Indicative schedule for this unit
Table A: AnIndicative schedule forEnhancing Skills and Knowledge
For this assessment, you are required to complete a report(1600 words) related on your area of research interest. The aim of this assessment is for you to develop,clarify and refine your thinking about your emerging research foci. You will need to engage with the substantive and methodological literature related to your Inquiry.
Assessment Criteria
This task will be assessed against the following criteria:
1. Critical Presentation of existing knowledge, theory and views related to the topic area, interpretative and critical analysis of context. (5)
2. An explanation of choice of paradigm; methodology and an explanation of the research design that will be adopted
to answer / explore the research inquiry and a discussion of ethical issues that may be relevant and how to
they will be managed; (5)
4. Demonstrates connection to theory/practice synthesis, interpretative and critical analysis of context. (5)
3. Consistent use of appropriate academic style, which includes the use of language, structure, adequate length, as well as accurate documentation of sources. (5)
For more in-depth detail about this criteria refer to the assessment matrix provided in the Unit Guide for this task. The task and the assessment criteria will be discussed in class.
ASSESSMENT 2 Poster Presentation (and written reflection)
Length: 6400 words (equivalent) consisting of oral presentation of poster and a reflection on the process of formulating an inquiry.
Submission type: Presentation face to face with to class members.
This assessment task will involve all students participating in a presentation of their inquirywhere you will have the opportunity to present your research and receive feedback about from your colleagues and lecturers. You are to prepare 10-15 minute individual poster presentation, including the specific research problem/question; the main issues that are relevant to the research topic; the methodology and methods used ; any possible ethical issues that may arise in the conduct of the research; and who will benefit from the research (its significance). Students will also be required to submit a reflective summary of the process in relation to the themes of sustainability , ethical praxis and social justice. When developing your presentation, you should demonstrate participation in a learning community where you share your ideas and receive feedback about them from your colleagues and lecturers. Similarly you are encouraged to provide respectful feedback to your peers about their emerging research proposals. The task requires you to use a blend of modes (such as written, oral, and or visual,) to present your ideas and thoughts and the particular requirements will be outlined by your class lecturer.
Assessment Criteria
This task will be assessed against the following criteria:
• Knowledge of the chosen content as well as an exploration of ideas and issues related to an appropriate methodology for the proposed inquiry. This would include evidence of engaging with required readings and other relevant methodology literature, as well as demonstrating a coherence and development of ideas through an effective structure for the whole presentation
• Effective communication skills have been employed that are appropriate to the specific purposes of the task
• A title, abstract and introduction (overview and background or context for the study);
• A referenced rationale for the study, in which appropriate literature is used to build the case for the research.
• An explanation of choice of paradigm; methodology and research methods adopted, with reference to appropriate research methodology literature (the core part of the task);
• An explanation of the research approach that will be adopted to answer / explore the research inquiry/questions;
• A discussion of ethical issues that may be relevant and how they will be managed;
• An indication of how considerations such as reliability, validity or trustworthiness will be addressed;
• A statement of significance of the research
• A reference list
Enhancing Skills and Knowledge
Assessment Task 1:
Student’s Name: Student #:
Criteria
1. Critical Presentation of existing knowledge, theory and views related to the topic area, interpretative and critical analysis of context.
2. An explanation of choice of paradigm; methodology and an explanation of the research design that will be adopted
to answer / explore the research inquiry and a discussion of ethical issues that may be relevant and how to
they will be managed;
3.Demonstrates connection to theory/practice synthesis, interpretative and critical analysis of context.
4. Consistent use of appropriate academic style, which includes the use of language, structure, adequate length, as well as accurate documentation of sources.
Grade 5
:4
3
2
1
0
1. Depth of understanding
Evidence
Interpretation and critical analysis
Argumentation
Impressive and original depth of understanding of topic.
Highly reflective use of evidence
Highly critical and reflexive analysis
Convincing synthesis of evidence, analysis and understanding in argumentation Thorough and comprehensive understanding of topic.
Considered weighing of evidence
Thorough and sustained critical analysis
Convincing synthesis of evidence, analysis and understanding in argumentation Clear understanding of topic.
Arguments sustained by reference to relevant evidence.
Issues and theories considered critically.
Credible argument making good use of evidence, analysis and understanding Adequate understanding of topic.
Occasional tendency to assertions not supported by evidence
Limited interpretation and critical analysis.
Reasonably well-argued discussion of topic Conversant with topic but serious gaps or errors.
General lack of evidence in supporting arguments
Lacks depth of understanding and demonstrates undeveloped critical analysis.
Inconsistent argumentation and lack of clarity Major aspects of the topic ignored.
