Use the “Literature Evaluation Table” to complete this assignment.

/in /by

Use the “Literature Evaluation Table” to complete this assignment.

The first step of the evidence-based practice process is to evaluate a nursing practice environment to identify a nursing problem in the clinical area. When a nursing problem is discovered, the nurse researcher develops a clinical guiding question to address that nursing practice problem.

For this assignment, you will create a clinical guiding question know as a PICOT question. The PICOT question must be relevant to a nursing practice problem. To support your PICOT question, identify six supporting peer-revised research articles, as indicated below. The PICOT question and six peer-reviewed research articles you choose will be utilized for subsequent assignments.

Use the “Literature Evaluation Table” to complete this assignment.

Select a nursing practice problem of interest to use as the focus of your research. Start with the patient population and identify a clinical problem or issue that arises from the patient population. In 200–250 words, provide a summary of the clinical issue.

Following the PICOT format, write a PICOT question in your selected nursing practice problem area of interest. The PICOT question should be applicable to your proposed capstone project (the project students must complete during their final course in the RN-BSN program of study).

The PICOT question will provide a framework for your capstone project.

Conduct a literature search to locate six research articles focused on your selected nursing practice problem of interest. This literature search should include three quantitative and three qualitative peer-reviewed research articles to support your nursing practice problem.

Note: To assist in your search, remove the words qualitative and quantitative and include words that narrow or broaden your main topic. For example: Search for diabetes and pediatric and dialysis. To determine what research design was used in the articles the search produced, review the abstract and the methods section of the article. The author will provide a description of data collection using qualitative or quantitative methods. Systematic Reviews, Literature Reviews, and Metanalysis articles are good resources and provide a strong level of evidence but are not considered primary research articles. Therefore, they should not be included in this assignment.

While APA style is not required for the body of this assignment, solid academic writing is expected, and documentation of sources should be presented using APA formatting guidelines, which can be found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

The post Use the “Literature Evaluation Table” to complete this assignment. appeared first on graduatepaperhelp.

 

"Looking for a Similar Assignment? Get Expert Help at an Amazing Discount!"

SCM

/in /by

SCM

Report Issue
https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1szJ5SwS8xbt76kP_lkH3lR2h5AaAHBOS1MFmPtXzQXU/edit?usp=sharing

The post SCM appeared first on graduatepaperhelp.

 

"Looking for a Similar Assignment? Get Expert Help at an Amazing Discount!"

Write Section 3 of the DAA. Specify a research question for the overall regression model.

/in /by

Write Section 3 of the DAA. Specify a research question for the overall regression model.

Step 1. Write Section 1 of the DAA. Provide a context of the u07a1data.sav data set. Specifically, imagine that you are a health researcher studying how well a measure of anxiety ( X1) and weight ( X2) predict systolic blood pressure ( Y) . In Section 1 of the DAA, articulate your predictor variables, the outcome variable, and the scales of measurement for each variable. Specify the sample size of the data set.

Step 2. Write Section 2 of the DAA. Test the four assumptions of multiple regression. Begin with SPSS output of the three histograms on X1, X 2, and Y and provide visual interpretations of normality. Next, paste the SPSS output of the scatter plot matrix and interpret it in terms of linearity and bivariate outliers. Next, paste SPSS output of the zero-order correlations (Pearson r) and interpret it to check the multicollinearity assumption. Note: to test this assumption in SPSS, use Analyze… Correlate… Bivariate Correlations to generate a two-tailed test; do not use the default one-tailed test output from the Linear Regression procedure. Finally, paste the SPSS plot of standardized residuals (ZPRED = x-axis; ZRESID = y-axis) and interpret it to check the homoscedasticity assumption.

Step 3. Write Section 3 of the DAA. Specify a research question for the overall regression model. Articulate a null hypothesis and alternative hypothesis for the overall regression model. Specify a research question for each predictor. Articulate the null hypothesis and alternative hypothesis for each predictor. Specify the alpha level.

