Assessment Brief & Rubric

b bgvgvv

Assessment Brief & Rubric

Contents

TOC o "1-3" h z u Assessment: PAGEREF _Toc145404161 h 3The research proposal (20% of the final mark) PAGEREF _Toc145404162 h 4The content of the research proposal PAGEREF _Toc145404163 h 4The research proposals suggested structure PAGEREF _Toc145404164 h 5Project Submission Instructions PAGEREF _Toc145404165 h 5The Rubric PAGEREF _Toc145404166 h 5The research project (80% of the final mark) PAGEREF _Toc145404167 h 8The content of the research project PAGEREF _Toc145404168 h 8The research project recommended structure PAGEREF _Toc145404169 h 11Project Submission Instructions PAGEREF _Toc145404170 h 11The rubric PAGEREF _Toc145404171 h 11General Assessment Weighting PAGEREF _Toc145404172 h 16How to get help PAGEREF _Toc145404173 h 20

Read this assessment brief carefully; it tells how you going to be assessed, how to submit the assessment on-time and how (and when) you will receive marks and feedback.

Module Code BAE_6_RPR

Module Title Research Project

Lecturer Valerio Ficcadenti

% of Module Mark 100 % of coursework is divided into two sub-components, 20 % of the final mark is devoted to a research proposal, and 80% of the final mark is devoted to the actual project.

Distributed One week before the start of the Module

Submission Method Submit online via this Modules Moodle site

Submission Deadline(s) To be decided

Release of Feedback Feedback will be available online 15 working days after the submission deadline.

Release of Marks Provisional marks will be available 15 working days after the submission deadline.

Assessment:Project assignment overview:

The students work to reach the learning outcome is measured via two individual coursework (sub-components).

SC2_80: A 6,500 words (+/- 10% allowed) Research Report weighted 80% of the final mark.

Submission deadline: 03/05/2024 at 8 PM

Template for submission: please check the submission link and its description on Moodle.

Formative feedback will be given each week in the seminars. Students will discuss the progress of their research projects, starting with identifying potential topics, developing aims and objectives, designing a suitable methodology, putting together a literature review and then collecting, analysing and presenting the findings.

Type: Research Proposal and Project - Thesis

Resources: The resources to be used are in the reading list on the Moodle site.

Word Count: 6,500 words Individual Written Research Project / Project (10%, excluding cover page, references and appendices)

If the word count is not respected, the student will be penalised proportionally to the exceedance of words.

Presentation: Work must be referenced, and a bibliography/reference list must be provided

Work must be submitted as a MS word document (.docx) following the indicated structure

The student number must appear at the front of the coursework. Your name must not be on your coursework.

Referencing: Harvard Referencing should be used; see your Library Subject Guide for guides and tips on referencing.

Regulations: Make sure you understand the University Regulations on expected academic practice and academic misconduct. Note in particular:

Your work must be your own. Markers will be attentive to both the plausibility of the sources provided and the consistency and approach to writing the work. If you do the research and reading and then write it up on your own, giving the reference to sources, you will appropriately approach the work and will not give markers reason to question the authenticity of the work.

All quotations must be credited and properly referenced. Paraphrasing is still considered plagiarism if you fail to acknowledge the source for the expressed ideas.

TURNITIN: When you upload your work to the Moodle site, it will be checked by anti-plagiarism software.

The research project (80% of the final mark)A 6,500 words (+/- 10% allowed) Research Project weighted 80% of the final mark constitutes the second assessment sub-component. It is a research project/thesis the students must develop in their study area.

The content of the research projectAn Introduction section containing:

Background: Briefly outline the context of the research, setting the stage for the problem statement. This could include some key literature, industry trends, or contextual facts that make the research topic timely or important.

Research Problem: Clearly and concisely state the research problem you are addressing. Make sure that this problem statement is specific and researchable within the constraints of your project.

Rationale or Justification: Explain why the research problem is important. This can include its academic significance, its relevance to industry, or its impact on society or policy.

Research Question(s): Enumerate the questions that your research will answer. These should align closely with your objectives and provide a focused direction for the research.

Research Objectives: State the objectives that guide the research. This sets up how you will approach the problem.

