8

RESEARCH 1
Second Quarter – Module 5:
JOURNAL REVIEW

1
Science – Grade 8
Alternative Delivery Mode
Quarter 1 – Module 5 Week 5: JOURNAL REVIEW
First Edition, 2020

Republic Act 8293, section 176 states that: No copyright shall subsist in any
work of the Government of the Philippines. However, prior approval of the government
agency or office wherein the work is created shall be necessary for exploitation of such
work for profit. Such agency or office may, among other things, impose as a condition
the payment of royalties.

Borrowed materials (i.e., songs, stories, poems, pictures, photos, brand

names, trademarks, etc.) included in this module are owned by their respective
copyright holders. Every effort has been exerted to locate and seek permission to use
these materials from their respective copyright owners. The publisher and authors do
not represent nor claim ownership over them.

Published by the Department of Education

Secretary: Leonor Magtolis Briones
Undersecretary: Diosdado M. San Antonio

Development Team of the Module

Writer: MARY KRISTAL LHYN AMOR (MNMNHS)
Editor: A. C. MANLANGIT.JR. (CCNHS)
Reviewer: Name
Illustrator: Name
Layout Artist: CARLA L. KONG
Subject Area Supervisor: MERIAM T. ABADILLA
Management Team: RONALD G. GUTAY,
ALLAN B. MATIN-AW,
MARY JANE J. POWAO,
AQUILO A. RENTILLOSA,
CRISTINA T. REMOCALDO
ADM Coordinator: RYAN B. REDOBLADO

Printed in the Philippines by ________________________

Department of Education – Region VII Central Visayas

Office Address: Department of Education – Carcar City Division
(Learning Resources Management Section)
P. Nellas St., Poblacion III, Carcar City, Cebu
Telefax: (032) 487-8495
E-mail Address: carcarcitydivision@yahoo.com

2
 8
Research 1
Quarter 2 - Module 5
Week 5:
JOURNAL REVIEW

3
Introductory Message
For the facilitator:

Welcome to the Grade 8 Resarch 1 Alternative Delivery Mode (ADM) Module on

Journal Review!

This module was collaboratively designed, developed and reviewed by educators both
from public and private institutions to assist you, the teacher or facilitator in helping the
learners meet the standards set by the K to 12 Curriculum while overcoming their
personal, social, and economic constraints in schooling.

This learning resource hopes to engage the learners into guided and independent
learning activities at their own pace and time. Furthermore, this also aims to help
learners acquire the needed 21st century skills while taking into consideration their
needs and circumstances.
In addition to the material in the main text, you will also see this box in the body of the
module:

Notes to the Teacher

This contains helpful tips or strategies that
will help you in guiding the learners.

As a facilitator, you are expected to orient the learners on how to use this module. You
also need to keep track of the learners' progress while allowing them to manage their
own learning. Furthermore, you are expected to encourage and assist the learners as
they do the tasks included in the module.

For the learner:

Welcome to the Grade 8 Resarch 1 Alternative Delivery Mode (ADM) Module on

Journal Review!

This module was designed to provide you with fun and meaningful opportunities for
guided and independent learning at your own pace and time. You will be enabled to
process the contents of the learning resource while being an active learner.

4
This module has the following parts and corresponding icons:

This will give you an idea of the skills or

What I Need to Know competencies you are expected to learn in
the module.
This part includes an activity that aims to
What I Know check what you already know about the
lesson to take. If you get all the answers
correct (100%), you may decide to skip this
module.
This is a brief drill or review to help you link
What’s In the current lesson with the previous one.
In this portion, the new lesson will be
What’s New introduced to you in various ways such as a
story, a song, a poem, a problem opener, an
activity or a situation.
This section provides a brief discussion of the
What is It lesson. This aims to help you discover and
understand new concepts and skills.
This comprises activities for independent
What’s More practice to solidify your understanding and
skills of the topic. You may check the
answers to the exercises using the Answer
Key at the end of the module.
This includes questions or blank
What I Have Learned sentence/paragraph to be filled in to process
what you learned from the lesson.
This section provides an activity which will
What I Can Do help you transfer your new knowledge or skill
into real life situations or concerns.
This is a task which aims to evaluate your
Assessment level of mastery in achieving the learning
competency.
In this portion, another activity will be given to
Additional Activities you to enrich your knowledge or skill of the
lesson learned. This also tends retention of
learned concepts.
This contains answers to all activities in the
Answer Key module.