Step 4. Write Section 4 of the DAA. Begin with a brief statement reviewing assumptions. Next, paste the SPSS output for the Model Summary. Report R and R2; interpret R2 effect size. Next, paste the SPSS ANOVA output. Report the F test for R and interpret it against the null hypothesis. Next, paste the SPSS Coefficients output. For each predictor, report the b coefficient, the t test results, including interpretation against the null hypothesis, the semipartial squared correlation effect size, and the interpretation of effect size. In your Interpretation section, following Table 11.1 on page 460 of your Warner text, generate a table of Results for the u07a1data.sav file that summarizes:

The means and standard deviations of each variable in the regression equation.

The zero-order (Pearson r) correlations among variables.

The y-intercept.

The b coefficients of each predictor with notation of calculated p-values for rejecting the null hypothesis.

The β coefficients of each predictor.

The squared semipartial correlations of each predictor.

The values of R, R2, and adjusted R2 with notation of p-values for rejecting the null hypothesis.

Step 5. Write Section 5 of the DAA. Discuss your conclusions of the multiple regression as it relates to your stated research questions for the overall regression model and the individual predictors. Conclude with an analysis of the strengths and limitations of multiple regression.

The post Write Section 3 of the DAA. Specify a research question for the overall regression model. appeared first on graduatepaperhelp.

 

"Looking for a Similar Assignment? Get Expert Help at an Amazing Discount!"

Provide suggestions about how each side could have responded better and adapted to the other side in a more functional way.

/in /by

Provide suggestions about how each side could have responded better and adapted to the other side in a more functional way.

Conflict Crosses the Border: Negotiations between Mexicans and Americans

Two companies were vying for a lucrative contract from the Mexican government. Both firms—one from the U.S. and one from Sweden—had already jumped several hurdles to get the business. Each was invited to Mexico City to present proposals to ministry officials to start the process of negotiating the terms of the proposed deal.

The Americans put a lot of effort into producing an impressive high-tech and hard-hitting presentation, working hard to assemble a team of senior technical experts, lawyers, and interpreters from the New York office. Their bottom line was clear: “We can give you the most technically advanced equipment at a price the others can’t match.” The team met several times with senior management before the presentation to discuss possible concessions, and they were given latitude to make decisions on the spot if need be. The team flew to Mexico City for a week and stayed at one of the top hotels in the city.

Arrangements for a fancy hotel conference room were made so that they could make the best possible presentation to the ministry officials. In a demonstration of due diligence and to impress their potential customer, they brought all the necessary equipment with them and had mailed outlines of the presentation to officials two weeks ahead of time. They also proposed a detailed schedule and other arrangements in a memo to the officials along with the presentation. The Mexican officials dutifully thanked the Americans for their information and said they looked forward to meeting with them and finding out more about their proposal and their firm. They provided information about the history of their agency and the top members of the current ministry.

The Americans arrived early the day before the meeting to avoid problems with their flight. And all team members met at the conference room very early to set it up and make sure all was a go for the meeting later that day. Finally, at the agreed time, the Americans were all ready to present and impress. Unfortunately, the Mexican ministry officials were not—in fact, no one from the ministry was there yet! Instead, various ministry officials arrived gradually over the next hour. They offered no apologies to the perplexed Americans, but instead began to chat amiably about a variety of non-contract-related matters. The U.S. team leader was feeling pressure from both thesituation and his team members—should he act leaderly and get the meeting organized, or should he let the Mexican officials provide the right signal? Finally, after about an hour of glancing at his watch and scanning nervously, the team leader assertively suggested that the meeting should start. The Mexicans seemed surprised but politely agreed and took their seats that were set up ahead of time by the Americans.

The presentation began with informal introductions of the team members by the presenter. The presentation itself was flawlessly delivered, thanks to endless practice. About 20 minutes into the presentation, the minister himself, with an entourage of other officials, walked in. When he figured out what was going on, his demeanor turned unpleasant. Angrily, he asked the Americans to start the presentation over. They complied and started again. Once more, the presentation was going for about 10 minutes, and then an aide arrived with a message for the minister that was delivered in hushed tones. Not wanting to anger him again, the U.S. presenter stopped to wait until themessage was delivered. But the minister signaled for him to continue, so he did. A few minutes later, a number of audience members were talking among themselves. By this time, the Americans were frustrated, but they slogged on and finished. At the end, when the audience was invited to ask questions, the minister’s only comment was to wonder why the Americans had focused so much on the technical details—why had they told the Mexicans so little about their firm’s history?

