Investigator Triangulation: A Collaborative StrategyWith Potential for Mixed Methods Research

DescriptionAbstract (half a page) Introduces the passage and its author. Provides reader with a little background so they understand why this critique is worth reading. What is the issue under discussion? At the end, you should clearly state the point(s) you are to critique and the arguments you intend to make about it. Example: Does the advance in mixed method research such as triangulation meet the structure of mixed methods.A brief summary (1 page)- Use adequate transitions so that the writing flows smoothly. Identify the author’s main point (thesis) and list the types of proofs he or she employs to persuade the reader to believe or accept the thesis. You should also try to figure out why the author is writing, and to whom. Analysis (3 pages) of the author’s presentation of the selected point(s). Present an in-depth analysis of the validity of the author’s logic and use of evidence (Only Within the Article) in supporting the selected point(s). Be sure to use transitional elements. Discuss specific reasons from the text why you agree or disagree with something. Do you agree or disagree with the author’s views and proofs? Does the author provide complete and accurate information? Is there other evidence that would support a counter-argument? Does the author provide information that is relevant to the issue? Does the author define key terms adequately and clearly? Is the author’s argument logically consistent? The critique’s value as an academic document rests on your ability to say precisely why you agree or disagree.Response to the argument (3 pages). How are you supporting your point (1 current external Empirical Sources ATTACHED). As discussed above, you may agree or disagree with the author’s point(s), and this is the part of the critique where you make your own views on the point(s) clear. Remember that your own arguments must be well-supported through the extensive use of references, evidence and/or logic. You must give compelling reasons for your agreement or disagreement with the author. Discuss the limitations, weaknesses, or problems of the text.A conclusion (half page). Synthesize your critique. Evaluate the author’s overall success or failure in achieving his or her point(s). Also, remind your reader of the strengths and weaknesses of the paper.