Methodology Overview: Provide a high-level overview of the methods you will use to collect and analyse data. Don't go into great detail; that's what the Methodology chapter is for.

Contributions: Explain what new knowledge, solutions, or insights your research aims to provide.

The Literature Review provides a comprehensive overview of existing research on the topic and highlights controversies, methodologies, and findings that are relevant to your study. Also, it contextualises the research in the existing theories. The literature review should not only be a descriptive list but also a critical discussion, evaluating the quality and significance of the existing research. Moreover, it should clearly demonstrate how your study fits into the larger academic dialogue on the topic. By the end of this section, your readers should be convinced of the necessity and relevance of your own research project. Here's what this section should ideally contain:

Thematic Organization: Structure the literature review around major themes or topics that are pertinent to your research problem rather than going chronologically or by author.

Key Theories and Models: Discuss the main theories or models that are commonly used to study the research problem you're focusing on. Explain how they are applied in the existing literature.

Methodologies: Briefly overview the kinds of research methods that have been employed in the literature. Comment on their efficacy and limitations, particularly in relation to your own proposed methods, which are introduced in a dedicated section.

Major Findings: Summarise the key findings from existing research, being sure to note any consensus or disagreement among researchers.

Gaps in the Literature: If there are gaps, clearly state where there are gaps or shortcomings in the existing literature. This is where you can make a compelling case for the importance of your own research.

Controversies and Debates: Highlight any contentious issues, differing viewpoints, or debates that exist within the literature. Offer your own preliminary standpoint if applicable.

Relevance to Your Research: Show how the existing literature informs your research problem, objectives, and methodology. Explicitly point out how your study will add to the existing body of knowledge.

References, for the reference list: Ensure that all the sources you cited are listed in a References section following the guidelines of the citation style you are using.

The section Methodology of research, data presentation and data analysis serves to justify the methods used, offering a transparent and replicable framework. The Research Methodology section serves as a robust framework that justifies your methodological choices and explains how you will execute the research. It provides the reader with a transparent account, thereby enhancing the reliability and validity of your research project. Below is a detailed breakdown of what this section should encompass:

Research Philosophy: Identify the research philosophy you adopt for the study (e.g., positivism, interpretivism) and justify its suitability for your research questions and objectives.

Research Approach: Discuss whether you'll adopt a deductive or inductive approach to the study, substantiating your choice in relation to the research question and objectives. Relate it to other studies.

Research Design: Specify the design type (e.g., exploratory, explanatory, descriptive) and articulate why this design is the most appropriate for your study.

Data type and Data Collection Methods: Describe if usage of primary or secondary data is appropriate. Describe the methods used for data collection such as surveys, interviews, observations, etc., and why they are appropriate.

Sampling: Define your target population, sampling frame, and sampling technique (e.g., random sampling, stratified sampling). Explain the size of your sample and the rationale for this choice.

Data Analysis Techniques: Detail the statistical or analytical methods (e.g., regression analysis, thematic analysis) that you'll use to analyse the data.

Ethical Considerations: Describe ethics role in your methodology, if you collect primary data, say how you grasp informed consent from participants.

Reliability and Validity: Address how you will ensure that your findings are reliable and valid, drawing on appropriate academic literature to support your arguments.

The section Data Presentation, Analysis, and Interpretation must clearly and transparently display your findings, break down their significance, and interpret what they mean in the context of your research objectives. This section is crucial for adding value to your research. It not only presents what you have found but also delves deeply into what those findings mean, offering interpretations grounded in academic rigor. A well-executed "Data Presentation, Analysis, and Interpretation" section adds depth and nuance to your thesis, paving the way for your conclusions and recommendations. Here's what should be included:

Data Presentation: Display your collected data in a structured manner using tables, charts, graphs, or figures. The aim is to make the raw data comprehensible and ready for analysis. This includes descriptive statistics, initial observations, or other methods of data summarisation that serve as a starting point for in-depth analysis.

Data Analysis: Conduct in-depth analysis using the methods outlined in your Research Methodology section. This could include statistical tests, coding of qualitative data, or other analytical techniques.

Key Findings: Summarise the main findings from your data analysis. These findings should directly relate to your research objectives and questions.