Later during lunch, the Americans felt that they had to be very forceful about keeping the conversation focused on the topic at hand—the contract and any outstanding issues or problems they could address. Most of theconversation was again seemingly casual, having little or nothing to do with the business at hand—not unlike what happened earlier during the presentation. The Americans were surprised by the many questions about their individual backgrounds and personal experience—including their qualifications. The minister breezed in during the lunch, had a brief but casual conversation with the U.S. team leader, and then left, not to return.

Over the next several days of their time in Mexico City, the Americans repeatedly contacted the Mexican officials for follow-up. Were there additional questions about the specs? How about the technical features of their implementation? What were the initial reactions? Was more information needed? They reminded ministry officials of the schedule they had shared ahead of time and the fact that they needed to return to New York soon. In short, they wished to start the negotiation process. The Mexican response was the same to all these forays throughout the rest of the week: “We need time to examine your proposal among ourselves here first.” The Americans got more and more angry; at the end of the week, this turned to plain frustration. After all, the ministry officials had the proposal for several weeks before the meeting and had multiple opportunities for elaboration of the specs and other elements. The team left Mexico empty-handed. Later they found that the contract was awarded to the Swedish firm.

Assignment Questions

  1. Summarize how the reactions of each side may have been influenced by cultural differences, including the culture issues at work here and the typical Mexican and U.S. approaches to this issue. Put differently, what is your diagnosis of the problems here and the reasons for the breakdown in the process?
  2. Provide suggestions about how each side could have responded better and adapted to the other side in a more functional way.
  3. How could each side have been better prepared for the negotiation?
  4. Given the problems that emerged, what could the parties have done to keep them to a minimum or reduce their impact so that progress could be made? Could the Americans have done anything to salvage the situation—even after the minister took offense?

Write a 3-4 page paper in APA format (not including the cover page and reference page). Respond to all the question using an essay format. Note that you must conduct research and your paper must have 3 scholarly references. This means that you must locate peer-reviewed articles.

The post Provide suggestions about how each side could have responded better and adapted to the other side in a more functional way. appeared first on graduatepaperhelp.

 

"Looking for a Similar Assignment? Get Expert Help at an Amazing Discount!"

Write a 3-4 page paper in APA format (not including the cover page and reference page)

/in /by

Write a 3-4 page paper in APA format (not including the cover page and reference page)

Conflict Crosses the Border: Negotiations between Mexicans and Americans

Two companies were vying for a lucrative contract from the Mexican government. Both firms—one from the U.S. and one from Sweden—had already jumped several hurdles to get the business. Each was invited to Mexico City to present proposals to ministry officials to start the process of negotiating the terms of the proposed deal.

The Americans put a lot of effort into producing an impressive high-tech and hard-hitting presentation, working hard to assemble a team of senior technical experts, lawyers, and interpreters from the New York office. Their bottom line was clear: “We can give you the most technically advanced equipment at a price the others can’t match.” The team met several times with senior management before the presentation to discuss possible concessions, and they were given latitude to make decisions on the spot if need be. The team flew to Mexico City for a week and stayed at one of the top hotels in the city.

Arrangements for a fancy hotel conference room were made so that they could make the best possible presentation to the ministry officials. In a demonstration of due diligence and to impress their potential customer, they brought all the necessary equipment with them and had mailed outlines of the presentation to officials two weeks ahead of time. They also proposed a detailed schedule and other arrangements in a memo to the officials along with the presentation. The Mexican officials dutifully thanked the Americans for their information and said they looked forward to meeting with them and finding out more about their proposal and their firm. They provided information about the history of their agency and the top members of the current ministry.

