2
2
Title of the Paper
Your Name
Institution Name
Course Name
Faculty Member’s Name
Assignment Due Date
![]()
Method and Design AES Worksheet
The components of critical thinking include analysis, evaluation, and synthesis (AES). You will analyze, evaluate, and synthesize literature (draw conclusions between and among historical and current literature) as you write your dissertation. For example, in Ch. 2 of your dissertation writing process, the Literature Review, you will compare and contrast past and current literature on your chosen topic. In Ch. 3 of your dissertation writing process, you will discuss and defend the chosen research method and design, and in other areas throughout the dissertation. This 4-part assignment breaks down AES to provide you the opportunity to see how literature analysis and evaluation leads to synthesis/conclusions. The focus of this assignment is on the methodology sections in Ch. 3 of 2 dissertations. The components of this 4-part assignment are:
· Part 1: Dissertation Analysis: Analyze Ch. 3 of 2 completed dissertations.
· Part 2: Critical Evaluation: Evaluate Ch. 3 of 2 completed dissertations.
· Part 3: Synthesis of Ideas: Identify the synthesis of ideas in Ch. 3 of 2 completed dissertations.
· Part 4: Method and Design Defense: Demonstrate AES through defending your own method and design choice.
Complete Parts 1, 2, 3, and 4 using the provided instructions.
Part 1: Dissertation Analysis
Access the Research Databases page on the University Library website to access the ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database.
Locate 1 University of Phoenix dissertation and 1 dissertation from another university. Ensure both were published within the last 2 years and utilized the same methodology (method and design) you are proposing for your research. Note: Even though you are referencing 2 dissertations for this assignment, dissertations are not considered peer reviewed and are not acceptable to use to substantiate discussions for your dissertation.
Analyze Ch. 3 of your 2 selected dissertations. Report your analysis findings in the Analysis Findings Table using key terms and phrases from the selected dissertations. Answer the questions provided in the “Analysis Criteria” column for the 2 dissertations you selected by providing your responses in the “Selected Dissertation 1” and “Selected Dissertation 2” columns.
Cite sources to support your analysis.
Format citations and references according to APA guidelines.
Provide the references in the “Reference” section at the end of this document in the example paper.
Analysis Findings Table
|
Analysis Criteria |
Selected Dissertation 1 |
Selected Dissertation 2 |
|
What is the dissertation’s title and author? |
||
|
In the research study, what are the strategies (i.e., methodology) used to execute the research, such as research method and research design? |
||
|
How are the research method and research design stated in the title? How are the method and design stated in the abstract? |
||
|
Using information from the CDS Dissertation Guide, does the research method align with the purpose of the study? Why or why not? |
||
|
What is the research design for the research study? |
||
|
Using information from the CDS Dissertation Guide, does the research design align with the research method of the study? Why or why not? |
||
|
Does the methodology (i.e., strategies used to execute the research) align with the research method and research design? Why or why not? |
||
|
Do the authors present a clear understanding of the differences between method and design? Explain your response. |
Part 2: Critical Evaluation
You will be building academic arguments throughout the dissertation process. Doing so will require you to justify your research method and design choices using general theorists in research method and primary theorists in research design. Academic arguments are supported with evidence-based research. Note: Even though you are referencing 2 dissertations for this assignment, dissertations are not considered peer-reviewed and are not acceptable to use to substantiate discussions for your dissertation. Refer to your course textbook, Critical Reading and Writing for Postgraduates (4th ed.), for information on evaluating literature.
Evaluate Ch. 3 of your 2 selected dissertations.
Report your findings in the Critical Evaluation Findings Table. Answer the questions provided in the “Evaluation Criteria” column for the 2 dissertations your selected by providing your responses in the “Selected Dissertation 1” and “Selected Dissertation 2” columns.
Cite sources to support your analysis.
Format citations and references according to APA guidelines.
Provide the references in the “Reference” section at the end of this document in the example paper.
Critical Evaluation Findings Table
|
Evaluation Criteria |
Selected Dissertation 1 |
Selected Dissertation 2 |
|
What is the dissertation’s title and author? |
||
|
What citations/references do the authors use to build their arguments for the research method section? |
||
|
Who are the theorists cited and referenced in the arguments? |
||
|
How do the authors compare/contrast different research methods? You can copy/paste excerpts from the text. Provide at least 2 examples and explain the evaluation. |
||
|
Are the research method and design in alignment with the study? If so, how are they aligned? If not, how are they misaligned? |
||
|
How are the research method and design appropriate for the purposes of the study? |
Part 3: Synthesis of Ideas
Now that you have analyzed the methodology sections of both dissertations and provided evidence of evaluation, readers need to be given information on why the evaluation is important. For this part of the assignment, you will identify the synthesis of the method and design arguments evaluated above from the same dissertations.
Note: Even though you are referencing 2 dissertations for this assignment, dissertations are not considered peer-reviewed and are not acceptable to use for your dissertation. Refer to your course textbook, Critical Reading and Writing for Postgraduates (4th ed.), for information on synthesizing literature.