Interpretation: Interpret the key findings, drawing on the literature review for contextual understanding. Explain what these findings mean in a broader academic and practical context.

Integration with Previous Research: Compare your findings with those in the literature review. Discuss similarities, differences, and how your research contributes to the existing body of knowledge.

Discussion of Objectives: Go back to your research objectives listed in the introduction and discuss how your findings address them. Confirm or refute each hypothesis (especially those made by others), providing evidence from your data. Discuss the implications of your findings for the field of your research.

Acknowledge limitations of your methodology and indicate how you plan to mitigate these limitations, or explain the implications of these limitations for your study.

5) In the Conclusion section the research questions and objectives set forth at the beginning are responded and addressed, and conclusions are drawn based on the findings and their implications, as set in the previous section. The "Conclusion" section should be written in a way that brings closure to the research. It's not merely a summary but rather a synthesis of the entire work, offering insights and reflections that stem from the data and its analysis. This section should leave the reader complete answer to the research question(s). Below is a breakdown of what this section should include:

Introduction to the Conclusion: Briefly recap the research objectives and questions to remind the reader of the study's aims. Summarise the major findings of the study, aligning them directly with the research objectives and questions initially set forth.

Interpretation and Synthesis: Synthesise the results to offer a broader interpretation.

Formally answer the research question with an evidence-based narrative. The evidence have to come from the previous section. Nothing should be added at this point.

Implications: Elaborate on the theoretical and practical implications of your findings. How can they impact academia, industry, policy, or society?

Final Thoughts: This could be a broader reflection on the research process, the methodologies employed, or any personal learning outcomes you've experienced as a researcher.

6) Bibliography / Reference list (as per Harvard Referencing Style. Every source used in the project must be listed here, and every source listed here must be cited in the text. Project Bibliography/References should be substantially distributed from a variety of sources such as: Corporate/industry/organisational websites, Web-repositories, e-books, printed books, academic journals, magazines, monographs, reports etc.

7) Appendix it is used for additional material. It must be used to present proof of your authorisation to collect primary data if the research uses primary data. It has to be used to present how the researcher has grasped the informed consent. It should be used to present the data collection tool.

If the student collected primary data, the ethics form used to apply for obtaining a green light on the data collection has to be attached. Furthermore, one has to see informed consent and/or proof of how the informed consent has been grasped. This is not marked, but if it is missing, it may cost the student a fail or a strong penalisation.

The research project recommended structureThe research project should comprise the following sections/chapters:

1) Introduction (~ 15 % of the words)

2) Literature Review (~ 20 % of the words)

3) The methodology of research

4) Data Presentation, Analysis, and Interpretation (~ 25% of the words)

5) Conclusion (~ 15 % of the words)

6) Bibliography / Reference list (As per Harvard Referencing Style - the words do not count to reach 6500)

7) Appendix (the words do not count to reach 6500)

Project Submission InstructionsYou must use the dedicated link on Moodle to submit your project in a MS word document (.docx) format. We recommend using the suggested structure. The submission is subjected to a plagiarism check via Turnitin. Assignments not available at the time of the deadline will be considered late unless an extension has been previously agreed with the Module Tutor.

To submit an electronic copy:

Click on the provided link in Moodle

Type your assignment name in the required field

Upload your assignment

Don't forget to tick the confirmation box

Click on 'add submission.'

The rubricClick here to access the SC2_80 Research Project Rubric and Assessment Criteria (worth 80% of the final mark)Assessment Criteria % of Mark Distinction and Above Merit Pass Fail

Executive Summary (Facultative) Not weighted

1. Introduction and Background 10% - Clearly contextualised research in real-world facts and ongoing scientific debates.

- Clearly articulated problem and question.

- Highly valid topic concerning the area of study.

- Clear scope, objectives and aim. - Adequately contextualised research in real-world facts and ongoing scientific debates.

- Adequate problem and question.

- Relevant topic concerning the area of study.

- Clear but less detailed scope, objectives and aim. - Sufficiently contextualised research in real-world facts and ongoing scientific debates.

- Stated but unclear problem and question.

- Some relevance in the topic concerning area of study.

- Mentioned but less specific scope, objectives and aim. - Poorly contextualised research in real-world facts and ongoing scientific debates.