Poor or no use of evidence in supporting arguments
Poor understanding of issues and no critical analysis
Poor argumentation
2.Methodology
Critical appraisal of research design
Methods and procedures
Synthesis of analysis with literature
Assured and critical discussion of methodology and implications
Critical and reflexive appraisal of research design
Displays highly critical and reflective understanding and analysis of methods and procedures used
Reflective discussion of convergence and divergence of research findings in context of literature
A clear discussion of methodology, showing understanding of implications
Critical appraisal of research design
Displays critical understanding and analysis of methods and procedures used
Relates and discusses convergence and divergence of findings from research literature
Discussion of methodology, showing awareness of implications
Some critical analysis of the research design.
Displays clear understanding and analysis of methods and
procedures used
Considers convergence and divergence of findings from research literature
Some awareness of research methodologies and their implications
Limited critique of research design
Reasons for choice of methods and procedures given.
Limited discussion of convergence and divergence of findings from research literature
No clear evidence of understanding research methodologies
Inconsistent critique of research
design
Methods and procedures explained, but no reason for choice given
No discussion of convergence and divergence of findings from research literature
Research not methodology poorly or not discussed
Poor or no critique of research design.
Methods and procedures lack explanation
No discussion of convergence and divergence of findings from research literature
3..Theory, practice and research synthesis
Use of personal and professional experience
Implications for wider context
Sensitive and effective use of personal experience to evaluate links between theory, research and practice; work potentially worth dissemination
Well-articulated, critical and reflexive use of personal professional experience to illuminate discussion.
Assesses critically and originally the impact of findings for the wider context
Considered discussion to evaluate links between theory, research and practice; work potentially worth dissemination
Thorough and effective use of personal professional experience to illuminate discussion.
Assesses clearly the impact of findings for the wider context
Beginning to develop critical reflection and analysis of practice through theory and research
Good use of personal professional experience to illuminate discussion.
Some discussion of the impact of findings for the wider context
Links between theory, research and practice partially considered.
Illustrates work with some examples from personal experiences.
Very little consideration of the impact of findings for the wider context
Very little consideration of how theory and research might be related to practice.
Tendency towards anecdote in discussion of personal experience.
Consideration of the impact of findings for the wider context lacking in credibility
No consideration of relationships between theory, practice and research
No evidence of relating professional experience to the assignment/dissertation.
No consideration of the impact of findings for the wider context
4. Presentation
Referencing
Presentation of a high quality very few typos, errors in punctuation.
Referencing is always correct
Well presented, generally few typos, errors in punctuation etc.
Referencing is always correct. Follows required presentational practices, a few typos, errors in punctuation etc. .
Referencing is almost always correct. Usually follows required practices for presentation, but with some issues to be addressed. A number of typos, errors in punctuation etc.
Referencing is generally correct.
Has not followed required presentational conventions
Many typos, errors in punctuation etc.
Many errors in referencing.
Poor presentation adversely affects intelligibility
Many typos, errors in punctuation etc.
No use of conventions in referencing.
MARK: /20 GRADE:
LECTURER’S SIGNATURE: ……………………………………DATE:……………
GRADE: HD: 80-100%; D: 70-79%; C: 60-69%; P: 50-59%; N: 0-49% Unsatisfactory
Assessment Task 2:
Criteria
1. Clear explanation of the research approach taken explore the inquiry/questions; well organised with a logical and demonstrates a coherence and development of ideas through an effective structure for the whole presentation;
2. Indicates substantive knowledge of the chosen content and in relation to critical appraisal of relevant literature;;
3. Provides depth of understanding of foci of inquiry supported by a range of evidence that is critically analysed and provides interpretation viv-a vis a theoretical lens.
4. An explanation of choice of paradigm; methodology and research methods adopted, with reference to appropriate research methodology literature;
5. Articulates connection to theory/practice synthesis and can substantiate significance of the inquiry related to context..
6. Consistent use of appropriate academic style, which includes the use of language, structure, adequate length, as well as accurate documentation of sources.
Grade 5
:4
3
2
1
0
1.Organisation,
Structure
Focus
Organisation of argument
Very clear structure
Originality and high quality in selection of material
Very clear focus throughout
Persuasive articulation of
argument, displaying academic rigour Clear structure
Impressive selection of key issues
Clear focus throughout
Argued in a fluent, readable and scholarly style. Appropriate structure
Major issues identified.
Generally clear focus throughout
Arguments presented cogently and clearly Structure adequate but with some limitations
Adequate identification of issues
Focus not always clear
Consistent line of argument
Noticeable limitation in organising material.
Some key issues unidentified
Unclear focus, meanders from topic to topic
Tendency to incoherence of argument Poor or no clear organisation of material.
No clear identification of issues
No clear focus
No clear argument
2.Critical appraisal of literature
Use of quotation
Sources
Scholarly evaluation of the literature.
Persuasive and original use of relevant quotation
Impressive and original use of a wide range of relevant and current sources Substantial critical appraisal of literature.