At the end of this module you will also find:

References This is a list of all sources used in developing

this module.

5
The following are some reminders in using this module:
1. Use the module with care. Do not put unnecessary mark/s on any part of the
module. Use a separate sheet of paper in answering the exercises.
2. Don’t forget to answer What I Know before moving on to the other activities
included in the module.
3. Read the instruction carefully before doing each task.
4. Observe honesty and integrity in doing the tasks and checking your answers.
5. Finish the task at hand before proceeding to the next.
6. Return this module to your teacher/facilitator once you are through with it.

If you encounter any difficulty in answering the tasks in this module, do not hesitate to
consult your teacher or facilitator. Always bear in mind that you are not alone.

We hope that through this material, you will experience meaningful learning and gain
deep understanding of the relevant competencies. You can do it!

6
 What I Need to Know

This module was designed and written with you in mind. It is here to help you master
the JOURNAL REVIEW. The scope of this module permits it to be used in many
different learning situations. The language used recognizes the diverse vocabulary
level of students. The lessons are arranged to follow the standard sequence of the
course. But the order in which you read them can be changed to correspond with the
textbook you are now using.

After going through this module, you are expected to:

• give a definition for research critique;
• state the purpose and provide a rationale for completing a research critique
and
• list the necessary elements/questions in a research critique.

7
 What I Know

MULTIPLE CHOICE: Choose the letter of the best answer. Write the chosen letter
on a separate sheet of paper.

1. The following are recommended to include in writing your book review

introduction EXCEPT___.
a. book title, theme and author's name
b. new material to read
c. thesis of the book
d. link of the title to the subject matter

2. Good scientific writing can be described as ______ , _____, and _____.

a. clear, concise, and convoluted
b. concise, dense, and compelling
c. clear, concise, and flowery
d. clear, concise, and compelling

3. Which of the following is not a way to achieve a compelling narrative in your

writing?
a. Use passive voice to build an objective stance
b. Write and re-write
c. Use logical and evidence-based reasoning
d. Start and end strong in your writing

4. Which of the following is generally a method to determine whether or not to

include certain details into your research article?
a. Results should be both written and portrayed in either a figure or table.
b. The article should review the history of the entire field.
c. The paper should provide as much detail as possible that the journal allows
and present critical information, such as key findings and important
implications multiple times
d. The paper should provide just enough detail so that an independent
researcher can replicate your research.

5. Which of the following sections is not a basic section of a quantitative research

paper?
a. Results c. Methods
b. References d. Criticisms

8
6. Which of the following sentences anthropomorphizes the word “research”?
a. The researchers found significant findings through a series of experiments
using animals.
b. The research revealed a significant finding that the scientists were looking
for.
c. The research was conducted by graduate students at a large public
university.
d. Researchers conducted research with a survey design.

7. A systematic literature review is___.

a. one which starts in your own library, then goes to on-line databases and,
finally, to the internet
b. a replicable, scientific, and transparent process
c. one which gives equal attention to the principal contributors to the area
d. a responsible, professional process of time-management for research

8. What is self-plagiarism?
a. When a person lifts material that they have previously written and pass it
off as their own work
b. Taking about yourself too much
c. Using somebody else's work and passing it off as your own
d. An epistemological stance

9. What is a narrative literature review?

a. An historically-based review, starting with the earliest contributions to the
field
b. A review based exclusively on stories about companies, in book and
case-study form
c. A paraphrase style of reviewing which does not require referencing
d. An initial impression of the topic which you will understand more fully as
you conduct your research

10. An analysis of a research undertaking that focuses on its strengths and

limitations.
a. Research critique c. research design
b. research paper d. action research

9
 Lesson

1 JOURNAL REVIEW

What’s In

THE CRITIQUE OR CRITIQUING PROCESS

Reviewing and Critiquing Research

What is a research critique?