- Unclear or missing problem.

- Lacks relevance in the topic concerning the area of study.

- Unclear or missing scope, and/or objectives.

2. Literature Review 15% - Comprehensive understanding and contextualisation within theory.

- Wide and relevant variety of academic sources cited.

- Excellent critical review of the sources, comparing and contrasting methods and results from research in the literature. - Good understanding and contextualisation within theory.

- Good range of academic sources.

- Good critical review of the sources, comparing and contrasting methods and results from research in the literature - Some understanding and contextualisation within theory.

- Limited variety of academic sources.

- Basic critical review of the sources, comparing and contrasting methods and results from research in the literature - Lack of understanding or contextualisation within theory.

- Limited or no academic sources.

- Lack of critical review of the sources, comparing and contrasting methods and results from research in the literature

3. Methodology.

The appropriateness of methods is evaluated by considering the contextualisation of Research Philosophy, Approach and Design. Also, a focus on data is highly considered. 20% - Highly appropriate methods. Focus on Research Philosophy, Design and Approach. Presence of a robust supporting rationale for their selection.

- Thorough considerations around the data selected for the analysis and the collection mean (description of population, sample and sampling techniques)

- Direct link to research question, objectives, and aim.

- Thorough considerations/reflections around ethics for primary and secondary data collection/usage. - Appropriate methods with rationale. Focus on Research Philosophy, Design and Approach.

- Meaningful considerations around the data selected for the analysis and the collection mean (description of population, sample and sampling techniques)

- Some links between methods and research question.

- Some good considerations/reflections around ethics for primary and secondary data collection/usage. - Some appropriateness of methods but lacking strong rationale. Focus on Research Philosophy, Design and Approach.

- Presence of considerations around the data selected for the analysis and the collection mean (description of population, sample and sampling techniques).

- Limited link to research objectives.

- Poor considerations/reflections around ethics for primary and secondary data collection/usage. - Inappropriate methods or lack of rationale. Focus on Research Philosophy, Design and Approach.

- Lack of considerations around the data selected for the analysis and the collection mean (description on population, sample and sampling techniques).

- No clear link to research objectives.

- Lack of considerations /reflections around ethics for primary and secondary data collection/usage.

4. Data Presentation, Analysis, and Interpretation 30% - Comprehensive coverage of objectives, with tools logically cascaded from the methodology chapter.

- Excellent analytical presentation of the results to cover the objectives.

- In-depth discussion and evaluation of the analysis. - Good coverage of objectives, with tools logically cascaded from the methodology chapter.

- Good analytical presentation of the results to cover the objectives.

- Adequate discussion and evaluation of the analysis. - Some coverage of objectives, with tools logically cascaded from the methodology chapter.

- Vague analytical presentation of the results to cover the objectives.

- Limited discussion and evaluation of the analysis. - Lack of coverage of objectives, with tools logically cascaded from the methodology chapter.

- Lack of analytical presentation of the results to cover the objectives.

- Inadequate or missing discussion and evaluation of the analysis.

5. Conclusion 15% - Strong and appropriate conclusions with formal answers to the research questions based on the elements from the previous section.

- Highly relevant and practical recommendations. - Good but less detailed conclusions and answers to the research questions based on the elements from the previous section.

- Relevant recommendations. - Basic conclusions and answers to the research questions based on the elements from the previous section.

- Some relevance in recommendations. - Inadequate or missing conclusions and answer to the research questions based on the elements from the previous section.

- Irrelevant or no recommendations.

6. Presentation of the Whole Work 10% - Impeccable structure and formatting.

- Excellent coherence and clarity.

- Impeccable referencing format

- Good structure and formatting.

- Generally coherent and clear.

- Good referencing formatting.

- Some issues in structure or formatting.

- Some coherence but could be improved.

- inconsistent formatting of references

- Poor structure and formatting.

- Lack of coherence and clarity.

- Lack of structure in the way the references are reported

Appendix If the student collected primary data, the ethics form used to apply for obtaining a green light on the data collection has to be attached. Furthermore, one has to see informed consent and/or proof of how the informed consent has been grasped.