The Americans arrived early the day before the meeting to avoid problems with their flight. And all team members met at the conference room very early to set it up and make sure all was a go for the meeting later that day. Finally, at the agreed time, the Americans were all ready to present and impress. Unfortunately, the Mexican ministry officials were not—in fact, no one from the ministry was there yet! Instead, various ministry officials arrived gradually over the next hour. They offered no apologies to the perplexed Americans, but instead began to chat amiably about a variety of non-contract-related matters. The U.S. team leader was feeling pressure from both thesituation and his team members—should he act leaderly and get the meeting organized, or should he let the Mexican officials provide the right signal? Finally, after about an hour of glancing at his watch and scanning nervously, the team leader assertively suggested that the meeting should start. The Mexicans seemed surprised but politely agreed and took their seats that were set up ahead of time by the Americans.

The presentation began with informal introductions of the team members by the presenter. The presentation itself was flawlessly delivered, thanks to endless practice. About 20 minutes into the presentation, the minister himself, with an entourage of other officials, walked in. When he figured out what was going on, his demeanor turned unpleasant. Angrily, he asked the Americans to start the presentation over. They complied and started again. Once more, the presentation was going for about 10 minutes, and then an aide arrived with a message for the minister that was delivered in hushed tones. Not wanting to anger him again, the U.S. presenter stopped to wait until themessage was delivered. But the minister signaled for him to continue, so he did. A few minutes later, a number of audience members were talking among themselves. By this time, the Americans were frustrated, but they slogged on and finished. At the end, when the audience was invited to ask questions, the minister’s only comment was to wonder why the Americans had focused so much on the technical details—why had they told the Mexicans so little about their firm’s history?

Later during lunch, the Americans felt that they had to be very forceful about keeping the conversation focused on the topic at hand—the contract and any outstanding issues or problems they could address. Most of theconversation was again seemingly casual, having little or nothing to do with the business at hand—not unlike what happened earlier during the presentation. The Americans were surprised by the many questions about their individual backgrounds and personal experience—including their qualifications. The minister breezed in during the lunch, had a brief but casual conversation with the U.S. team leader, and then left, not to return.

Over the next several days of their time in Mexico City, the Americans repeatedly contacted the Mexican officials for follow-up. Were there additional questions about the specs? How about the technical features of their implementation? What were the initial reactions? Was more information needed? They reminded ministry officials of the schedule they had shared ahead of time and the fact that they needed to return to New York soon. In short, they wished to start the negotiation process. The Mexican response was the same to all these forays throughout the rest of the week: “We need time to examine your proposal among ourselves here first.” The Americans got more and more angry; at the end of the week, this turned to plain frustration. After all, the ministry officials had the proposal for several weeks before the meeting and had multiple opportunities for elaboration of the specs and other elements. The team left Mexico empty-handed. Later they found that the contract was awarded to the Swedish firm.

Assignment Questions

  1. Summarize how the reactions of each side may have been influenced by cultural differences, including the culture issues at work here and the typical Mexican and U.S. approaches to this issue. Put differently, what is your diagnosis of the problems here and the reasons for the breakdown in the process?
  2. Provide suggestions about how each side could have responded better and adapted to the other side in a more functional way.
  3. How could each side have been better prepared for the negotiation?
  4. Given the problems that emerged, what could the parties have done to keep them to a minimum or reduce their impact so that progress could be made? Could the Americans have done anything to salvage the situation—even after the minister took offense?

Write a 3-4 page paper in APA format (not including the cover page and reference page). Respond to all the question using an essay format. Note that you must conduct research and your paper must have 3 scholarly references. This means that you must locate peer-reviewed articles.

The post Write a 3-4 page paper in APA format (not including the cover page and reference page) appeared first on graduatepaperhelp.

 

"Looking for a Similar Assignment? Get Expert Help at an Amazing Discount!"

Conflict Crosses The Border: Negotiations Between Mexicans And Americans

/in /by

Conflict Crosses The Border: Negotiations Between Mexicans And Americans

Two companies were vying for a lucrative contract from the Mexican government. Both firms—one from the U.S. and one from Sweden—had already jumped several hurdles to get the business. Each was invited to Mexico City to present proposals to ministry officials to start the process of negotiating the terms of the proposed deal.

