Critical Appraisal Qualitative Research Nursing Free …

The data collection methods are described adequately in the Padula et al. (2009) study.
The research assistants who collected the data were trained and followed a protocol consistently,
in the same way for both the control and intervention groups. Additionally, the same research
assistant collected data on each patient each time, all of which establish consistency of data
collection. The data collected address the hypotheses and research questions: measures of IM
strength, dyspnea, self-efficacy for breathing, and Healthcare Related Quality of Life (HRQOL)
outcomes (Burns & Grove, 2007). If the researchers had included the actual protocol used,
rather than simply describing it, it would have strengthened the confidence in the reliability of
the data collection process, though perhaps the limitations of space prohibited inclusion.
Critical Appraisal #2

Critical Appraisal Qualitative Research Nursing

Got It!Buy research papers online cheap critical appraisal of an assessment practice.

Understanding Research and Critical Appraisal in …

Cossette, S., Frasure-Smith, N., Dupuis, J., Juneau, M., & Guertin, M. (2012). Randomized controlled trial of tailored nursing interventions to improve cardiac rehabilitation enrollment. Nursing Research, 61(2), 111-120.
This critical appraisal must be written in narrative format. Use headings for each section of the paper as identified in the guidelines, such as Strengths, Weaknesses, and Evaluation. You can also use subheadings of Problem and Purpose, Literature Review, and so forth as needed to organize your paper. Do not use outline numbers in this paper (i., ii., iii., etc.) or present the paper in outline format. This assignment is worth 100 points.

Research Paper On Performance Appraisal Free Essays

It is reassuring to see organizations moving away from the toxic practice of rank-and-yank. As Infosys and other companies have found, the collateral damage caused by rank-and-yank outweighs its dubious benefits. As the authors of an noted, forcing people into a rigid rank-order can cause a crippling "erosion of social capital" within the organization, precipitating an overall decline in collective performance. While I agree with that observation, I do not agree with "scrapping the bell curve". The bell curve is a useful tool and a beautiful piece of human science. What should be scrapped is its misuse in misguided schemes such as rank-and-yank.

"... big companies such as GE, Accenture and Deloitte are trumpeting their abandonment of the annual ritual of performance appraisal .... because it is much easier and less time-consuming to do them in real time via an app on a smartphone." Yes, but 'easier' and 'less time-consuming' does not automatically mean better, if the goal is to give considered, meaningful and useful feedback, of the type that actually leads to superior behavior.

Since when was the bell curve the enemy of humanity? The articles I am reading of late are incorrectly asserting that the bell curve is being abandoned. Shall we abandon the best-demonstrated piece of empirical psychology we know? Shall we abandon science? If you read the articles more closely, you will see that what is really being abandoned in most cases is the toxic practice of forced rankings. That is, rating people in such a way that the ratings distribution conforms to the bell curve shape. Forced rankings is a wrongheaded idea. But the bell curve itself is a fact, like gravity. Wrongheaded ideas come and go, but facts don't. The bell curve will continue to elegantly depict the truth of human nature.

Vicky Roberts of UK training firm Vista asks if the recent trend towards ditching the traditional annual performance appraisal (for example, see the articles above) will become widespread. Will we all bend with the trend? No doubt, sole reliance on the once-a-year review process will be change as new technology makes new methods of feedback more timely and convenient. But it will not be the end of performance appraisal, as such. Improvement is surpassingly difficult if not impossible in the absence of appropriate feedback. As Roberts rightly writes: "Certainly the concept of an annual review of performance has its flaws, and the oft-cited reason is that nobody likes surprises. This is true, issues should of course be dealt with as they arise, not saved as a bombshell for the annual appraisal. To borrow terminology from the world of educational assessment, performance management should be formative rather than summative."

Here's a scenario to keep HR managers awake at night. An African American employee with allegedly poor performance, documented through a performance appraisal, was terminated after a series of warnings and probation periods. The employee goes to court and claims racial bias. The court cannot find any evidence that the people who terminated the worker were motivated by racism. But on appeal, the employee invokes a legal argument known as the - "under which an employer may be found liable when a non-decision-making employee with discriminatory animus provided factual information or input that may have affected the adverse employment action." In other words, the evidence relied upon by the decision-makers may have been tainted by racial animus. Hence the decision to dismiss was similarly tainted.

