FacultyofEducationHealthandWellbeing 7HW139/UM1
- Subject Code :
7HW139-UM1
Faculty Education Health and Wellbeing Assessment Brief (2024-25)
|
Module title: |
Research Dissertation in Health |
|
Module code: |
7HW139/UM1 |
|
Deadline for assessment 1 submission: |
2.00pm 10/03/25 |
|
Assessment 1 Resubmission date: |
2.00pm on 07/07/25 |
|
Deadline for assessment 2 submission: |
2.00pm on 08/09/25 |
|
Assessment 2 Resubmission date: |
2.00pm on 05/01/26 |
|
Markers/Assessors: |
Dissertation Supervisors (Academic Staff from School of Health and Society) |
|
Date of expected feedback: |
4 weeks after the deadline |
|
Marking/Moderating Team: |
Dr Peter Collins Module Team |
Module Description |
|
In this module you will design, conduct and evaluate an original research study within the field of Public Health or Health Social Care. You will carry out a research investigation on a topic area within the field of your choosing, and you will demonstrate an in-depth understanding of relevant theoretical frameworks, research methodologies and applications for your chosen discipline. This module is the independent study element of your Masters Degree. The module is designed to be studied after or in conjunction with a research skills module where your research proposal is planned and assessed. |
Module Learning Outcomes: |
|
1) Critically analyse existing evidence to design and develop a strong rationale and rigorous methodological approach for an original research study related to health. 2)Apply appropriate analytical methods to your gathered data and critically evaluate the impact of your study, applying the findings to policy, research and practise in your discipline (e.g. public health, health and social care). 3)Disseminate your research study by producing a clearly written, coherently argued, accurately presented research project thesis. |
Assessment1:OralPresentationwithOnlineSubmission(10%weighting) |
|
This assessment enables you to demonstrate that you meet learning objective one, by orally presenting a research proposal (with the use of a visual aide such as PowerPoint slides also required). This presentation will be 10 minutes long and followed by a series of questions, to provide you with an opportunity to demonstrate a depth of knowledge andunderstanding, in regards to your research studys plan, rationale and methodological approach. For more information, please see Assessment 1 Guidance Marking Criteria. |
|
Assessment length: 15 minutes (10 minutes to present research proposal 5 minutes to answer questions). Assessment weighting:10% Assessment Deadline: 10th March 2025 (2.00pm) |
Assessment 2: Research Dissertation (90% weighting) |
|
The research dissertation will enable you to demonstrate that you meet all three of the learning objectives, by presenting an original research study, that is theoretically and methodologically sound, and presented as a clearly written, coherently argued, accurately presented research project thesis. For the Assessment 2 marking criteria and feedback sheet, please click here. Assessment length: 15,000 words Assessment weighting: 90% Assessment Deadline: 8th September 2025 (2.00pm) |
Signposting to academic support: |
|
Core teaching materials and learning resources are available via the Canvas module page. Alongside the taught seminars and drop-in support, you will be allocated a dissertation supervisor, who will provide you with bespoke support with your research project. Details of the supervision process can be found in canvas (via the modules tab) under the heading Details about the Dissertation Supervision Process. Your grade will be affected if you do not remain within 10?low or above the specified word limit (3,000 words). Your work must be supported by sound academic sources with full Harvard Referencing. As per University guidelines, you must not be more than 10% over or under the specified word count. Additional support with academic skills can be found via this link: https://www.wlv.ac.uk/lib/skills-for-learning/ |
FEHWEMAdisclaimerstatement
IMPORTANTNOTE:
It is solely the students responsibility to ensure that:
- thecorrect (e.g. latest or final, finished) version of the file is uploaded
- thefile submitted is uploaded to the correct Module and assignment link;
- thefile is in a format that can be opened on university computers, g..doc, .docx, .rtf,
.odt-NOT PAGES format.
Any file submitted to an incorrect link or in a file format that cannot be opened on a university computer will count as a non-submission, even if it has been uploaded before the deadline
Your work will assessed against the Assessment 1 Marking Criteria and the Assessment 2 Marking Criteria, respectively. These criteria are informed by the module s learning outcomes, and your mark will be calculated according to the level 7 grade descriptors (see next page).
University of Wolverhampton Grade Descriptors Postgraduate (Level 7)
|
Marking band |
Work demonstrates: |
|
90-100% Outstanding |
outstanding originality and/or independent thought that could be considered for dissemination to the broader discipline (e.g. through publication in a journal) engagement in a focused academic debate, which presents a range of evidence underpinning a deep understanding of all the issues studied challenges to current theory and/or practice no errors outstanding problem-solving and/or analytical and/or creativity skills |
|
80-89% Excellent |
excellent level of originality and/or independent thought with the potential for dissemination to the broader discipline engagement in an academic debate which presents clear evidence of a considered understanding of the professional issues studied, the approach adopted and the position taken enhancements to current theory and/or practice very few errors excellent problem-solving and/or analytical and/or creativity skills |
|
70-79% Very good |
analysis and critique of concepts, models of key authors, rival theories, and major debates together with some evidence of synthesis the complexity of the context in which the work is situated differing perspectives and interpretations a few minor errors very good problem-solving and/or analytical and/or creativity skills |
|
60-69% Good |
capacity to express views based on sound argument and solid evidence in an articulate and concise way effective engagement in a critical dialogue relating to professional practice willingness to question and to explore issues and to synthesise theoretical perspectives and practical application a few minor errors good;problem-solving and/or analytical and/or creativity skills |
|
50-59% Sufficient |
evidence of engagement with pertinent issues presentation of key authors and debates evidence of suitable basic reading clear presentation, but requiring stronger presentation of synthesis or evaluation sufficient problem-solving and/or analytical and/or creativity skills |
|
40-49% Insufficient |
little evidence of an ability to apply the principles of the module to a wider context an overly descriptive account demonstrating only minimal interpretation, and very limited evidence of analysis, synthesis or evaluation lack of counterarguments and/or alternative frames of reference insufficient problem-solving and/or analytical and/or creativity skills |
|
0-39% Poor |
fundamental misconceptions of the content little or no understanding of relevant theory and/or practice no evidence of independent thought or criticality a descriptive form of presentation |
/p>