The Americans put a lot of effort into producing an impressive high-tech and hard-hitting presentation, working hard to assemble a team of senior technical experts, lawyers, and interpreters from the New York office. Their bottom line was clear: “We can give you the most technically advanced equipment at a price the others can’t match.” The team met several times with senior management before the presentation to discuss possible concessions, and they were given latitude to make decisions on the spot if need be. The team flew to Mexico City for a week and stayed at one of the top hotels in the city.

Arrangements for a fancy hotel conference room were made so that they could make the best possible presentation to the ministry officials. In a demonstration of due diligence and to impress their potential customer, they brought all the necessary equipment with them and had mailed outlines of the presentation to officials two weeks ahead of time. They also proposed a detailed schedule and other arrangements in a memo to the officials along with the presentation. The Mexican officials dutifully thanked the Americans for their information and said they looked forward to meeting with them and finding out more about their proposal and their firm. They provided information about the history of their agency and the top members of the current ministry.

The Americans arrived early the day before the meeting to avoid problems with their flight. And all team members met at the conference room very early to set it up and make sure all was a go for the meeting later that day. Finally, at the agreed time, the Americans were all ready to present and impress. Unfortunately, the Mexican ministry officials were not—in fact, no one from the ministry was there yet! Instead, various ministry officials arrived gradually over the next hour. They offered no apologies to the perplexed Americans, but instead began to chat amiably about a variety of non-contract-related matters. The U.S. team leader was feeling pressure from both thesituation and his team members—should he act leaderly and get the meeting organized, or should he let the Mexican officials provide the right signal? Finally, after about an hour of glancing at his watch and scanning nervously, the team leader assertively suggested that the meeting should start. The Mexicans seemed surprised but politely agreed and took their seats that were set up ahead of time by the Americans.

The presentation began with informal introductions of the team members by the presenter. The presentation itself was flawlessly delivered, thanks to endless practice. About 20 minutes into the presentation, the minister himself, with an entourage of other officials, walked in. When he figured out what was going on, his demeanor turned unpleasant. Angrily, he asked the Americans to start the presentation over. They complied and started again. Once more, the presentation was going for about 10 minutes, and then an aide arrived with a message for the minister that was delivered in hushed tones. Not wanting to anger him again, the U.S. presenter stopped to wait until themessage was delivered. But the minister signaled for him to continue, so he did. A few minutes later, a number of audience members were talking among themselves. By this time, the Americans were frustrated, but they slogged on and finished. At the end, when the audience was invited to ask questions, the minister’s only comment was to wonder why the Americans had focused so much on the technical details—why had they told the Mexicans so little about their firm’s history?

Later during lunch, the Americans felt that they had to be very forceful about keeping the conversation focused on the topic at hand—the contract and any outstanding issues or problems they could address. Most of theconversation was again seemingly casual, having little or nothing to do with the business at hand—not unlike what happened earlier during the presentation. The Americans were surprised by the many questions about their individual backgrounds and personal experience—including their qualifications. The minister breezed in during the lunch, had a brief but casual conversation with the U.S. team leader, and then left, not to return.

Over the next several days of their time in Mexico City, the Americans repeatedly contacted the Mexican officials for follow-up. Were there additional questions about the specs? How about the technical features of their implementation? What were the initial reactions? Was more information needed? They reminded ministry officials of the schedule they had shared ahead of time and the fact that they needed to return to New York soon. In short, they wished to start the negotiation process. The Mexican response was the same to all these forays throughout the rest of the week: “We need time to examine your proposal among ourselves here first.” The Americans got more and more angry; at the end of the week, this turned to plain frustration. After all, the ministry officials had the proposal for several weeks before the meeting and had multiple opportunities for elaboration of the specs and other elements. The team left Mexico empty-handed. Later they found that the contract was awarded to the Swedish firm.