A research critique is an analysis of a research undertaking that focuses on its

strengths and limitations.

Critiquing is a systematic process for evaluating research studies and the results
reported.

Purpose of A Research Critique

The purpose of a research critique is to determine whether the findings are usable for
you (brink & wood, 2001, p.57)

Why do a research critique?

• Not all published research is scientifically sound.

• Results may have little support for their validity and may reflect a bias.

Four key aspects of critique

• Understanding the purpose and problem, while determining if the design and
methodology are consistent with the purpose.
• Determining if the methodology is properly applied.
• Assessing if outcomes and conclusions are believable and supported by
findings.
• Reflecting on overall quality, strengths, and limitations.
Research critique process

1. Read the research article or report in it’s entirely to get a sense of the study
and its contribution to knowledge development.
2. Read the article or report again, paying attention to the questions appropriate
to each stage of the critiquing process.

10
Essential elements in the research critique process

“The necessary elements in a research critique can be compiled in a series of

questions for the process of critiquing research” (Boswell & Cannon, 2009,p. 308).

So your assignment is to critique a journal article. This handout will give you a few
guidelines to follow as you go. But wait, what kind of a journal article is it: an
empirical/research article, or a review of literature? Some of the guidelines offered
here will apply to critiques of all kinds of articles, but each type of article may provoke
questions that are especially pertinent to that type and no other. Read on.

First of all, for any type of journal article your critique should include some basic
information:

1. Name(s) of the author(s)

2. Title of article
3. Title of journal, volume number, date, month and page numbers
4. Statement of the problem or issue discussed
5. The author’s purpose, approach or methods, hypothesis, and major conclusions.

The bulk of your critique, however, should consist of your qualified opinion of the
article. Read the article you are to critique once to get an overview. Then read it again,
critically. At this point you may want to make some notes to yourself on your copy (not
the library’s copy, please).

The following are some questions you may want to address in your critique no matter
what type of article you are critiquing. (Use your discretion. These points don’t have to
be discussed in this order, and some may not be pertinent to your particular article.)

1. Is the title of the article appropriate and clear?

2. Is the abstract specific, representative of the article, and in the correct form?
3. Is the purpose of the article made clear in the introduction?
4. Do you find errors of fact and interpretation? (This is a good one! You won’t believe
how often authors misinterpret or misrepresent the work of others. You can check on
this by looking up for yourself the references the author cites.)
5. Is all of the discussion relevant?
6. Has the author cited the pertinent, and only the pertinent, literature? If the author
has included inconsequential references, or references that are not pertinent, suggest
deleting them.
7. Have any ideas been overemphasized or underemphasized? Suggest specific
revisions.
8. Should some sections of the manuscript be expanded, condensed or omitted?
9. Are the author’s statements clear? Challenge ambiguous statements. Suggest by
examples how clarity can be achieved, but do not merely substitute your style for the
author’s.
10. What underlying assumptions does the author have?
11. Has the author been objective in his or her discussion of the topic?

In addition, here are some questions that are more specific to empirical/research
articles. (Again, use your discretion.)

1. Is the objective of the experiment or of the observations important for the field?
2. Are the experimental methods described adequately?
3. Are the study design and methods appropriate for the purposes of the study?

11
4. Have the procedures been presented in enough detail to enable a reader to
duplicate them?
(Another good one! You’d be surprised at the respectable researchers who cut corners
in their writing on this point.)

