Too Tired? Too Anxious? Need More Time? We’ve got your back.
Ask for Help Print
OJM2 — OJM2 TASK 1: IDENTIFYING AND EVALUATING DATA SOURCES
DATA-INFORMED PRACTICES — D179
PRFA — OJM2
TASK OVERVIEWSUBMISSIONSEVALUATION REPORT
COMPETENCIES
2052.1.1 : Identifying and Evaluating Data Sources
The graduate identifies relevant types and credible sources of data required to solve an identified problem.
INTRODUCTION
In this task, you will identify educational problems from your own experience that you could have addressed with either qualitative or quantitative data. You will then use the currency, relevance, authority, accuracy, and purpose (CRAAP) test to evaluate the credibility of a published educational research article that relates to one of the educational problems you identify.
REQUIREMENTS
Your submission must be your original work. No more than a combined total of 30% of a submission and no more than a 10% match to any one individual source can be directly quoted or closely paraphrased from sources, even if cited correctly. The similarity report that is provided when you submit your task can be used as a guide.
You must use the rubric to direct the creation of your submission because it provides detailed criteria that will be used to evaluate your work. Each requirement below may be evaluated by more than one rubric aspect. The rubric aspect titles may contain hyperlinks to relevant portions of the course.
Tasks may not be submitted as cloud links, such as links to Google Docs, Google Slides, OneDrive, etc., unless specified in the task requirements. All other submissions must be file types that are uploaded and submitted as attachments (e.g., .docx, .pdf, .ppt).
A. Discuss an educational problem from your own experience that you could have used qualitative data to address.
1. Discuss one advantage and one disadvantage of using qualitative data to address the educational problem from part A.
2. Explain why the use of qualitative data would be appropriate to address the educational problem from part A.
B. Discuss an educational problem from your own experience that you could have used quantitative data to address.
1. Discuss one advantage and one disadvantage of using quantitative data to address the educational problem from part B.
2. Explain why the use of quantitative data would be appropriate to address the educational problem from part B.
C. Identify a published educational research article from the WGU Library that could be used to address your educational problem from either part A or part B and provide a link to the article.
1. Discuss the credibility of your article from part C using the following components of the CRAAP test and evidence from the article:
a. Currency: Describe the timeliness of the information in the article.
b. Relevance: Discuss the relevance of the information to the identified educational problem.
c. Authority: Evaluate the credibility of the source of the information.
d. Accuracy: Discuss the reliability and accuracy of the information.
e. Purpose: Describe the purpose or intent of the information.
D. Acknowledge sources, using APA-formatted in-text citations and references, for content that is quoted, paraphrased, or summarized.
E. Demonstrate professional communication in the content and presentation of your submission.
File Restrictions
File name may contain only letters, numbers, spaces, and these symbols: ! – _ . * ‘ ( )
File size limit: 200 MB
File types allowed: doc, docx, rtf, xls, xlsx, ppt, pptx, odt, pdf, txt, qt, mov, mpg, avi, mp3, wav, mp4, wma, flv, asf, mpeg, wmv, m4v, svg, tif, tiff, jpeg, jpg, gif, png, zip, rar, tar, 7z
RUBRIC
SOE PROFESSIONAL DISPOSITIONS AND ETHICS:
NOT EVIDENT
The submission demonstrates consistently unprofessional or unethical behavior or disposition as outlined in the SOE Professional Dispositions and Ethics.
APPROACHING COMPETENCE
The submission demonstrates behavior or disposition that conflicts with the professional and ethical standards outlined in the SOE Professional Dispositions and Ethics.
COMPETENT
The submission demonstrates behavior and disposition that align with the professional and ethical standards outlined in the SOE Professional Dispositions and Ethics.
A:EDUCATIONAL PROBLEM: QUALITATIVE DATA
NOT EVIDENT
An educational problem is not discussed.
APPROACHING COMPETENCE
The educational problem discussed could not plausibly be addressed using qualitative data.
COMPETENT
The educational problem discussed could plausibly be addressed using qualitative data.
A1:ADVANTAGE AND DISADVANTAGE: QUALITATIVE DATA
NOT EVIDENT
A discussion of 1 advantage and 1 disadvantage of using qualitative data to address a problem is not provided.
APPROACHING COMPETENCE
The discussed advantage, disadvantage, or both are irrelevant to the educational problem from part A. Or the results of using qualitative data to address the problem are not plausible.
COMPETENT
Both the discussed advantage and the disadvantage of using qualitative data are relevant to the educational problem from part A. The results of using qualitative data to address the problem are plausible.
A2:APPROPRIATENESS: QUALITATIVE DATA
NOT EVIDENT
An explanation of why the use of qualitative data would address the educational problem from part A is not provided.