Assignment Questions

  1. Summarize how the reactions of each side may have been influenced by cultural differences, including the culture issues at work here and the typical Mexican and U.S. approaches to this issue. Put differently, what is your diagnosis of the problems here and the reasons for the breakdown in the process?
  2. Provide suggestions about how each side could have responded better and adapted to the other side in a more functional way.
  3. How could each side have been better prepared for the negotiation?
  4. Given the problems that emerged, what could the parties have done to keep them to a minimum or reduce their impact so that progress could be made? Could the Americans have done anything to salvage the situation—even after the minister took offense?

Write a 3-4 page paper in APA format (not including the cover page and reference page). Respond to all the question using an essay format. Note that you must conduct research and your paper must have 3 scholarly references. This means that you must locate peer-reviewed articles.

The post Conflict Crosses The Border: Negotiations Between Mexicans And Americans appeared first on graduatepaperhelp.

 

"Looking for a Similar Assignment? Get Expert Help at an Amazing Discount!"

English 1302 | Research Essay

/in /by

English 1302 | Research Essay

Requirements:
· MLA formatted Word document

· 5-6 pages (approx. 1600-1800 words)

· At least 5 sources

· Minimum of 3 sources must be academic (library database)

· Up to 2 sources may be news or other sources (verified and reliable)

Step 1 – Topic:
Choose a topic explored in one of the literary pieces that we have read. I’d recommend that you choose a topic you care about or are interested in.

Your essay should be centrally focused on an arguable claim related to the topic. The piece of literature should not be the focus on the essay.

· Some ideas:

· “A Wall of Fire Rising” – income inequality, suicide, or immigration

· “Boys and Girls” – misogyny, gender roles, farming in US

· “A Good Man is Hard to Find” – any criminal justice related topic, including gun violence or the death penalty

· “Cathedral” – topics related to art, blindness, physical disability or disability accommodations

· “My Papa’s Waltz” – family violence, alcoholism

Step 2 – Research Question:
Once you’ve chosen a general topic, you’ll need to narrow down your research. Topics like “immigration” or “gun violence” are far too broad for an essay of this length, so figure out exactly what you want to research and focus on.

This website can help you formulate a research question for your topic .

Step 3: Thesis Statement:
A thesis statement is (a) arguable (b) supportable and (c) a preview of your essay.

· Arguable means it’s not a statement of fact. It doesn’t have to be controversial or persuasive, but it cannot be factual or obvious.

· An example of an arguable claim is “Disability accommodations in public institutions are not only legally required in the US, they provide opportunity and benefit everyone.”

· Notice that the arguable claim makes a statement and takes a side, but is not necessarily trying to evoke any action from the reader.

· Supportable means it’s not an opinion, guess, or generalization. It has to be something that research can back up and support. It cannot be a statement about morals or values, that something is “right” or “wrong,” or “good” or “bad.”

· A preview of your essay means that your thesis tells us your topic, your stance, and what you’ll cover in your essay.

Click this link for a great resource for more information on thesis statements.

Click this link for another resource on thesis statements for research papers.

Sources
· Your essay should have at least 5 sources.

· At least 3 of these sources should be from the academic databases.

· Up to 2 of these sources can be from reputable popular sources, like The Washington Post.

· Do not use blogs, personal webpages, or sites like Sparknotes or poemhunter.

Essay Structure
Your essay should have at least 4 paragraphs: Introduction (containing thesis), 2 discussion sections where you present supporting points, and conclusion.

Introduction

· Lead In

· Background on topic

· Thesis Statement

Discussion Sections (you should have at least 2 – each should contain the following)

· Topic Sentence

· Explanation

· Example from Research

· Significance

Conclusion

· Summarize arguments

· Project into the future, offer suggestions for further research, identify topics otherwise unexplored, connect to introduction, or connect to current event

The literary text
You may make use of how the literary text discusses the topic. For instance, if there are quotes from the story that illustrate or support a point you are making, you can use that quote. In that case, the poem or story would count as a source (a non-scholarly source). You can, but you are not required to, use the literary text in your essay.