How To Critique A Journal Article Sponsored by The Center for Teaching and Learning
at UIS (Last Edited 4/9/2009 Page 2 of 2 5). Scan and spot-check calculations.

Are the statistical methods appropriate?

Do you find any content repeated or duplicated?
A common fault is repetition in the text of data in tables or figures.
Suggest that tabular data be interpreted of summarized, nor merely repeated, in the
text. A word about your style: let your presentation be well reasoned and objective. If
you passionately disagree (or agree) with the author, let your passion inspire you to
new heights of thorough research and reasoned argument.

Notes to the Teacher

This contains helpful tips or strategies that will help you in guiding the
learners.

12
What’s New

13
 What is It
CRITIQUING RESEARCH ARTICLES
A critique is a systematic way of objectively reviewing a piece of research to highlight
both its strengths and weaknesses, and its applicability to practice. Professionals often
need to be able to identify best current practice, and the ability to evaluate and use
published research is critical in achieving this. As such, it is a skill required in many
position descriptions. This guide suggests a detailed critique, such as required in the
health sciences, and possibly other disciplinary areas. You are advised to check with
your tutors and assignment guidelines as to what your particular requirements are.

PUBLISHED RESEARCH
It is useful to have some background knowledge of the publishing process in order to
understand published research better. Researchers try to get their research published
as a final step in the research process. They aim for publication in professional journals
to ensure the most appropriate readership and potential for contribution to professional
practice.

THE PUBLICATION PROCESS

Peer- reviewed journals are considered the best for publication because the content is
scrutinized by peers for quality. Briefly, the process involves:

1. Submission of the manuscript to the journal.

2. The manuscript is reviewed by two experts in the field (without knowing the
author(s)’ identity). The reviewers each write a report referring to the article’s
relevancy, the rigour of the research and its potential contribution to the
profession. The reviewers independently make recommendation as to whether
it should be published or requires further work.
3. An editorial board then accepts or rejects the paper based on the reviewer’s
report
4. Authors may decide to adjust their article based on the reviewers’ report and
then resubmit to the same or a different journal for further consideration for
publishing. The paper will go through the same reviewing process.

CHOSSING AN ARTICLE TO REVIEW

Consider the following:

• Who is the target audience?

• Does it favor a particular research approach ( paradigm )
• Is there an editorial board? What are their classifications?
• Is the peer-review process clearly explained?
• When was the article published?
• Is the article a seminal piece of research i.e. often cited by others?

14
NOTE: not all publication follows such rigorous procedures before publishing, and not
all work that is published in truthful or trustworthy.

SOME USEFUL RESEARCH TERMINOLOGY

Research terminology can be off-putting to those not accustomed to it. Below are some
terms that are useful to understand.

• Ethics (ethical) clearance: when proposed research involves humans and/or

animals, details of the research and how it will be conducted must be approved
by an ethics approval committee. This process aims to protect the rights of
human and animals so that no harm occurs to either as a result of the research.
• Identifying a “gap”: identifying a topic on which little or no research has been
published, in order to come up with a useful, original study.
• Reliability: n instrument’s ability to consistently and accurately measure the
concept under study
• Representativeness ( of a sample) : the degree to which a sample reflects
the population from which it was drawn
• Rigor: trustworthiness of documentation, procedure and ethics to establish
credibility and transferability.
• Theoretical framework: theories which provide boundaries for the study and
guide all stages.
• Validity: the ability of an instrument to measure what is supposed to measure.

WRITING THE CRITIQUE

Critical reviews for research are systematic. They begin at the title, and review each
section until the reference list at the end. It is useful to ask yourself questions about
the purpose of each components of the article, whether it achieves that purpose.

THE TITLE

Does the title clearly indicate what the research is about, without being extremely long
or short to be informative? Are the variables or theoretical issues stated and any
relationships between them?

THE AUTHOR(S)

What are the author’s professional and academic qualifications? Have they published
previously on a similar topic?

KEYWORDS

Some journals require keywords to help to identify main areas of focus. Are these
informative and relevant?