This is not marked, but it costs the student a fail if it is missing.

For a better understanding:

Distinction and Above: 70% and above

Merit: 60%-69%

Pass: 40%-59%

Fail: Below 40%

General Assessment WeightingCriteria Feedforward comments

100-80% 79-70% 69-60% 59-50% 49-40% 39-30% 29-0%

50% 1. Research

Systematic identification and use of academic and relevant resources Extensive independent relevant research evidenced by quality and quantity used. Ability to draw on own research and that of others. Extensive independent relevant research evidenced by quality and quantity used. Some autonomous research. Wide range of relevant sources identified and used. Very little guidance needed. A range of sources identified and used. Limited guidance needed. Limited research identified and used. Some guidance needed to complete research tasks. Some evidence of research but insufficient amount. Needs support to develop research skills. Little or no research presented. Needs significant support to develop research skills.

2. Subject Knowledge

Understanding and application of subject knowledge. Contribution to subject debate. Shows sustained breadth, accuracy and detail in understanding key aspects of subject. Contributes to subject debate. Awareness of ambiguities and limitations of knowledge. Shows breadth, accuracy and detail in understanding key aspects of subject. Contributes to subject debate. Some awareness of ambiguities and limitations of knowledge. Accurate and extensive understanding of key aspects of subject. Evidence of coherent knowledge. Accurate understanding of key aspects of subject. Evidence of coherent knowledge. Understanding of key aspects of subject. Some evidence of coherent knowledge. Some evidence of superficial understanding of subject. Inaccuracies. Little or no evidence of understanding of subject. Inaccuracies.

3. Critical Analysis

Analysis and interpretation of sources, literature and/or results. Structuring of issues/debates. Very high-quality analysis developed independently.

Sustained evaluation and synthesis of resources. Use of evidence-based arguments. Thoroughly identifies trends, inconsistency, congruence, and states the implications. Sustained evaluation and synthesis of resources. Use of evidence-based arguments. Thoroughly identifies trends, inconsistency, congruence, and states the implications. Evaluation and synthesis of resources. Use of evidence-based arguments. Identifies trends, inconsistency, congruence, and states the implications. Evaluation and synthesis of resources. Use of evidence-based arguments. Some attempt at evaluation and synthesis of resources. Some use of evidence-based arguments. Limited evaluation of resources. Limited use of evidence-based arguments Little or no evaluation of resources. Very little use of evidence-based arguments.

4. Testing and Problem-Solving Skills

Design, implementation, testing and analysis of product/process/system/idea/solution(s) to practical or theoretical questions or problems Autonomous creation and novel implementation. Adapts to unforeseen practical and theoretical challenges to achieve identified goals. Almost entirely autonomous creation and implementation. Adapts to unforeseen practical and theoretical challenges to achieve identified goals. Mainly autonomous creation and implementation. Adapts to unforeseen practical and theoretical challenges to achieve identified goals. Some autonomy to create and implement. Some adaption made to unforeseen practical and theoretical challenges to achieve identified goals. Exploration of possible solution(s). Use of established approaches to resolve practical and theoretical problems. Limited exploration of possible solution(s) using established approaches to resolve practical and theoretical problems. Little or no exploration of solution(s). Question or problem unresolved.

5. Experimentation

Problem-solving and exploration of the assessment including risk taking and testing of ideas.

Evidence of rich, in-depth exploration and highly innovative problem-solving. Responds to assessment in a way that pushes boundaries and/or makes exciting new connections possible within discipline. Finds a balance between experimentation and resolution to create a highly coherent and innovative piece of work. Evidence of in-depth exploration and innovative problem-solving. Responds to assessment in a way that pushes boundaries and/or makes new connections possible within discipline. Finds a balance between experimentation and resolution to create a coherent and innovative piece of work. Clear evidence of exploration and experimentation. The work may not find the balance between experimentation and the attempt to create a coherent piece of work. There is some problem-solving evident but lacks creative exploration and experimentation. Some evidence of limited problem-solving. Appropriate response to assessment but there is little development and exploration evident. Some evidence of engagement with assessment but it is insufficiently developed. Unable to engage with the challenges of assessment. Little or no evidence of engagement with the assessment, it shows little development.