"... we learned long ago that, particularly in technology, work-progress and achieved objectives depend upon a well-lubricated team-spirit. We cannot all be experts all the time in all venues. We depend, to meet an overall task or objective, on very diverse competencies. Thus, our ability to interact with people becomes a paramount attribute..."

Not an article, but a good read by (Author) and (Author)

In this assignment you will have to provide a critical appraisal of the research design of the studies listed below:
Critical Appraisal of a Research Article – Usa Online …

Critical appraisal of a research article - Progress Essays

To complete this assignment you should:
– Retrieve the specified research article (you can choose ONE of the three papers specified for each part) ( i have chosen and attached)
– Read the article and make sure you understand the content, argument, vocabulary etc. Use the resources in the study guide and reader to help you explore relevant research principles, terms and issues.
– Identify what kind of study is being reported, and locate a critical appraisal tool that is appropriate to the study type. You should attach the original critical appraisal tool to your assignment. There are examples of critical appraisal tools introduced in the study guide.i have selected a tool and attached it
– Apply the critical appraisal tool, noting answers to the tool questions/items. This forms the main section of your written appraisal. Include page numbers from the research article in your answers to the appraisal tool (i.e. cross reference where in the research article you are finding the answers to the critical appraisal tool questions/items).
I have attached the research article and the critical appraisal tool. below is the task
Completed appraisal tool (800 words approx)
Complete the critical appraisal tool, responding to all of the questions/items
Cross reference your responses to the critical appraisal tool with page numbers from the research article

Article Analysis, Lisa Booth - A Critical Appraisal of Qualitative Research

Critical Appraisal Essay | Sampling (Statistics) | Obesity

As some once said, "... if performance reviews were a drug, the FDA would never approve them because they're ineffective and have too many side effects." And if performance appraisal was a tool, management would blame it for their failures. Wait, it is a tool, and they do profusely blame it. As the French say, the bungler blames his tools. Performance appraisal has become the bungler's tool du jour,deplorable in every way. Attacking it is the latest falsehood to weaken the West. But I do not despair. I should, but I do not. I take heart from: "We have now sunk to a depth at which restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men." Very well; let's restate the obvious, starting with the science. From psychology, we know that feedback is correlated with improvement, and biology tells us that improvement is correlated with survival. Therefore feedback is correlated with survival. When feedback occurs, the odds of survival improve. Feedback is useful, feedback is good. The nature of performance appraisal is feedback. Performance appraisal is bad in the same way a hammer is bad. Use it properly, and it works well. Use it poorly and you'll bend the nail and smash your thumb. Then the tool gets the blame rather than the tool user. The bastardization of performance appraisal is commonplace, but science says feedback can produce a
Performance appraisal: ancient perspective
Criticism is something we can avoid easily by saying nothing, doing nothing, and being nothing.

Feedback is the basis of improvement, and improvement is the basis of survival. Is this too hard to see? Survival depends on improvement, which depends on feedback. It's not rocket science, but it is science. vows to fix performance appraisal at.

"If you think about it, the performance appraisal is the heart of the interface between the organization and the employee, manifested through the relationship between the supervisor -- representing the employer -- and the individual. So the changes in performance appraisal reflect what it means to be an employee at different points in time." ~ Peter Capelli, Human Resource Executive Online

The voice of sanity. More to come on this one.

'If somebody is rude or an outlier occasionally because they are in a situation where they didn't get a good night's sleep or something drastic has happened in their personal lives, we wouldn't consider that person to be a jerk at work,' says Gretchen Spreitzer, co-author of Destructive De-energizing Relationships: How Thriving Buffers their Effect on Performance. She continues: 'It is when there is a pattern in the behaviour over time that a person can be considered a jerk.'