THE ABSTRACT

The purpose of an abstract is to provide a succinct summary of the contents of the

article and is usually 5-0250 words in length, depending on journal requirements. It
should contain enough information to enable a reader to decide whether the article is
of interest to them or not, so must be informative.

15
Ask yourself:

• Does it explain the purpose of the paper?

• Does it explain why the research was carried out?
• What are accomplished?
• What were the main findings?
• What is the significance of the research?
• What conclusions were reached?

THE INTRODUCTION

The introduction should orientate the reader to the study, by:

• Giving a firm sense of what was done in the study

• Introducing the question/problem
• Developing the background of the study
• Stating the purpose and rationale of the research

Ask yourself:

• Is the research question/problem researchable?

• Is the problem important enough to justify the research?
• Is the background of the research relevant to the research question?

THE LITERATURE REVIEW

The literature review should give an overview of the available literature which frames
or surrounds the problem being researched. It should look at the similarities and
differences between the literature, as well as the strengths and limitations. It should
illustrate how the current study fits into the existing framework of research or how it fills
a gap in the literature.

Ask yourself:

• Is the literature review broad, yet focused on the issue?

• Is there historical as well as contemporary material to put the area of study into
a context?
• Is there convincing evidence to support assertion?
• Does it fairly represent opposing views?
• Does the literature review use a theoretical framework?
• Does it reveal gaps in the knowledge which this research will fill?

THE AIM

The aim must be clearly stated, focused on one main idea and should convey the main
purpose of the study

Ask yourself: do you have a clear idea of what the study tried to achieve?

16
THE RESEARCH DESIGN
This section should clearly state what the researcher did and how it was done, allowing
the reader to evaluate the methods used the consistency, the reliability of the study,
its validity and whether it could be replicated. As a minimum, there should be a brief
synopsis of the research approach taken. Once the research method is established,
the reader can critique the research design for methodological rigour.
The method section of the research design usually has subsection which describes
the participants, the materials and the procedure. The detail should be sufficient to
clearly explain the research design, without excessive detail, so that no questions
remain.
• Participants or sample: The number of participants, their characteristic and
selection process used should be described. Do the participants represent the
research well? If any participants did not complete the study, this should be
explained. Details such a s payments made to participants and details of major
demographic information should be made evident for example, geographical
location, gender, age, affiliation with any institutions etc.
• Ethics clearance: the process of obtaining ethics clearance and how ethical
standards were maintained should be made clear.
• Use of apparatus: if any apparatus were used it should be briefly identified and
described, and its function in the research explained. If any apparatus were
obtained or donated by a commercial source, this must be stated.
• Procedure: each step in the research procedure should be explained. This
includes any instructions to the participants, the formation of groups, and any
experimental manipulations. Any control features in the research design should
be stated.

Ask yourself:
• Is there a clear rationale for the chosen research approach, methods and/or
instruments used?
• Is the research method appropriate for the research question?
• Was the collection of data appropriate for the research question?
• Is there enough information concerning the participants?
• What were the ethical considerations for the research and participants?
• Were the methods and/or instruments described in enough detail?
• Were any ambiguous terms used?
• Is the method deemed reliable and valid?
• Are any limitations of the study discussed?

DATA ANALYSIS (also known as the RESULTS AND FINDINGS section)

This section should contain a summary of the data collected and the main
results and findings, in enough detail so that the reader can understand how the
conclusions that are drawn later in the article have been reached. In qualitative
research, illustrative samples of data are frequently used. In quantitative data,
individual scores or raw data are not discussed. All relevant data, including that which
runs counter to the hypothesis, should be discussed.

17
 Tables are figures should be used for clear representation of data. (in the
discussion section, this data should be discussed in text, not as data.) the reader
should be made clear as to what the data provided means and why it is important.
Ask yourself:
• Were the steps involved in the data analysis explained and strategies justified?
• Was the data analysis rigorous enough to substantiate the claims?
• Were all data taken into account? If not, why not?
• Are the presented results relevant to the research question?
• Do the tables and graphs make the data analysis clearer?