Identify the synthesis of ideas in Ch. 3 of your 2 selected dissertations Report your findings in the Synthesis of Ideas Table. Answer the questions provided in the “Synthesis Criteria” column for the 2 dissertations your selected by providing your responses in the “Selected Dissertation 1” and “Selected Dissertation 2” columns.
Cite sources to support your analysis.
Format citations and references according to APA guidelines.
Provide the references in the “Reference” section at the end of this document in the example paper.
Synthesis of Ideas Table
|
Synthesis Criteria |
Selected Dissertation 1 |
Selected Dissertation 2 |
|
What is the dissertation’s title and author? |
||
|
How did the authors present the conclusions for their arguments for the chosen method? Provide 2 or more examples. |
||
|
How did the authors present the conclusions for their arguments for the chosen design? Provide 2 or more examples. |
||
|
Are the conclusion/summary sections clear and logical? If yes, how do the authors tie everything together? If no, what suggestions would you make to guide the authors? |
Part 4: Method and Design Defense
Now it’s time to practice AES. Using the Student Paper Template included in the following pages of this document, write:
· 1 paragraph defending your proposed method you chose for your dissertation
· 1 paragraph defending your proposed design you chose for your dissertation
Cite at least 1 method and 1 design expert recommended in the CDS Dissertation Guide to provide a definition and explanation of the method and design characteristics.
Format your paper according to APA guidelines.
Title of the Paper
Begin the paper here. Double space the entire document. Indent the first line by 1 tab key (0.5 inches). University of Phoenix accepts 1 space after a period. The first paragraph is the introduction in every paper and does not contain a subheading. Provide a brief overview of the general topic and end with a preview of the topics discussed in the paper. Unless the paper is a self-assessment analysis or a reflection paper, never write using first-person point of view: I, me, my, mine, etc. Never write academic papers using second-person point of view: you, your, yours, etc. Using editorial “we” and “our” is not acceptable. For more information on writing style and grammar, review Ch. 4, “Writing Style and Grammar,” of Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (7th ed.).
Provide an introductory paragraph to prepare the reader for the discussion, and the introductory paragraph does not have a level heading (subheading).
In-Text Citations
Formatting of in-text citations throughout the paper varies, with options to ensure readability and writing style. The following sections provide a brief overview of 2 types of in-text citations: narrative and parenthetical. Review Ch. 8, “Works Credited in the Text,” of Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (7th ed.) for more information regarding the formatting of personal communications, block quotations, secondary sources, and citing several sources to support a single claim.
Narrative Citations
Narrative citations are citations in which the author or authors are listed as part of the sentence. For example, in the following phrase, “Alexander and Smith (2019) examined…,” notice that “and” is used between authors’ names in narrative citations. Also, always use past tense verbs when associated with a citation because the source was published prior to the date used in the paper. If 3 or more authors are being cited, for example a source written by Thomas, Dickinson, and Harrison, list the first author and then include “et al.” so that the structure is as follows: “Thomas et al. (2018) stated…”
Parenthetical Citations
A parenthetical citation is a citation in which the writer presents the statement followed by the citation. For example, in the following phrase, “The writing process requires… (Alexander & Smith, 2019),” notice an ampersand (&) is used between names in parenthetical citations. A parenthetical citation for 3 or more authors requires only the first author’s last name and the addition of et al. so that the structure is as follows: “Improvement strategies for writing include… (Thomas et al., 2018).”
The examples shown in the narrative and parenthetical citations sections are paraphrases. Paraphrases are the writer’s interpretation of an author’s statement. None of the exact words used by the author should appear in a paraphrase. Direct quotations occur when the writer copies the exact words used by an author. To properly acknowledge the sentence as a direct quotation, quotation marks must surround the quoted material and a page number or paragraph number (if pages are not marked) must appear in the citation. Examples of this format are: Alexander and Smith (2019) stated “Insert quotation” (p. 423); or, “The guidelines for writing an academic paper require…” (Alexander & Smith, 2019, para. 6). The use of direct quotations in scholarly writing is discouraged, as the ability to paraphrase indicates critical-thinking skills.
Headings
Headings identify paragraph topics. The centered “Headings” shown above is classified as a Level 1 heading. Following the introduction, the body of the paper begins with a Level 1 heading. Level 2 headings are formatted flush left, as shown in the “Narrative Citations” section above and reflect subtopics of the Level 1 heading. Many papers use only Level 1 headings throughout, yet most papers use a combination of Level 1 and Level 2 headings. More complex topics may require additional headings. For guidance with headings, refer to Section 2.27, “Heading Levels” of Ch. 2, “Paper Elements and Format,” of Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (7th ed.).
Conclusion
The final Level 1 heading in every paper is for the conclusion section and eliminates the need to add “in summary” or “in conclusion” as the start of the final paragraph. In the conclusion, the writer summarizes the key points made in the paper with no new information or analysis. The conclusion is simply a recap of the most notable information presented in the paper.
