Care Unit Fy2013Mn Hccis Quantitative Analysis
OUR GROUP TOPIC IS Comparing No Show Rates with Reminders vs No Reminders
I HAVE ATTACHED THE INTRODUCTION FROM A MEMBER OF THE GROUP ALSO
Assignment #2: Quantitative Analysis, Part 1 (20%) – Submit Assignment
 Hide Submission Folder Information |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Assignment #2 – Team Project (20% of the grade) In this assignment students will go through the steps to set up a quantitative research study. The Instructor will divide the class into groups to complete the assignment. Each group should submit 1 report. Step #1: Topic selection:In The “Topic Selection – Assignment Drop Box In Weekly Module 4 and in the Assignment Folder), add your topic and the name of the data set you plan to use for your quantitative research assignment for Instructor approval. Students are required to use one of the data sets. Data set: Minnesota Healthcare Database.xlsx Medicare National Data by County MN Hospital Report Data by Care Unit FY2013 MN HCCIS Imaging Procedures 2013 Step #2: Quantitative data analysis design Using the topic approved by the Instructor, class teams should: a.) Select a topic (as a team) and state the hypothesis b.) Conduct a literature review on the selected topic and summarize at least five scholarly sources c.) Select one of the above data sets to use to conduct a statistical analysis d) Identify relevant variables (two or more) and justify your choices e) Work as a team to choose the statistical method you plan to use for your analysis (Refer to content in week 3 on Biostatistics for information on various statistical methods you can choose from) f) Identify statistical software your team will use to run your statistical analysis focusing on RStudio as the main software (you can use any other software such as SAS, STATA or SPSS) Step # 3: Analyze the data, state your conclusions and support them a) students should identify relevant variables and justify the choices b) analyze the data, state your conclusions and support them Rubrics for Assignment #2 (TA) Rubrics for Assignment #2 (TA)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rubric Name: TA Assignment revised
Superior 80-89 %
Good 70-79 %
Below Standard 60-69 %
Failure 0-59 %
10 points
Student demonstrates a high degree of critical thinking, is consistent in accurately interpreting questions & material; provides solid assumptions, reasoning & claims; provides thorough analysis & evaluation with sound conclusions
8.9 points
Student shows good critical thinking; accurately interprets most questions & material; usually identifies relevant arguments/reasoning/claims; offers good analysis & evaluation with fairly sound conclusions.
7.9 points
Student shows occasional critical thinking; questions & material are accurately interpreted any times; arguments/reasoning/claims are explained occasionally; offers fair analysis & evaluation with a conclusion.
6.9 points
Student shows little critical thinking, misinterprets questions or material; ignores or superficially evaluates; justifies little and explains reasoning seldom; draws unwarranted conclusions
5.9 points
Student lacks critical thinking, consistently offers biased interpretations; ignores or superficially evaluates; argues using poor reasoning, and/or unwarranted claims.
/ 10
15 points
Student’s arguments or positions are well-supported with evidence from the readings/experience; ideas go beyond the course material and recognize implications and extensions of the material and concepts to the real life and industry.
13.35 points
Student’s arguments or positions are mostly supported by evidence from the readings and course content; ideas presented demonstrate student’s understanding of the material and concepts and may relate to the real life and industry occasionally.
11.85 points
Student’s arguments are more often based on opinion or unclear views than on position grounded in the readings of material or external sources of material
10.35 points
Student’s arguments are frequently illogical and unsubstantiated; student may resort to ad hominem attacks on the author instead of making meaningful application of the material
8.85 points
There is no meaningful attempt to explain or support ideas or the application/examples are superficial and unrelated to the material/industry.
/ 15
25 points
Used the class data-set and a statistical package to perform analysis. Developed codes and performed analysis. Developed tables of variables, descriptive analysis and plots.
22.25 points
Used the class data-set with or without statistical package to perform analysis. Did not developed codes and performed analysis. Developed tables of variables, descriptive analysis or plots.
19.75 points
Used the class data-set with or without statistical package to perform analysis. Partially developed tables of variables or descriptive analysis or plots.
17.25 points
Used the class data-set to perform analysis. Partially developed descriptive analysis or plots.
14.75 points
Used the class data-set to perform analysis. Partially developed descriptive analysis.
/ 25
15 points
Used the class material and literatures to describe all findings. Clearly addresses the research questions and using different findings such as ttest, ANOVA or regression results, descriptive tables and plots.
13.35 points
Used the class material and literature to describe most of findings. Addressed most of research questions, using different findings such as ttest or ANOVA results, descriptive tables and plots.
11.85 points
Used the class material to describe some of findings. Addressed some of research questions, using findings such as ttest and ANOVA, descriptive tables and plots.
10.35 points
Used the class material to describe some of findings. Did not address all research questions. Used at least one ttest or ANOVA to respond to research questions.
8.85 points
Used the class material to describe some of findings. Did not address research questions. Partially used ttest and tables/plots.
/ 15
15 points
Developed discussion and conclusion with clear message from findings and literature reviewed. Addressed the health service management issue very well
13.35 points
Developed discussion and conclusion with clear message from findings but did not support with literature reviewed. Addressed the health service management issue well.
11.85 points
Developed discussion and supported with findings but did not support with literature. Addressed the health service management issue.
10.35 points
Developed discussion and supported with findings but did not support with literature. Did not Addressed the health service management issue.
8.85 points
Did not develop discussion with clear message or partially addressed the some of findings. Did not Addressed the health service management issue.
/ 15
10 points
Student demonstrated full understanding of requirements; responded to each aspect of assignment: correctly developed required document format.
8.9 points
Student demonstrated general understanding of requirements; missed one minor aspect of assignment; the document format is missing one element.
7.9 points
Student demonstrated some understanding of requirements; missed a key element or two minor aspects of assignment; the document format is missing two or more elements.
6.9 points
Student failed to show a firm understanding of requirements; missed two key elements or several minor aspects of assignment; the document format is not complete or partially incorrect.
5.9 points
Student did not demonstrate understanding of assignment requirements; the document format is not followed
/ 10
10 points
Student’s writing is clear and easy to follow; grammar and spelling are all correct; formatting gives a professional look and adds to readability, no APA style errors.
8.9 points
Most ideas are presented clearly; occasional spelling and/or grammar issues (no more than 3), attempts in-text citation and reference list but 1 or 2 APA style errors are present.
7.9 points
Wordy; some points require rereading to understand fully; more than 3 occasional spelling and/or grammar errors, attempts in-text citation and reference list; APA style errors are present; inconsistencies in citation usage can be found throughout the document
6.9 points
Unclear and difficult to understand; frequent spelling and grammar issues (more than 6), attempts either in-text citation or reference list but omits the other.
5.9 points
Very difficult to understand, poorly written in terms of mechanics and structure