THE DISCUSSION
In this section, the implications of the research results are evaluated and interpreted
in relation to the research question. This is where the findings and the selected
theoretical framework come together. The discussion should contain a clear statement
of support or otherwise of the original hypothesis or research question. The result of
this study and those of other studies should be discussed, and any suggestions for
improvements or further research are study and those of other studies should be
discussed, and any suggestions for improvements or further research are made here.

There should be no repetition of points already made in other sections.

Ask yourself:
• Have the results been interpreted in relation to the research question and
aims?
• Have the results been discussed with reference to the research question,
hypothesis and theoretical or conceptual frameworks?
• Have conclusions and/ or recommendations been appropriately drawn from
the data analysis?
• Did the researcher highlight the most important results?
• Have the results been used to support or refute the results of other studies?
• How relevant and useful are the result to practice?

CONCLUSION
This section should summarise the main points, and indicate the usefulness of
the research. It should not include any new information. Areas for future research may
be suggested.
Ask yourself:
• Were the main points drawn out?
• Were fresh insights or a new perspective on the topic demonstrated?
• Have any recommendations been made based on the research?
• Were there any suggestions for future research?

REFERENCE LIST OR BIBLIOGRAPHY

This should contain a list of all sources referred to in the article (in the case of a
reference list) or all sources actually accessed in preparation for the article (in the case
of bibliography).

18
Ask yourself:
• Are all sources cited clearly and with full bibliographic details provided?
• Has a wide range of works in the field been referred to?
• Does the list contain both seminal (classical) and more contemporary
literature?

REFERENCES SAMPLE:
Ryan, F, Couhlan, M & Cronin, P 2007, Step-step guide to critiquing research. Part 2:
qualitative research, British Journal of Nursing, vol 16, no 12 pp. 738-743.
Stockhausen L & Conrick, M 2002, Making sense of research: a guide for critiquing a
paper, Comtemporary Nurse vol 14 no 1 pp 38-45

What’s More

Answer the following questions.

1. What are the 4 aspects of critique?

2. Give at least 2 purpose of a research critique.

3. What is a research critique?

19
 What I Have Learned

Directions:
Identify the given characteristics in each of the item below. Refer your answer
from the choices in the box by writing only the letter of the correct answer on a
separate sheet of paper.

a. Ethical clearance b. Validity c. Reliability d. Data analysis

e. Reference or bibliography f. Conclusion g. Discussion h. Introduction

i. Theoretical framework j. Research design

1. Section that summarize the main points and indicate the usefulness of the
research.
2. Contain list of all sources referred to in the article or all sources actually
accessed in preparation of the article.
3. The ability of an instrument to measure what is supposed to measure.
4. The implications of the research results are evaluated and interpreted I relation
to the research questions.
5. When proposed research involves humans and animals, details of research
and how it will be conducted must be approved by an ethics approval
committee.
6. Section should clearly state what the researcher did and how it was done
allowing the reader to evaluate the methods used the consistency, the
reliability, the study its validity and whether it could be replicated.
7. Contain a summary of data collected and the main results and findings, in
enough detail so that the reader can understand how the conclusions that are
drawn later in the article have been reached.
8. Should orientate the reader to the study by giving a firm sense of what was
done in the study and introducing the question/problem.
9. Theories which provide boundaries for the study guide all stages.
10. Ability to measure the concept consistently and accurately under study.