Peer Revision Paragraph:

  1. After completing your rough draft of your research paper, choose a paragraph you’d like peer feedback about. It can be a paragraph you think is unclear, or maybe one you think need more information. It’s up to you which paragraph you submit.
  2. Create a discussion board thread and post the paragraph. In your post, include:

a. the paragraph

b. where the paragraph belongs in your essay – is it the intro, from the bio, from the poem analysis, or the conclusion?

c. two or three questions you have for your peers – things you’d like their feedback about.

The post English 1302 | Research Essay appeared first on graduatepaperhelp.

 

"Looking for a Similar Assignment? Get Expert Help at an Amazing Discount!"

· “My Papa’s Waltz” – family violence, alcoholism

/in /by

· “My Papa’s Waltz” – family violence, alcoholism

English 1302 | Research Essay
Requirements:
· MLA formatted Word document

· 5-6 pages (approx. 1600-1800 words)

· At least 5 sources

· Minimum of 3 sources must be academic (library database)

· Up to 2 sources may be news or other sources (verified and reliable)

Step 1 – Topic:
Choose a topic explored in one of the literary pieces that we have read. I’d recommend that you choose a topic you care about or are interested in.

Your essay should be centrally focused on an arguable claim related to the topic. The piece of literature should not be the focus on the essay.

· Some ideas:

· “A Wall of Fire Rising” – income inequality, suicide, or immigration

· “Boys and Girls” – misogyny, gender roles, farming in US

· “A Good Man is Hard to Find” – any criminal justice related topic, including gun violence or the death penalty

· “Cathedral” – topics related to art, blindness, physical disability or disability accommodations

· “My Papa’s Waltz” – family violence, alcoholism

Step 2 – Research Question:
Once you’ve chosen a general topic, you’ll need to narrow down your research. Topics like “immigration” or “gun violence” are far too broad for an essay of this length, so figure out exactly what you want to research and focus on.

This website can help you formulate a research question for your topic .

Step 3: Thesis Statement:
A thesis statement is (a) arguable (b) supportable and (c) a preview of your essay.

· Arguable means it’s not a statement of fact. It doesn’t have to be controversial or persuasive, but it cannot be factual or obvious.

· An example of an arguable claim is “Disability accommodations in public institutions are not only legally required in the US, they provide opportunity and benefit everyone.”

· Notice that the arguable claim makes a statement and takes a side, but is not necessarily trying to evoke any action from the reader.

· Supportable means it’s not an opinion, guess, or generalization. It has to be something that research can back up and support. It cannot be a statement about morals or values, that something is “right” or “wrong,” or “good” or “bad.”

· A preview of your essay means that your thesis tells us your topic, your stance, and what you’ll cover in your essay.

Click this link for a great resource for more information on thesis statements.

Click this link for another resource on thesis statements for research papers.

Sources
· Your essay should have at least 5 sources.

· At least 3 of these sources should be from the academic databases.

· Up to 2 of these sources can be from reputable popular sources, like The Washington Post.

· Do not use blogs, personal webpages, or sites like Sparknotes or poemhunter.

Essay Structure
Your essay should have at least 4 paragraphs: Introduction (containing thesis), 2 discussion sections where you present supporting points, and conclusion.

Introduction

· Lead In

· Background on topic

· Thesis Statement

Discussion Sections (you should have at least 2 – each should contain the following)

· Topic Sentence

· Explanation

· Example from Research

· Significance

Conclusion

· Summarize arguments

· Project into the future, offer suggestions for further research, identify topics otherwise unexplored, connect to introduction, or connect to current event

The literary text
You may make use of how the literary text discusses the topic. For instance, if there are quotes from the story that illustrate or support a point you are making, you can use that quote. In that case, the poem or story would count as a source (a non-scholarly source). You can, but you are not required to, use the literary text in your essay.

Peer Revision Paragraph:

  1. After completing your rough draft of your research paper, choose a paragraph you’d like peer feedback about. It can be a paragraph you think is unclear, or maybe one you think need more information. It’s up to you which paragraph you submit.
  2. Create a discussion board thread and post the paragraph. In your post, include:

a. the paragraph

b. where the paragraph belongs in your essay – is it the intro, from the bio, from the poem analysis, or the conclusion?

c. two or three questions you have for your peers – things you’d like their feedback about.