A new article in Fortune magazine points out that while some organizations are moving towards a less traditional approach in giving employees performance feedback, the need to record and document performance information is as pressing as ever. The traditional annual review, or performance summary, will still have a part to play as there is a baseline requirement for properly documented performance information. Roger Ferguson notes: HR departments need "documentation in the event of an EEOC or NLRB claim or charge... We are, after all, a very litigious society." That's not likely to change.

Jayson Saba writing for believes that the phrase 'performance management' will be replaced by 'performance development' in much the same way that personnel management became known as human resources. The difference, he says, between performance development and performance appraisal is that development is more focused on the future than appraisal, which tends to look at the past.

"The performance review is getting mixed reviews" says new research from OfficeTeam. Although most (79 percent) human resources (HR) managers interviewed said they schedule these meetings at least annually, one in four (25 percent) employees feel the assessments do not help improve their performance." That sounds pretty bad, but wait ... it also means 75 percent of employees believe they get at least some gain from it. So yes, performance appraisal is worth it. A biased conclusion, naturally :-)

"Once regarded as an opportunity to boost pay, openly express issues and perhaps help bosses understand just how exceptionally you've performed, many now regard these sporadic review meetings with trepidation, with some employers seizing this annual / bi annual meeting as a place to chastise or 'rate and rank' the already nervous employee. At best it's an opportunity to defend yourself, at worst it's an Apprentice style mugging based on interrogation and blame shaming..." Dear, dear. I wonder if Donald Trump ever had a performance appraisal?

Anyone see a consensus emerging? The herd-minded follow the herd-minded. All of this talk about dumping and ditching performance appraisal is an exercise in folly. Plants will not grow in the dark and neither will people.

Peter Cappelli at the Warton School writes that the current disillusionment with 'traditional' performance appraisal seen in a number of large companies is due to a concept of team dynamics known as the "A player, B player, C player" model, which gained a following in the 1990s. The model "... suggested that poor performers would always be bad, so we should just find them and get rid of them." This seems to be a variant on the discredited rank-and-yank thinking that contributed heavily to the demise of organizations such as . The model, says Cappelli, was never true. He believes that it may have reflected the theory of and crowded out the rightful attention due to other tasks that performance appraisal was supposed to perform, such as improving performance and developing skills.

There are four critical steps, according to the . 1. Document the performance issue. 2. Develop an action plan. 3. Review the plan with another party such as an upline manager. The plan should be "specific, measurable, relevant and attainable" with 60 to 90 days. 4. Meet with the Employee to outline the plan. 5. Follow up to assess the success of the intervention and if unsuccessful, modify the plan or consider other actions such as job reassigment, etc.

Among the age group known as Millennials, or those born after 1980, a quarter would rather call in sick than face a performance appraisal, says a survey of 1,000 full-time employees reported by TriNet and Wakefield Research. Nearly 70% of Millennials believe the process of performance appraisal (at least the one they've experienced) to be flawed, yet 85% want to get more feedback, not less, from their boss.

The Washington Post reports that big US companies are increasingly disillusioned with 'traditional' performance appraisal. Welcome to the news. We have been saying the same thing for years.

Critical Appraisal Essay Overweight and obesity are defined as abnormal or excessive fat ..

critical appraisal - Best Essay Writers

The literature review is organized logically to show the progression of research and a
clear direction of that research. The limitations, theory, and knowledge gleaned from the
previous eight studies reviewed is concisely presented and easily followed to the purpose and
Critical Appraisal #2
hypothesis for the Padula et al. (2009) study. A final summary of the literature clarifies what is
known about the subject, and identifies the gaps in knowledge (Burns & Grove, 2009).
The research reviewed, though it is within the previous one to fifteen years of the study,
discusses only three studies within the previous five years, the most recent being three years
before the Padula et al. (2009) study. If more recent research could have been included it would
help the chronology presented. Another weakness of the review is the reliance on empirical
literature; had the researchers included more theoretical literature, perhaps they would have
found more research, and more recent research, that added to the knowledge base (Burns &
Grove, 2009).