20
 What I Can Do

Directions: Make your own article and provide the following statements to
discuss.
Critique/ing Worksheet

Topic/questions Discussion

Title of the study

Author credentials

In your own words state the purpose of the

study

Identify the literature written about the

problem

State the research question or hypothesis

List the tools with their reliability and

validity information

Assessment

Directions: Choose the letter of the best answer. Write the chosen letter on a
separate sheet of paper.
1. Which steps of the critique process focus on the identification of the strengths
and weaknesses of the study?
a. Analysis and comparison c. comparison and comprehension
b. Analysis and comprehension d. conceptual clustering and evaluation
2. Which of the following is a good research question?
a. To produce a report on student job searching behaviors
b. To identify the relationship between self-efficacy and student job searching
behavior
c. Students with higher levels of self-efficacy will demonstrate more active job
searching behavior
d. Do students with high levels of self-efficacy demonstrate more active job
searching behaviors?

21
3. Ethical problems can arise when researching the internet because.
a. Everyone has access to digital media
b. Respondents may fake their identities
c. Researchers may fake their identities
d. Internet: research has to be covert
4. A review of the related literature prior to formulating research questions allows
the researcher to.
a. Provide an up-to-date understanding of the subject, its significance, and
structure
b. Guide the development of research questions
c. Present the kinds of research questions
d. All of the above
5. Which of the following is true about reference section?
a. The author selects only the key references that he or she cites in the rest
of the report and puts them in the references section.
b. The references section does not have strict formatting guidelines in
psychology
c. The references section lists all the citation in the research report
d. The APA has three different ways to format a references section that
authors are allowed to choose from
6. Due to its technicality, which of the following is the most difficult section to
write?
a. Materials b. Procedure c. Introduction d. Results
7. Which of the following is the main goal of the methods section of a research
report?
a. Meticulously articulate how you analyzed the data
b. Provide enough detail to allow an independent researcher to replicate your
study
c. Outline the demographic information of your participants so that reviewers
can access the generalizability of your research
d. Discuss the procedure you used so that readers can decide for themselves
if your protocol is biased
8. What is the purpose of the abstract?
a. Provide a clear and depth discussion of the implications of the research
b. Discuss the motivation for the research but provide no information about
the findings
c. Provide a clear but succinct summary of the research
d. Discuss why the authors think the findings are important, to convince the
readers to read the article
9. Which of the following pieces of information is typically not on the tittle page of
a manuscript?
a. Authors name c. authors affiliation
b. Keywords d. research acknowledgements
10. Which of the following is not a goal of introduction?
a. Articulate the purpose of your research
b. Convince the readers to be interested in your research
c. Provide a detailed analysis of the findings and implications of past research
and the history of the field
d. Situate your research in the context of current trends and past literature
22
 Answer Key

What I Know 1D 2D 3A 4D 5D 6A 7A 8A 9D 10D

What I Have Learned 1F 2E 3B 4G 5A 6J 7D 8H 9I 10C

What I Can Do (Answer may vary)

Assessment 1A 2D 3A 4D 5C 6C 7B 8B 9A 10C

References

https://www.uis.edu/ctl/wp-
content/uploads/sites/76/2013/03/Howtocritiqueajournalarticle.pdf

https://global.oup.com/uk/orc/sociology/brymansrm5e/student/mcqs/ch05/

https://samples.jbpub.com/9780763794675/Critique_Process.pdf

Boswell, C., & Cannon, S. (2009). Critique process. In C. Boswell & S. Cannon (Eds.),

Introduction to nursing research: Incorporating evidencebased practice (pp. 291-316).

Retrieved from

http://samples.jbpub.com/ 9780763794675/Critique_Process.pdf • Brink, P. J., & Wood,

M. J. (2001). Basic steps in planning nursing research from question to proposal (5th
ed.). Boston, MA: Jones and Bartlett.

Holder, B. (2003). The research critique. Available at

http://virtual.clemson.edu/group/odce/summer1_03/nursT807/pdf

23
For inquiries or feedback, please write or call:

Department of Education- Carcar City Division (Learning Resources

Management Section)
P. Nellas St., Poblacion III, Carcar City, Cebu
Philippines 6019
Tel No. 487-8495
Email Address: carcarcitydivision@yahoo.com

24