Archive for category: English

This assignment will help you complete the following course objectives:

• Articulate how sport and physical activity participation influences psychological factors of the participant.
• Critique the ways in which sport, exercise, and physical activity impact the psychology of participants.

For this assignment, you are going to summarize and analyze recent research on a physical activity psychology topic from the first unit, exploring the influence of exercise on different psychological factors. You will select one original research article from the options below, read and annotate the article, and write a report that summarizes the research article and integrates the research findings with course content. It is expected that you will cite the research article and the textbook/class notes in your report.

1. Introduction paragraphon exercise and your chosen psychological factor. You should introduce the topic of your report, indicate why this topic is important, and clarify the purpose of your report. (~.5 page)
2. Article Summary:For your chosen research article, answer the following questions in paragraph form (multiple questions can be integrated into a single paragraph, but paragraphs should still be cohesive). Your summary should be a condensed version of the article rather than an article abstract. It will contain more information than the article’s abstract and will require you to read and understand the entire research article. Your article summary should be approximately 1-1.5 pages and include in-text citations for the research article.
   • What was the purpose of the article?
   • Who were the study participants? How were they recruited? What were the inclusion/exclusion criteria?
   • What type of research design was used?
   • What was the independent (exposure) variable(s)? How was it measured (or manipulated if research was an experimental design)?
   • What was the dependent (outcome) variable(s)? How was it measured?
   • What were the main study findings? What are the conclusions of this research article?
3. Evaluation of article and connection to class content:How do the study findings connect to content covered on that topic in class? What findings are similar? What findings are different? Where discrepancies lie, what might be the reason for this? **Incorporate critical thinking and substantive connections to class content on the psychological topic of focus in your article*  (~.5 to 1 page)
4. Application of findings and conclusion: What are the practical applications of these findings? How would the findings of the research article and class content be used when working as an exercise, health, or fitness professional? Summarize key points of report and provide a strong take home message. (~.5 page)
5. Reference pagein APA format (should include chosen article, and textbook/class notes)

Exercise and Psychological Outcomes Research Analysis Rubric – Spring 2021

Exercise and Psychological Outcomes Research Analysis Rubric – Spring 2021

Criteria		Ratings		Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Introduction
3 to >2.75 pts Outstanding Introduction is detailed, insightful, specific to the focus of the paper, and well-written. Introduction contains a hook, clear identification and description of the main topics of paper, introduces the prevalence of the issue, and a clear statement of the purpose of the report.	2.75 to >2.25 pts Good Introduction is clear and specific to the focus of the paper. Introduction contains a hook, identification of the main topics of paper, description of the prevalence or importance of the issue, and identification of the purpose of report.	2.25 to >1.5 pts Acceptable Introduction is specific to the focus of the paper, but may be missing important details. Introduction may be missing information on importance/prevalence of the issue or a clear statement of the purpose of the report.	1.5 to >0.0 pts Poor Introduction is unclear, unfocused to the topic of the paper, or too brief.	0 pts Missing Introduction is missing

3 pts

 

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Article Summary: Purpose

 

0.5 pts

Clearly states study purpose

0.25 pts

Uses a direct quote to restate study purpose OR unclear statement of study purpose

0 pts

Missing or incorrect study purpose

 

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Article Summary: Study Participants

 

1 pts

describes (1) research participants (number, relevant descriptive characteristics (e.g., male/female, age)), (2) how they were recruited, and (3) relevant inclusion or exclusion criteria, if applicable

0.75 pts

describes all components (1, 2, and 3) but missing detailed description or clarity

0.5 pts

missing information on how participants were recruited or inclusion/exclusion criteria

0.25 pts

only briefly describes participants – minimal detail

0 pts

No Marks

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Article Summary: Research Design

 

1 pts

Correctly identifies research design

0.5 pts

Incorrect identification of research design

0 pts

Missing identification of research design

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Article Summary: Independent Variable

 

1 pts

Correctly identifies the independent variable

0.5 pts

Switches the independent and dependent variables

0 pts

Incorrectly identifies the independent variable

 

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Article Summary: Measurement/manipulation of IV

 

1.5 pts

Full Marks

experimental study: describes all groups’ protocols and procedures in enough detail to follow without needing to reference the article itself for clarification observational/cross-sectional study: describes measures in enough detail to follow without needing to reference the article itself for clarification (names of scales, information about the measure – # of items, response scale, subscales (if any))

1 pts

Description of IV could be more thorough

0.5 pts

Minimal description of measurement/manipulation of IV

0 pts

Missing

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Article Summary: Dependent Variable

 

1 pts

Correctly identifies the dependent variable

0.5 pts

Switches the independent and dependent variables

0 pts

Incorrectly identifies the dependent variabl

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Article Summary: Measurement of DV