APPROACHING COMPETENCE
The explanation of why it is appropriate to use qualitative data to address the educational problem from part A is not plausible.
COMPETENT
The explanation of why it is appropriate to use qualitative data to address the educational problem from part A is plausible.
B:EDUCATIONAL PROBLEM: QUANTITATIVE DATA
NOT EVIDENT
An educational problem is not discussed.
APPROACHING COMPETENCE
The educational problem discussed could not plausibly be addressed using quantitative data.
COMPETENT
The educational problem discussed could plausibly be addressed using quantitative data.
B1:ADVANTAGE AND DISADVANTAGE: QUANTITATIVE DATA
NOT EVIDENT
A discussion of 1 advantage and 1 disadvantage of using quantitative data to address a problem is not provided.
APPROACHING COMPETENCE
The discussed advantage, disadvantage, or both are irrelevant to the educational problem from part B. Or the results of using quantitative data to address the problem are not plausible.
COMPETENT
Both the discussed advantage and the disadvantage of using quantitative data are relevant to the educational problem from part B. The results of using quantitative data to address the problem are plausible.
B2:APPROPRIATENESS: QUANTITATIVE DATA
NOT EVIDENT
An explanation of why the use of quantitative data would address the educational problem from part B is not provided.
APPROACHING COMPETENCE
The explanation of why it is appropriate to use quantitative data to address the educational problem from part B is not plausible.
COMPETENT
The explanation of why it is appropriate to use quantitative data to address the educational problem from part B is plausible.
C:EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH ARTICLE
NOT EVIDENT
A working link to a published educational research article is not provided.
APPROACHING COMPETENCE
A working link to a published educational research article is provided, but the article identified does not address the chosen educational problem from part A or part B.
COMPETENT
A working link to a published educational research article is provided, and the article identified addresses the chosen educational problem from part A or part B.
C1A:CRAAP TEST: CURRENCY
NOT EVIDENT
A description of the timeliness of the information is not provided.
APPROACHING COMPETENCE
The description does not accurately address the timeliness of the information. Or supporting evidence from the article is not included.
COMPETENT
The description accurately addresses the timeliness of the information and includes supporting evidence from the article.
C1B:CRAAP TEST: RELEVANCE
NOT EVIDENT
A discussion of the relevance of the information is not provided.
APPROACHING COMPETENCE
The discussion of the relevance of the information in the article to the chosen educational problem is not plausible, or evidence from the article is not included.
COMPETENT
The discussion of the relevance of the information to the educational problem is plausible and includes evidence from the article.
C1C:CRAAP TEST: AUTHORITY
NOT EVIDENT
An evaluation of the credibility of the source of the article is not provided.
APPROACHING COMPETENCE
The evaluation of the credibility of the source of the information is inaccurate, or evidence from the article is not included.
COMPETENT
The evaluation of the credibility of the source of the information is accurate and includes evidence from the article.
C1D:CRAAP TEST: ACCURACY
NOT EVIDENT
A discussion of the reliability and accuracy of the information in the article is not provided.
APPROACHING COMPETENCE
The discussion of the reliability or accuracy of the information in the article is inaccurate, or evidence from the article is not included.
COMPETENT
The discussion of the reliability and accuracy of the information from the article is accurate and includes evidence from the article.
C1E:CRAAP TEST: PURPOSE
NOT EVIDENT
A description of the purpose or intent of the information is not provided.
APPROACHING COMPETENCE
The description of the purpose or intent of the information in the article is inaccurate, or evidence from the article is not included.
COMPETENT
The description of the purpose or intent of the information from the article is accurate and includes evidence from the article.
D:APA SOURCES
NOT EVIDENT
The submission does not include in-text citations and references according to APA style for content that is quoted, paraphrased, or summarized.
APPROACHING COMPETENCE
The submission includes in-text citations and references for content that is quoted, paraphrased, or summarized but does not demonstrate a consistent application of APA style.
COMPETENT
The submission includes in-text citations and references for content that is quoted, paraphrased, or summarized and demonstrates a consistent application of APA style.
E:PROFESSIONAL COMMUNICATION
NOT EVIDENT
Content is unstructured, is disjointed, or contains pervasive errors in mechanics, usage, or grammar. Vocabulary or tone is unprofessional or distracts from the topic.
APPROACHING COMPETENCE
Content is poorly organized, is difficult to follow, or contains errors in mechanics, usage, or grammar that cause confusion. Terminology is misused or ineffective.
COMPETENT
Content reflects attention to detail, is organized, and focuses on the main ideas as prescribed in the task or chosen by the candidate. Terminology is pertinent, is used correctly, and effectively conveys the intended meaning. Mechanics, usage, and grammar promote accurate interpretation and understanding.
Too Tired? Too Anxious? Need More Time? We’ve got your back.