6. Practical Competence

Skills to apply theory to practice or to test theory Consistently applies comprehensive practical and/or technical skills which reflect the correct application of theory to context. Applies comprehensive practical and/or technical skills which reflect the correct application of theory to context. Applies practical and/or technical skills very well and with careful application of theory to context. Applies practical and/or technical skills correctly and with some application of theory to context with only minimal errors. Applies a sufficient level of practical and/or technical skills but with some errors. Limited application of theory to context. Applies some aspects of the practical and/or technical skills but these are incomplete or contain important errors. Very limited application of theory to context. Limited application of some aspects of the practical and/or technical skills. No application of theory to context.

7. Communication and Presentation

Clear intention in communication. Audience needs are predicted and met. Presentation format is used skilfully. Work is well structured. Communication is entirely clear, persuasive and compelling with very skilful use of the presentation format. Presentation addresses fully the needs of the audience. Communication is clear, persuasive and compelling with very skilful use of the presentation format. Presentation addresses fully the needs of the audience. Communication is clear, mostly persuasive and compelling with skilful use of the presentation format. Presentation addresses the needs of the audience. Communication is clear, with skilful use of the presentation format. Presentation takes into account the needs of the audience. Communication is mostly clear and presentation format is adequate. Presentation may sometimes not take into account the needs of the audience. Communication is unclear because presentation format is not used adequately and/or the needs of the audience are not taken into account. Communication is very unclear because presentation format is not used adequately, and the needs of the audience are not taken into account.

8. Academic Integrity

Acknowledges and gives credit to the work of others follows the conventions and practices of the discipline including appropriate use of referencing standards for discipline. Consistent, error free application of relevant referencing conventions with great attention to detail. Consistent, error free application of relevant referencing conventions. Consistent application of relevant referencing conventions with few errors. Application of relevant referencing conventions, with some errors and / or inconsistencies. Generally correct application of relevant referencing conventions, with some errors and / or inconsistencies. Limited application of referencing conventions and / or errors. Very limited or no application of referencing conventions, and/or multiple errors.

10. Personal and Professional Development

Management of learning through self-direction, planning and reflection Takes full responsibility for own learning and development through continuous cycles of well-articulated purposeful analysis and planning, supported by extensive evidence Takes full responsibility for own learning and development through continuous cycles of well-articulated purposeful analysis and planning, supported by evidence. Reflection and planning are self-directed, continuous, habitual and evidenced clearly. Strengths have been built on; weaknesses have been mitigated. Evidence that a cycle of reflection and planning has been continuous and productive. Actively works to develop strengths and mitigate weaknesses. Evidence that reflection and planning have led to increased disciplinary engagement and commitment. Developing an awareness of strengths and weaknesses. Weak evidence of reflection and planning for learning but not followed through consistently. Incomplete awareness of personal strengths and weaknesses. Insufficient evidence of reflection or planning for learning and no evidence of awareness of personal strengths and weaknesses.

11. Performance Quality

Demonstration of embodied practice including affecting and being affected. An exceptional level of embodied awareness revealed in a highly sensitive and detailed performance. Highly developed embodied awareness; consistent detailed and accurate responsiveness; clear and dynamic intentionality / connectivity Well-developed embodied awareness; for the most part, a detailed and accurate responsiveness; a dynamic intentionality / connectivity Some moments of embodied awareness; responsiveness is more generalised; intentions / connections are evident, but not dynamic Little evidence of embodied awareness; responsiveness is slow and inorganic; intentions are self-conscious or guarded and lack connection Blocked embodied awareness: attempts are frustrated by lack of engagement or resistance to make connections. Responsiveness is consciously withheld; there is no attempt to make connections or embody intentionality

12. Data literacy

Competence in working ethically with data including data access, data extraction, interpretation and representation. An exceptional level of competence in the ethical use and presentation of data. Highly developed competence in the ethical use and presentation of data. Well-developed competence in the ethical use and presentation of data. Evidence of competence in the ethical use and presentation of data. Limited evidence of competence in the ethical use and presentation of data, with some minor errors. Evidence of limited competence in the ethical use and presentation of data, with some major errors. Little or no evidence of competence in the ethical use and presentation of data.