Apposite use of relevant quotation
Shows originality in choice and range of sources Evidence of critical appraisal of literature, with a recognition of different perspectives
Effective use of relevant quotation
Uses a variety of sources effectively to support points. Limited criticality in appraisal of literature
Inconsistency in quality of use of quotations
Uses limited sources to support arguments Literature discussed with little or no critical engagement
Choice and use of quotations is often inappropriate
Very narrow range of sources, barely goes beyond study guides No critical engagement with literature
No appropriate use of quotations and/ or direct use of sources without referencing
Little or no use of source material to support arguments
3.Depth of understanding
Evidence
Interpretation and critical analysis
Argumentation
Impressive and original depth of understanding of topic.
Highly reflective use of evidence
Highly critical and reflexive analysis
Convincing synthesis of evidence, analysis and understanding in argumentation Thorough and comprehensive understanding of topic.
Considered weighing of evidence
Thorough and sustained critical analysis
Convincing synthesis of evidence, analysis and understanding in argumentation Clear understanding of topic.
Arguments sustained by reference to relevant evidence.
Issues and theories considered critically.
Credible argument making good use of evidence, analysis and understanding Adequate understanding of topic.
Occasional tendency to assertions not supported by evidence
Limited interpretation and critical analysis.
Reasonably well-argued discussion of topic Conversant with topic but serious gaps or errors.
General lack of evidence in supporting arguments
Lacks depth of understanding and demonstrates undeveloped critical analysis.
Inconsistent argumentation and lack of clarity Major aspects of the topic ignored.
Poor or no use of evidence in supporting arguments
Poor understanding of issues and no critical analysis
Poor argumentation
4.Methodology
Critical appraisal of research design
Methods and procedures
Synthesis of analysis with literature
Assured and critical discussion of methodology and implications
Critical and reflexive appraisal of research design
Displays highly critical and reflective understanding and analysis of methods and procedures used
Reflective discussion of convergence and divergence of research findings in context of literature A clear discussion of methodology, showing understanding of implications
Critical appraisal of research design
Displays critical understanding and analysis of methods and procedures used
Relates and discusses convergence and divergence of findings from research literature Discussion of methodology, showing awareness of implications
Some critical analysis of the research design.
Displays clear understanding and analysis of methods and
procedures used
Considers convergence and divergence of findings from research literature
Some awareness of research methodologies and their implications
Limited critique of research design
Reasons for choice of methods and procedures given.
Limited discussion of convergence and divergence of findings from research literature No clear evidence of understanding research methodologies
Inconsistent critique of research
design
Methods and procedures explained, but no reason for choice given
No discussion of convergence and divergence of findings from research literature Research not methodology poorly or not discussed
Poor or no critique of research design.
Methods and procedures lack explanation
No discussion of convergence and divergence of findings from research literature
5.Theory, practice and research synthesis
Use of personal and professional experience
Implications for wider context
Sensitive and effective use of personal experience to evaluate links between theory, research and practice; work potentially worth dissemination
Well-articulated, critical and reflexive use of personal professional experience to illuminate discussion.
Assesses critically and originally the impact of findings for the wider context
Considered discussion to evaluate links between theory, research and practice; work potentially worth dissemination
Thorough and effective use of personal professional experience to illuminate discussion.
Assesses clearly the impact of findings for the wider context
Beginning to develop critical reflection and analysis of practice through theory and research
Good use of personal professional experience to illuminate discussion.
Some discussion of the impact of findings for the wider context
Links between theory, research and practice partially considered.
Illustrates work with some examples from personal experiences.
Very little consideration of the impact of findings for the wider context
Very little consideration of how theory and research might be related to practice.
Tendency towards anecdote in discussion of personal experience.
Consideration of the impact of findings for the wider context lacking in credibility
No consideration of relationships between theory, practice and research
No evidence of relating professional experience to the assignment/dissertation.
No consideration of the impact of findings for the wider context
6. Presentation
Referencing
Presentation of a high quality very few typos, errors in punctuation.
Referencing is always correct
Well presented, generally few typos, errors in punctuation etc.
Referencing is always correct. Follows required presentational practices, a few typos, errors in punctuation etc. .
Referencing is almost always correct. Usually follows required practices for presentation, but with some issues to be addressed. A number of typos, errors in punctuation etc.
Referencing is generally correct.
Has not followed required presentational conventions
Many typos, errors in punctuation etc.
Many errors in referencing.
Poor presentation adversely affects intelligibility
Many typos, errors in punctuation etc.
No use of conventions in referencing.
MARK: /80 GRADE:
LECTURER’S SIGNATURE: DATE
GRADE: HD: 80-100%; D: 70-79%; C: 60-69%; P: 50-59%; N: 0-49% Unsatisfactory
Hello Dear writer
This is the order that I told you before ( Do not start until you complete research proposal because I do not want do the same mistake like last report you did before )
you will find attached all of the instructions about this order and also sample of this work what should be look like
In addition I need reflection summary
you should represent look like I am really collected data and I did analysis of the research proposal
be careful with the past tense and past simple and all of this kinds of verbs because the lecturer catch me in last report he wanted to fail me in this unit completely
so be careful
regards
mohammed