 

1.5 pts

Full Marks

Describes measures in enough detail to follow without needing to reference the article itself for clarification (names of scales, information about the measure – # of items, response scale, subscales (if any)); focuses attention on just the dependent variable(s) of interest (in relation to study purpose)

Describes all DVs, even those that are not directly relevant to psychological outcome of focus OR missing description of one relevant DV

0.75 pts

Description of DV could be more thorough

0.5 pts

Minimal description of measurement of DV

0 pts

Missing

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Article Summary: Main Findings and Conclusions

 

1.5 pts

Describes main results related to the study purpose in own words and in a way that demonstrates understanding; includes at least 1 numerical/statistical info when describing results; describes what the main findings mean – identifies author’s main conclusions

1 pts

Describes main results related to study purpose in own words, but does not demonstrate a clear understanding of what the results mean; may not include numerical/statistical information; identifies authors’ main conclusions

0.75 pts

Describes some results but either includes non-relevant information to study purpose or does not clearly describe the findings; no numerical information included; unclear identification of main conclusions – or missing conclusions

0.25 pts

Minimal description of findings – or only describes non-relevant findings to study purpose; does not include conclusions

0 pts

No Marks

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Evaluation and Connection to Class Content

 

8 to >7.75 pts

Outstanding

Section contains multiple, thoughtful, clear, and well developed points of emphasis. These points cover: (1) similarities between the article and class content and/or (2) explanation of differences between article and class content. Clear evidence of critical thinking in section.

7.75 to >6.0 pts

Good

Section contains one thoughtful, clear, and well developed points of emphasis, or multiple clear, but slightly under-developed points of emphasis. These points cover: (1) similarities between the article and class content, and/or (2) explanation of differences between article and class content

6 to >4.0 pts

Acceptable

Section contains multiple brief or under-developed points of emphasis. These points cover: (1) similarities between the article and class content, and/or (2) explanation of differences between article and class content.

4 to >0.0 pts

Poor

Section contains unclear or incorrect points of emphasis. These points cover: (1) similarities between the article and class content, and/or (2) explanation of differences between article and class content.

0 pts

No Marks

This section is missing

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Conclusion

 

4 to >3.5 pts

Outstanding

Contains a clear, well-developed assessment of how findings can be utilized in the real world. Summarizes key points of report without being overly repetitive. Delivers a strong take home message.

3.5 to >3.0 pts

Good

Indicates how findings can be utilized in the real world. Summarizes key points of report and provides a clear take home message.

3 to >2.0 pts

Acceptable

Attempt, but unclear indication, of how findings can be utilized in the real world. Conclusion is too brief or introduces new information

2 to >0.0 pts

Poor

Conclusion overlaps with or is not distinct from the evaluation and connection to class content section.

0 pts

No Marks

Report does not conclude

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Writing Quality

 

3 to >2.5 pts

Outstanding

*Style is clear, concise, focused, informative, and interesting. *Very well organized. *Writing is free of errors in punctuation, spelling, grammar, and usage. *Written in formal academic language (no first person, slang, casual phrases, or incomplete sentences).

2.5 to >1.0 pts

Acceptable

*Style is somewhat clear, concise, focused, informative, and interesting. *Good organization. *Some errors in punctuation, spelling, grammar, and usage. *Some instances of informal language (including use of first person, slang, casual phrases, or incomplete sentences).

1 to >0 pts

Poor

*Style is not clear, concise, focused, informative, or interesting. *Poor organization. *Many errors in punctuation, spelling, grammar, and usage. *Many instances of informal language (including use of first person, slang, casual phrases, or incomplete sentences).

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome APA Format

 

2 pts

Outstanding

APA format is correct for both reference list and in-text citations – no errors

1.5 pts

Good

APA format is mostly correct for reference list and in-text citations – 1-2 small errors

1 pts

Acceptable

More than 2 errors in APA formatting for reference list and in-text citations, but still is APA format

0.5 pts

Poor

Attempt at in-text citations and reference list – but not APA format

 

0 pts

No Marks

No in-text citations or reference list

 

 

 

 

 

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Assignment Technical Details

 

1 to >0.75 pts

Full Marks

Includes a title page (in format of sample title page), 1″ margins on all sides, page numbers in top right corner, double spaced, size 12 Times New Roman font, reference list starts on separate page.

 

0.75 to >0 pts

Assignment Technical Details not adhered to

Missing at least one of the following: title page (in format of sample title page), 1″ margins on all sides, page numbers in top right corner, double spaced, size 12 Times New Roman font, reference list starts on separate page.

 

 

 

 

Total Points: 30