Word Length: 2500 words ± 10%
Learning Outcome(s):
1
For this assignment, you must find one (1) recently (within the past 5 years) published research article in an area of business/organisational research of interest to you. This article must have been published in a peer-reviewed research journal (a media story, newspaper or magazine report will not suffice) and needs to report empirical data collected for the purposes of the research (a purely conceptual or theoretical article or an editorial or introductory article for special issue of a journal will not be appropriate). A list of potential journals for a number of discipline areas follows this assignment description.

The article you choose must report research involving the collection and analysis of primary data or sampling and analysis of secondary data at a minimum; it may not be an essay, viewpoint, literature review, conceptual or theoretical article.

Your goals in this Assignment align with the following two major sections, SUMMARY and CRITIQUE:

SUMMARY:      Provide a 1250-word (approximate) summary of the paradigm approach, research problem, context, questions and methodology(ies) employed in the article. This summary must be developed under the following two major sub-headings:

1. Paradigm assumptions evident in the article: describethe paradigm and associated guiding assumptions underpinning the research reported in the article, giving clear reasons as to why you have concluded this and referring to specific features/expectations of the relevant paradigm to anchor your arguments (note this is a critical section to devote attention to and you should realise that some authors may not state these assumptions clearly, so you may have to infer them from the approach and methods adopted in the research);
2. Summary of research approach(es) taken in the article:
3. summarise the general research problem and its context and the research question(s) and/or hypotheses being investigated in the article (include some mention of who you see as the key stakeholders in the research);
4. summarise the methods and procedures employed in the article (including the research design, the procedures followed to conduct the research, safeguards for ethical concerns and how sampling issues, measurement processes (where appropriate given the paradigm) and data analyses were handled); and
5. summarise the general conclusions the authors drew regarding their research problem.

As part of this summary process, use a highlighter on the printed copy of the article to highlight those specific aspects of the story you focused on to inform your summary. You should also make notes in the margins of the article about which aspect of the article summary each highlighted point is relevant to.

CRITIQUE:  Critically evaluate the article (in approximately 1250 words or so) with respect to how convinced you were by the authors’ conclusions given the methodological approach(es) taken by them to address their research question(s)/hypotheses. Be broad ranging and analytical in your critique. Consider all aspects of the authors’ methodological approach in your critique (e.g., design, instruments (where relevant), procedures and actual conduct of the research, sampling, handling of ethical issues, and especially focus on the authors’ handling of relevant research quality issues consistent with the paradigm employed in the article as well as on how the article satisfies relevant meta-criteria).

Your critical evaluation (1) must indicate your overall judgment of the convincingness of the study giving clear reasons for your judgment and (2) it must address the following two areas, linking each discussion to relevant paradigm-specific criteria as well as the overall meta-criteria for judging research quality:

1. What you think the authors did well in their research and why; and
2. Whatyou think the authors could have done better in their research and why.

Be sure to clearly show your logic and reasoning in every aspect of your critical evaluation. As part of this critical evaluation process, use a ballpoint pen on the printed copy of the article to underline or circle those aspects of article you focused on for your critique. You should also make notes in the margins of the article about which aspect of the article critique each highlighted point is relevant to.

For purposes of this critical evaluation, focus on methods, design and procedures, rather than on specifics of the authors’ quantitative or qualitative data analyses. You do not need to comment on the quality or interpretations of the authors’ data analyses, only note the types of analyses used.

Pay close attention to the clarity of your writing and expression, organisation and structure of your assignment, referencing style, proofreading, completeness of your list of references (which should include, at a minimum, the article you have reviewed and the unit materials) and appropriately dealing with quoted material from those references. These presentational issues will constitute 10% of the marking criteria.  Remember that the appropriate referencing style to employ is either APA or Chicago (author-date).  APA style is generally a bit simpler to use.

This assignment is worth an aggregate of 100 points total. The actual marking criteria and template for recording your marks can be viewed in this document:  Assignment 1 Marking Template.

Referencing and Style is important in all GSB units. Please see the GSB Policies and Administration webpage for details.