The post · “My Papa’s Waltz” – family violence, alcoholism appeared first on graduatepaperhelp.

 

"Looking for a Similar Assignment? Get Expert Help at an Amazing Discount!"

Research Essay

/in /by

Research Essay

English 1302 | Research Essay
Requirements:
· MLA formatted Word document

· 5-6 pages (approx. 1600-1800 words)

· At least 5 sources

· Minimum of 3 sources must be academic (library database)

· Up to 2 sources may be news or other sources (verified and reliable)

Step 1 – Topic:
Choose a topic explored in one of the literary pieces that we have read. I’d recommend that you choose a topic you care about or are interested in.

Your essay should be centrally focused on an arguable claim related to the topic. The piece of literature should not be the focus on the essay.

· Some ideas:

· “A Wall of Fire Rising” – income inequality, suicide, or immigration

· “Boys and Girls” – misogyny, gender roles, farming in US

· “A Good Man is Hard to Find” – any criminal justice related topic, including gun violence or the death penalty

· “Cathedral” – topics related to art, blindness, physical disability or disability accommodations

· “My Papa’s Waltz” – family violence, alcoholism

Step 2 – Research Question:
Once you’ve chosen a general topic, you’ll need to narrow down your research. Topics like “immigration” or “gun violence” are far too broad for an essay of this length, so figure out exactly what you want to research and focus on.

This website can help you formulate a research question for your topic .

Step 3: Thesis Statement:
A thesis statement is (a) arguable (b) supportable and (c) a preview of your essay.

· Arguable means it’s not a statement of fact. It doesn’t have to be controversial or persuasive, but it cannot be factual or obvious.

· An example of an arguable claim is “Disability accommodations in public institutions are not only legally required in the US, they provide opportunity and benefit everyone.”

· Notice that the arguable claim makes a statement and takes a side, but is not necessarily trying to evoke any action from the reader.

· Supportable means it’s not an opinion, guess, or generalization. It has to be something that research can back up and support. It cannot be a statement about morals or values, that something is “right” or “wrong,” or “good” or “bad.”

· A preview of your essay means that your thesis tells us your topic, your stance, and what you’ll cover in your essay.

Click this link for a great resource for more information on thesis statements.

Click this link for another resource on thesis statements for research papers.

Sources
· Your essay should have at least 5 sources.

· At least 3 of these sources should be from the academic databases.

· Up to 2 of these sources can be from reputable popular sources, like The Washington Post.

· Do not use blogs, personal webpages, or sites like Sparknotes or poemhunter.

Essay Structure
Your essay should have at least 4 paragraphs: Introduction (containing thesis), 2 discussion sections where you present supporting points, and conclusion.

Introduction

· Lead In

· Background on topic

· Thesis Statement

Discussion Sections (you should have at least 2 – each should contain the following)

· Topic Sentence

· Explanation

· Example from Research

· Significance

Conclusion

· Summarize arguments

· Project into the future, offer suggestions for further research, identify topics otherwise unexplored, connect to introduction, or connect to current event

The literary text
You may make use of how the literary text discusses the topic. For instance, if there are quotes from the story that illustrate or support a point you are making, you can use that quote. In that case, the poem or story would count as a source (a non-scholarly source). You can, but you are not required to, use the literary text in your essay.

Peer Revision Paragraph:

  1. After completing your rough draft of your research paper, choose a paragraph you’d like peer feedback about. It can be a paragraph you think is unclear, or maybe one you think need more information. It’s up to you which paragraph you submit.
  2. Create a discussion board thread and post the paragraph. In your post, include:

a. the paragraph

b. where the paragraph belongs in your essay – is it the intro, from the bio, from the poem analysis, or the conclusion?

c. two or three questions you have for your peers – things you’d like their feedback about.

The post Research Essay appeared first on graduatepaperhelp.

 

"Looking for a Similar Assignment? Get Expert Help at an Amazing Discount!"