As a matter of fact, the name of the analysis, according to Jeanfreau, should generally contain a heading that delivers insight into the reported study by including reference to the study problem or theory studied the populace, and the research design. Given such a view, the title of the present study correctly ties in as it includes the primary keywords and refers to the learning encounters and the populace consists of nursing students with dyslexia. This title contains fifteen words, which is also a good point as it meets the requirements of research methods as advised by Holloway (2010) and Polit and Beck (2010)
In qualitative research, the analysts are considered as data collecting instruments - as well as the makers of the analytic process (Onwuegbuzie, 2010). Therefore their requirements, experience, and reflexivity are relevant in creating confidence in the info. (Polit and Beck, 2011) The study under consideration was carried out by two researchers, Jenny Child and Elizabeth Langford. Child is a senior lecturer in adult medical, while Langford is also a older lecturer and analysis skills adviser at the School of the Western of Britain, in the Faculty of Health and Life Sciences in Bristol. The two authors are personnel who show nurse students, and have experience with nurse's education. They are really therefore competent and also have the right requirements to deal with the type of topics developed. You can also go through the notion of cultural competency of these authors. Lapan et al (2011) advocated such a view, and argued that "cultural competency is a crucial disposition that is related to the researcher's or evaluator's capability to accurately symbolize simple fact in culturally sophisticated communities" (Mertens, 2009:89). Being lecturers in a British isles university, the authors of this article certainly meet this requirement, especially Langford who's a report skills adviser.
An abstract of articles can be defined as "a summary of what you will do, why and what its value is" (Hickson (2008:61). Several conditions can be considered to assess the grade of an abstract: duration and content. With 183 words, the length of this abstract meets the requirements of your abstract as mentioned by Polit and Beck (2008) who advocate a amount of between 100 to 200 words. For the details, it actually summarizes this content. It opens with the aim where the creators point out why they take on the study. Then it elucidates the research methodology with a definite affirmation about the phenomenological life world procedure used. That is followed by the results of the research, where three main styles emerged, and ends it with a summary that supports the abstract's data.
As for the literature review, it actually is a summary of existing books, which develops a disagreement that helps the needs of today's study (Polit and Beck, 2008). With this research, no less than eleven recent documents have been assessed, and this search concentrated on computer based mostly literature that was posted between 2008 and 2011. The interesting point in this review is the fact it moves beyond a simple information of the options to be "a crucial summary and diagnosis of the number of existing materials working with the knowledge and understanding" of dyslexia (Blaxter, 2006). This books review is up-to-date and extensive, because it searches, studies and reviews what is present to place the study in the context of what was already done, and especially it points out the paucity of research in the domain of dyslexia for nursing students. However, one weakness of this article in general is the fact that it includes many references dated prior to 2006. However this is understood as most of those documents are secondary sources which were very helpful in the study.
From these literature review, the explanation for the study is apparent. First there is a requirement by the Equality Action 2010, for fair adjustments of university student health professionals in the educational organizations and work environment. Second the NMC (2006) requires that any nurse should have good skills in literacy and numeracy. Third the writers mention that there surely is a paucity of research in this issue. This is justified. While providing the reasons why the research has been conducted, the explanation of a study is generally developed alongside an assessment of some central ideas in the relevant literature (Truck der Riet. et al. 2006).
Looking at the seeks, it could be argued that there is a clear statement of the goals of the research, which mentions the study goal, its relevance and just why the study is important. The writers explored the knowledge of such students to make recommendations that will support them in practice.
Talking about the honest issues, Polit and Beck (2010) dispute that "methods must be ethically appropriate, and must include issues surrounding enlightened consent, the to withdraw, awareness, confidentiality and anonymity of the participants". In the article under scrutiny, one can discover several ethical issues tackled. The authors took good care to enquire the authorisation of the university ethics committee. In addition they obtained voluntary enlightened consents from the members who they asked by letters. The study itself addresses issues that would help the members in their education. This means that ideas such as value, up to date consent and justice have been taken into account. One would for example notice that the tape taking and the analysis were all coded, so not disclosing the personality of the participants. This is a good system to keep the anonymity of the participants, which means confidentiality. Further, the participants were granted the liberty to be a part of the study or withdraw from it without the problem. That is an element of admiration (Kitchener and Kitchner, 2009). Finally, participants received a consent form. That is also a form of flexibility for the participant to accept or refuse to participle.
Dealing with the methods of a research, Cadwell et al (2005) suggested to examine several aspects. In this specific article, the researchers had taken the good care of determining the philosophical background and the study design as well as describing the explanation behind their choice. They used a phenomenological life world procedure, focused on the planet as it is experienced prior to the formulation of any hypothesis to clarify it. This is a suitable procedure, because phenomenology is "a research whose purpose is to describe a particular happening or the looks of things, as resided encounters" (Carpenter 2007:43).