References
Note: The following provides examples for formatting different pieces of literature. According to APA guidelines, the reference page is not sub-divided by type of literature, but it has been provided in this format for ease of reference as you use this template. All references are in alphabetical order according to authors’ last names. All references listed in the reference list must have an in-text citation from that source in the body of the paper. For additional reference formatting examples, see Ch. 10, “Reference Examples,” of the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (7th ed.). For APA tutorials on formatting citations and references, please access the Doctoral Writing Resources page on MyPhoenix.
When using this “References” template page, replace these references with your own, and remove the content type headings and this paragraph.
Journal Article Example
Ainsworth, S., & Purss, A. (2009). Same time, next year? Personnel Review, 38(3), 217–235.
https://doi.org/10.1108/00483480910943304
Authored Book Example
Bateman, T. S., & Snell, S. A. (2007). Management: Leading and collaborating in a competitive world (7th ed.). McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
Chapter in an Edited Book Example
Eatough, V., & Smith, J. (2008). Interpretative phenomenological analysis. In C. Willig & W. Stainton-Rogers (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research in psychology (pp. 179–195). Sage Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781848607927.n11
Copyright 2021 by University of Phoenix. All rights reserved.
Copyright 2021 by University of Phoenix. All rights reserved.
image1.png
,
AES Model and Guide for Summarizing, Analyzing, Evaluating, and Synthesizing Information
DOC/714S
© 2021 University of Phoenix
AES Model
What is it?
© 2021 University of Phoenix
© 2021 University of Phoenix
What is the AES Model?
Analysis
Evaluation
Synthesis
An iterative process for success in the ACCESS program sequence
3
© 2021 University of Phoenix
What is the AES Model? (Continued)
By understanding the AES model, you will be able to:
Prepare your papers more effectively.
Become a better critical reader.
Easily make sense of your faculty member feedback.
Become a more effective critical and creative thinker.
Prepare yourself to become a more effective researcher.
© 2021 University of Phoenix
3-Stage Model
Analysis Core Task: To identify and break into parts for identification and comparison
Evaluation Core Task: To make a conclusion based on empirical data and a clear rationale
Synthesis Core Task: To put back together and create something new
There are 3 main parts to this model: analysis, critical evaluation, and creative synthesis.
The core task in analysis is to identify and break apart the main ideas into separate parts for comparison (e.g., to take a car apart to find the broken part).
The core task in critical evaluation is to reach a conclusion about the parts based on empirical data and clear, cogent rationale. (For example: This is the part that is broken, based upon this measurement and this evidence.) The conclusion is to replace the part.
The core task in creative synthesis is to put things back together and create something new. (For example: If the new part has been redesigned to add more performance, then the car will perform differently, so something new has been created.)
5
© 2021 University of Phoenix
Different Types of Thinking
Critical Thinking
(Deductive Reasoning)
Analysis
Critical Evaluation
Creative
Synthesis
Creative Thinking
Design Thinking
(Abductive Reasoning)
Analysis and critical evaluation are closely related and tend to rely on deductive reasoning. Many people will recognize the scientific method as analysis/critical evaluation. Evidence-based practice is a good example of analysis and critical evaluation. Analysis and critical evaluation are particularly important in professional practice when we do not need to create a new solution.
Critical evaluation flows directly from analysis. Some analysis is usually needed before a valid conclusion can be developed.
Creative synthesis is an entirely different thinking process and can be regarded as employing different reasoning: creative thinking. It is sometimes referred to as abductive reasoning or design thinking. Creative synthesis can occur at any moment as an insight.
6
An Iterative Process Over Time
Creative Synthesis
Analysis
Critical Evaluation
© 2021 University of Phoenix
At a broader perspective analysis, critical evaluation and creative synthesis are cyclical in nature. The creative product of synthesis that we achieve today will become the subject of analytical and evaluative processes in the future. Such a cyclical arrangement is necessary and inevitable as we progress over time in various disciplines.
7
Key Questions
Analysis
What are the main ideas being made in each article? Is it possible to compare/contrast?
What groupings/sequence might exist?
What alternative/contradictory ideas exist?
Critical Evaluation
What metric/criterion will I apply?
What evidence exists?
What does the evidence suggest?
What is my evaluation process?
What assumptions/limitations/alternative views might exist?
Creative Synthesis
How might I integrate these ideas?
How could I reframe the main points or the context?
What metaphor might I employ?
What new questions might I ask? (e.g., What might be…? What if…?)
© 2021 University of Phoenix
8
AES Model Guide
Summarizing, Analyzing, Evaluating, and Synthesizing Information
© 2021 University of Phoenix
When writing papers, you will interact with various sources of information. The 4 most common ways to interact with information include summarizing, analyzing, evaluating, and synthesizing. Understanding the difference between a summary, analysis, evaluation, and synthesis will strengthen the credibility of your writing.
9
Summary
© 2021 University of Phoenix
When you summarize, you restate information without adding your personal interpretation. For example, if you read a book, summarizing might include restating the plot, the characters, the scenery, etc., without sharing your opinion of the book.