public health content, both in writing and through oral presentation.

Peer Review of Research Proposal Drafts

provide a quality, professional peer review of the two Research Proposal Drafts assigned to you. Respond to each of the questions posted in the peer review tool. Justify your comments.

Competencies:
2. Analyze quantitative and qualitative data using biostatistics, informatics, computer-based programming and software, as appropriate.
3. Interpret results of data analysis for public health research, policy, or practice.
4. Discuss the means by which structural bias, social inequities, and racism undermine health and create challenges to achieving health equity at organizational, community, and societal levels.
5. Design a population-based policy, program, project, or intervention.
9. Communicate audience-appropriate public health content, both in writing and through oral presentation.
10. Perform effectively on interprofessional teams.

Rubric

Research Proposal for Peer Review Rubric

Criteria

Ratings

Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIntroduction

2.0 to >1.79 pts

Student provides a clear, concise, and complete introduction, including a statement of the context of the study and the benefit this research would provide to the field of public health

1.79 to >1.59 pts

Student provides a complete introduction, although this could be more clear and/or concise; a cursory discussion of the context of the study and the benefit this research would provide to the field of public health is included

1.59 to >1.39 pts

Student provides an introduction, although this could be more clear, concise, and complete; no context or benefit to the field of public health is noted

1.39 to >0 pts

Student fails to provide an introduction, or the introduction provided is not clear; there is no context or benefit to the field of public health noted

2.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeProblem Statement and Hypothesis

5.0 to >4.49 pts

Student provided a clear, concise, and complete problem statement and hypothesis

4.49 to >3.99 pts

Student provides both a problem statement and a hypothesis; one of these components is lacking in critical thinking and detail to support it

3.99 to >3.49 pts

Student provides a problem statement and a hypothesis; these components lack critical thought and detail

3.49 to >0 pts

Student fails to provide a problem statement and hypothesis, or the problem statement and/or hypothesis provided are unclear and/or illogical

5.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeLiterature Review

5.0 to >4.49 pts

Literature review is focused and clearly and concisely connects the themes and issues of the various sources

4.49 to >3.99 pts

Literature review is focused and connects the themes and issues of most of the sources together; this could be more concise or cohesive

3.99 to >3.49 pts

Literature review is cursory and while it’s apparent that there are some themes or issues across the sources, this is somewhat disjointed

3.49 to >0 pts

Literature review lacks focus; it’s challenging for the reader to determine the theme of the literature review

5.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMethods

5.0 to >4.49 pts

Methods section clearly and thoroughly details the methods, measurement instruments, and/or procedures that will be used to address the problem statement; all potential issues and limitations are addressed

4.49 to >3.99 pts

Methods section details the methods, measurement instruments, and/or procedures that will be used to address the problem; some of these could benefit from more detail to connect to the problem being addressed

3.99 to >3.49 pts

Methods section gives a cursory treatment to the methods, measurement instruments, and/or procedures that will be used to address the problem; limitations are not adequately addressed

3.49 to >0 pts

Methods section is missing or the methods, measurement instruments, and procedures that will be used to addressed the problem are inadequate, illogical, or unclear; potential issues and limitations are not addressed

5.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWriting style

3.0 to >2.69 pts

Excellent mechanical, grammatical, and style form; writing style is at an appropriate scholarly level

2.69 to >2.39 pts

Good mechanical, grammatical, and style form, with only minimal, minor errors; writing style at an adequate scholarly level

2.39 to >2.09 pts

Acceptable mechanical, grammatical, and style form, with a few repeated errors; writing style could be improved with a few minor tweaks to achieve an adequate scholarly level

2.09 to >0 pts

Poor mechanical, grammatical, and style form; writing style is not at an adequate scholarly level

3.0 pts

Total Points:



^{Have a similar assignment? "Place an order for your assignment and have exceptional work written by our team of experts, guaranteeing you A results."}