They also used the qualitative exploratory method, involving one tape-recorded semi-structured interview per participant, with an independent interviewer. The length of time of the interview and the place were determined. The technique of analysis was also diagnosed, a line-to-line and thematic evaluation. It is also interesting to note that there was a piloting study of the questions with specialists, and that the responses obtained helped to refine the questions. This approach was properly selected, because the analysis is focussed on the real human experience, and very little is well known about this issue. (Melts away and Grove, 2009) Further, the research gets more trustworthiness not only because of the famous journal where it was posted, but also it went through a double-blind test before publication.
According to Cadwell et al (2005), a good research must identify the major ideas and themes. In this article, three main themes were layed out, mainly the worthiness of work-based learning times, the importance of the specialized medical placement mentor role, and the necessity for advocacy. Other themes also surfaced, and the researchers put all of them in Pack 2. Further, the authors included some excerpts from the interviews to indicate what students said and thought about those themes. This makes things clear for any reader.
Dealing with selecting participants, one would say that there surely is a flow in this field, because the analysis does not tell how the members were picked, neither will it really identify the sampling methods. All the present research workers say is the fact that that they had two groups of individuals picked, six students with dyslexia and six other students without dyslexia, and they were third year adult medical students. They do not say anything about their gender, the severe nature of the dyslexia. Could it be justified in that it was a convenience, purposive and selective sample, grounded on the research workers' will to own participants readily available and easy to contact, participants with specific characteristics, in cases like this dyslexia and the selection of circumstances was done before the do of research" (Higginbottom, 2002).
Talking about the findings, lots of aspects can be considered, and Cadwell et al (2005) discussion in terms of trustworthiness, confirmability and transferability. "Credibility identifies the self confidence in the reality value or believability of the study's conclusions" (Polit, Beck and Hungler, 2006). Actually in this study, there's a huge description of the participants' responses in the form of verbatim transcripts that can lead the viewers to draw their own conclusions as well. There is a good relationship between the multiple sources used like the literature review, the interview's data and the researchers, note, and this increases the credibility of the analysis (Streubert-Speziale, 2007). Nonetheless it seems that the participant validation suffers, because not much is said about the individuals' views on the conclusions obtained.
As for the confirmability or auditability, " it refers to the amount to which the results could be validated or corroborated by others. " Several strategies were used to improve confirmability in this research. The writers have recorded the methods for checking out and rechecking the data throughout the study. They audited their data by analyzing the info collection and analysis procedures. There can be an examination of the technique used through the presentation of the techniques, research records and records of coding of the interviews. The reference to such documentations permit the reader to comprehend the researcher's decision making ( Streubert-Speziale, 2007).
Transferability or fittingness is established by creating solid descriptions, which, when read by other analysts, can be applied in other contexts (Stringer (2007). The writers of this research identified that the test was so small that their results could not be generalized. However as said by Stringer (2007), in addition they gone a step further to assume that "the data collected will be of interest and relevance to others nationally and internationally who are redesigning their structures for university student support and mentoring. " It would also seem that this transferability is firmly enhanced by the partnership between your conceptual framework with their research and the data collection and evaluation (Marshall and Rossman, 2010).
The findings were presented in an appropriate way and they're clear to anyone who reads the article. They are also interesting in that in addition to discovering the main topics, the authors looked at the personalised strategies produced by the students and developed a toolkit to help them in their placement. The main recommendations and shared duties are plainly summarised in Figure 1, under three areas: the school, the practice position and the students, displaying also areas of overlapping. The only real aspect that seems a lttle bit ill-placed is the questionnaire used in the study. An appendix by the end of the analysis would be preferred, because just how it is presented creates sort of digression within the study.
The discussion expanded the conclusions with ideas related to time pressure, more training for mentors to have the ability to support students with dyslexia, student's personalised ideas from the university or college, development of strong links between the two organizations, development of personal skills in the school curriculum, advocacy to help students disclose their disability, more time needed to adjust to placement routines. The conclusions run well as they summarized the main points of the study.
To conclude, it can be said that this study was properly performed. The title offers insights into the topic, the population and the research design. The abstract shown a listing of the whole analysis, just how it was conducted like the data, the examination and the results. The method was appropriate, including the collection of the info, analysis strategies, and reasons for its selection. The discussion of the evidence can be considered adequate, and the studies relate to the original research question. The results recognized the main topics of the analysis and include quotes from the participants. It also highlights the constraints of the study transferability because of its small test. The validity of the research is obvious as it makes a contribution to current practice. One of the weaknesses, you have to mention the lack of clear selection criteria for the individuals, too little participants' views on the conclusions and a big portion of out-of-date bibliography.
I finally close this appraisal by stating that it includes helped me to develop critical thinking as it led me to read a lot to be able to truly have a reasoned argument when assessing an undeniable fact, searching for alternatives, supportive and challenging facts. This exposed my eyes to think more about better research to use in my future job as a nurse.