Write a Research Analysis Paper for biochem class
Every research article will have the following major sections: Title Page, Abstract, Introductions, Method, Results, Discussion, References, Tables, and Figures.
There is a difference between summarizing and analyzing a research paper. The goal of a summary is to briefly report an accurate discussion of the primary or essential parts of the article (such as the author’s main ideas and findings). Summaries identify thoughts or contributions others have made, and no conclusion is presented from the reader’s point of view. An analysis examines and interprets each element of the paper and discusses why each element is important or significant. It might discuss causes and effects or how each element connects to other pieces. Analyses might discuss strengths and weaknesses or effectiveness or ineffectiveness. An analysis will make an argument or conclude the author’s work and conclusions.
Your analysis should highlight the information in the Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion, followed by your opinion or thoughts about the study. Include a Title Page with the title of the article and your name, and the date.
No more than two or three well-written pages. Do not quote from the paper. No external references are required. Everything should be in your own words. Your work will be checked for similarity matches with repositories of other student submissions and published works. Summaries with more than 30% similarity matching may receive a zero! While most plagiarism is unintentional, it is preventable.
Turnitin will check your work and email you a copy of the results shortly afterward
Guidelines
Some general items to consider when composing your paper:
1. Include a title page. It adds to the presentation.
2. Generally, the first paragraph or two should include general introductory information, enough for the reader to understand what the authors were trying to learn. Then introduce additional specific information (such as “CHIP28 is a member of a family of proteins with unknown specific functions. These proteins are found in mammalian red blood cells and renal tubules where osmosis is a critical process.”), and clearly state the author(s) research question, followed by their hypothesis. (For example, “The author(s) research question was, does the CHIP28 protein contribute to the structure or function of a membrane water channel?” Then, “the author(s) hypothesized that if CHIP28 contributes to water passage through a membrane channel, then….” A good template when writing a hypothesis statement is “If X, then Y.”
3. A summary of the methods should include just enough information to understand what the author(s) are doing but not too many details that don’t add to the paper’s intent. It’s always important to describe what the authors used as a control. If possible, include what assays they used (such as immunoblot or Western blot in the CHIP28 study), the independent variables, and what was measured (the dependent variable). How were the data analyzed?
4. Next, critically analyze the articles methodology, data collection, and analysis. Consider the validity, reliability, and any potential biases in the study.
5. The conclusion should clearly state how what the author(s) learned or didn’t learn supported their initial hypothesis, at least partly, and provides additional information that might also play a role. What was (were) the key implication(s) of their results?
6. Be precise in terminology and descriptions. Use scientific terms rather than vernacular. Always write in the third person (“The authors stated…”).
Rubric
Criterion 1: Summary (15 Points)
Poor (5 Points): The summary is either missing or lacks significant details about the article’s main points, hypotheses, methodology, and findings.
Fair (10 Points): The summary is present but only partially complete, with some critical aspects of the article not adequately covered.
Good (15 Points): The summary is clear and concise and covers most of the critical elements of the article, including main points, hypotheses, methodology, and findings.
Excellent (20 Points): The summary is comprehensive and insightful, clearly conveying all critical aspects of the article, including hypotheses, methodology, findings, and main points.
Criterion 2. Review of the Topic and/or Past Literature (15 points)
Poor (4 points): Demonstrates minimal understanding of the topic. Minimal or no review of past literature; fails to connect the article to existing research or relevant studies.
Fair (6 Points): Shows a basic understanding of the topic, but key concepts and ideas are not fully developed. Basic review of past literature, but lacks depth or breadth; only partially connects the article to existing research.
Good (8 Points): Demonstrates understanding of the article’s topic, accurately explaining the most critical concepts and ideas. A solid review of relevant literature, showing a good understanding of the article’s context within the field.
Excellent (10 Points): Shows an excellent understanding of the article’s topic. All key concepts and ideas are thoroughly and accurately explored. An in-depth and comprehensive review of past literature, excellently connecting the article to broader research trends and key studies in the field.
Criterion 3: Analysis of Methodology and Framework (10 Points)
Poor (4 Points): Minimal or no analysis of the article’s methodology and theoretical framework; significant misunderstandings may be present.
Fair (6 Points): Basic analysis of methodology and framework, but lacking depth or showing some misunderstanding of key concepts.
Good (8 Points): Solid analysis of methodology and framework, demonstrating a good understanding of the article’s approach and theoretical underpinnings.
Excellent (10 Points): Exceptional, in-depth analysis, demonstrating a sophisticated understanding of the article’s methodology and theoretical framework.
Criterion 4. Writing Quality and Adherence to Standards (10 Points)
Poor (4 Points): Numerous grammatical, spelling, or formatting errors; does not meet basic academic writing standards. Demonstrates minimal effort or understanding of the assignment’s requirements. Significant revisions are needed.
Fair (6 Points): Several grammatical or spelling errors; basic adherence to academic writing standards with some inconsistencies in formatting. Shows a basic level of understanding and effort but lacks depth and clarity in several areas.
Good (8 Points): Few grammatical or spelling errors; generally adheres to academic writing standards with proper formatting. Solid performance with good understanding and execution of the assignment’s objectives. Minor revisions may be needed.
Excellent (10 Points): Virtually free of grammatical or spelling errors; excellent adherence to academic writing standards and consistent, proper formatting. Outstanding work demonstrating a high level of understanding, analysis, and critical thinking. Exceeds assignment expectations.
