Assignment

Week 6 | The Nature of Inquiry

Assignment Synthesis Paper: Doctoral Identity

 

View Rubric

Due Date: Feb 21, 2018 23:59:59       Max Points: 200

Details:

In Topic 2, you were asked to read three articles on the topic of doctoral identity and to complete an annotated bibliography to demonstrate their understanding of the material. In Topic 3, you were asked to take this process a step further and identify themes found in the three articles and to complete a synthesis worksheet where the themes were supported by evidence from each article. In this assignment, you will build on your worksheet efforts and write a paper about the three themes. The narrative will not only present the evidence from the articles to support the identified themes, but also will provide an analysis for each theme by synthesizing the information collected.

General Requirements:

  • Locate the Synthesis Worksheet you completed in Topic 3.
  • Locate and download “Synthesis Paper Template” from the Course Materials for this topic.
  • Review the articles by Baker & Pifer (2011), Gardner (2009), and Smith & Hatmaker (2014) located in the Course Materials for this topic.
  • This assignment uses a rubric. Review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
  • Doctoral learners are required to use APA style for their writing assignments. Review the GCU APA Style Guide for Writing located in the Student Success Center.
  • You are required to submit this assignment to Turnitin. Refer to the directions in the Student Success Center.

Directions:

Using the Synthesis Worksheet you completed in Topic 3 and considering the themes you developed and the feedback provided by your instructor, write a paper (1,000-1,250 words) that synthesizes the three articles. Your paper should include the following:

  1. An introduction that introduces and provides context for the topic. This includes giving a brief description of each article and its purpose, identifying the three themes that emerged from your reading, describing how they will be discussed in the paper, and presenting a clear thesis statement.
  2. Support for your identified themes with evidence from each article. Provide analysis of these findings to strengthen your narrative.
  3. A discussion of the conclusions that can be drawn when the articles are taken together as a single entity. What is the overall message of the group of articles?

RES-811-RS-SynthesisPaperTemplate.dot

 

Top of Form

Please Note: Assignment will not be submitted to the faculty member until the “Submit” button under “Final Submission” is clicked.

New Attempt Graded Document

Bottom of Form

Title Attached Documents Citation Report Similarity Index Final Submission
Synthesis Paper
Feb 21, 2018 22:23:14		 SYNTHESIS PAPER RES-811.docx View Report 17% Submitted
Feb 21, 2018 23:02:28

Result

Instructor’s Comment Instructor’s Document Points
Cynthia, Thank you for your submission. Please remember you are going to use my feedback on this assignment to revise this paper towards your Module 7 paper. For the Module 7 paper, you will have add to the themes with the inclusion of two additional resources from the list that has been provided within the class and I have attached to your feedback as well.As a reminder, the allowable similarity for the College of Doctoral Studies is 15% or less. Please ensure that you have met this requirement on your Mod 7 paper. God bless, Dr. Davis RES-811-RS-SynthesisResources.docx

Cynthia Cureton.docx

RES-811-RS-EnhancedSynthesisPaperTemplate.docx

 165.80/200 (82.9%)    View Rubrics

View All Attempts

Top of Form

Apply Rubrics

Synthesis Paper: Doctoral Identity

  1
Unsatisfactory
0.00% 		2
Less than Satisfactory
73.00% 		3
Satisfactory
82.00% 		4
Good
91.00% 		5
Excellent
100.00% 		Points
Earned
100.0 %Criteria  
10.0 % Introduction An introduction is either missing or not evident to the reader. An introduction is present, but incomplete or illogical. An introduction is presented, but does not contextualize the topic well. An introduction is present and adequately contextualizes the topic. An introduction is thoroughly presented and vividly contextualizes the topic. 16.40/20
20.0 % Support of Common Themes Support of common themes is either missing or not evident to the reader. Support of common themes is present, but inaccurate or illogical. Support of common themes is presented, but is cursory and lacking in depth. Support of common themes is present and thorough. Support of common themes is thoroughly presented with rich detail. 36.40/40
20.0 % Discussion of Conclusions A discussion of the conclusions is not presented. A discussion of the conclusions is presented, but inaccurate or illogical. A discussion of the conclusions is presented, but it does not include an overall summary of themes found in the articles or does not connect well to the thesis statement. A discussion of the conclusions is presented and includes an overall summary of themes found in the articles and reasonably connects to the thesis statement. A discussion of the conclusions is thoroughly presented including an overall summary of themes found in the articles and is strongly connected to the thesis statement. 32.80/40
20.0 % Integration of Instructor Feedback Integration of instructor feedback is either missing or not evident to the reader. Integration of instructor feedback is vaguely attempted, but does not address the majority of instructor comments and suggestions. Integration of instructor feedback is evident though it appears as a disjointed, cursory addition. Most of the instructor comments and suggestions are addressed. Integration of instructor feedback is evident and relatively well incorporated into the natural flow of the paper. All instructor comments and suggestions are addressed. Integration of instructor feedback is evident and meaningful. It is seamlessly incorporated into the flow of the paper. All instructor comments and suggestions are addressed. 32.80/40
10.0 % Synthesis and Argument No synthesis of source information is evident. Statement of purpose is not followed to a justifiable conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses non-credible sources. Synthesis of source information is attempted, but is not successful. Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility. Synthesis of source information is present, but pedantic. Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis. Synthesis of source information is present and meaningful. Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative. Synthesis of source information is present and scholarly. Argument is clear and convincing, presenting a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative. 14.60/20
10.0 % Thesis Development and Purpose Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim. Thesis and/or main claim are insufficiently developed and/or vague; purpose is not clear. Thesis and/or main claim are apparent and appropriate to purpose. Thesis and/or main claim are clear and forecast the development of the paper. They are descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose. Thesis and/or main claim are clear and comprehensive; the essence of the paper is contained within the thesis. 16.40/20
5.0 % Mechanics of Writing Mechanical errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are used. Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, and/or word choice are present. Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used. Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used. Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English. 8.20/10
5.0 % APA Format Required format is rarely followed correctly. No reference page is included. No in-text citations are used. Required format elements are missing or incorrect. A lack of control with formatting is apparent. Reference page is present. However, in-text citations are inconsistently used. Required format is generally correct. However, errors are present (e.g. font, cover page, margins, and in-text citations). Reference page is included and lists sources used in the paper. Sources are appropriately documented though some errors are present. Required format is used, but minor errors are present (e.g. headings and direct quotes). Reference page is present and includes all cited sources. Documentation is appropriate and citation style is usually correct. The document is correctly formatted. In-text citations and a reference page are complete and correct. The documentation of cited sources is free of error. 8.20/10
100 % Total Weightage 165.80/200

 

Bottom of Form

 

 

You Need a Professional Writer To Work On Your Paper?