Marking descriptors for HE707 and HE706

Marking descriptors for HE707 and HE706

Qualitative assessment 80-100 (A+) First class/Distinction: An outstanding response to the task. All criteria have been achieved to an exceptionally high level 70-79 (A A-) First class/Distinction: An excellent response to the task. All criteria have been achieved to a high standard and many at an exceptionally high level 60-69 (B+ B B-) Upper Second class/ Merit: A good to very good response to the task. All criteria have been met fully at a good or a very good standard 50-59 (C+ C C-) Lower Second class/Pass: A sound, competent response to the task. All criteria have been met and some may have been achieved at a good standard40-49 Fail

An unsatisfactory response to the task

One or more of the criteria have not been met 0-39 (E+ E E-) Fail:

An unsatisfactory response to the task

Most of the criteria have not been metDemonstrate a clear understanding of

complex theoretical issues relating to qualitative research design and performance. Use of references to support arguments

Authoritative knowledge and critical understanding of theories, principles and concepts underpinning research design, and ability to generate insights at or informed by the forefront of the discipline Excellent knowledge and critical understanding of theories, principles and concepts underpinning research design, demonstrating the potential to generate insights at or informed by the forefront of the disciplineGood to very good knowledge and critical understanding of theories, principles and concepts underpinning research designSound knowledge and critical understanding of theories, principles and concepts underpinning research designLimited knowledge and critical understanding of theories, principles and concepts underpinning research design, demonstrating limited insightVery limited knowledge and critical understanding of theories, principles and concepts underpinning research design, demonstrating very little insightCritically evaluate qualitative research findings considering an area of your practice, identifying the strengths and limitations of a variety of qualitative research methods. An original approach to the identification and analysis of problems, demonstrating outstanding levels of intellectual rigour in formulating evidence-based approaches to critically evaluating research.

An original approach to the identification and analysis of problems, demonstrating excellent levels of intellectual rigour in formulating evidence-based approaches to critically evaluating research. Some originality in the approach to the identification and analysis of problems, demonstrating high levels of intellectual rigour in formulating evidence-based approaches to critically evaluating research. Ability to identify and analyse problems in a standard way, and sound evidence of formulating evidence-based approaches to critically evaluating research.

Limited ability to identify and analyse problems, and limited evidence of formulating evidence-based approaches to critically evaluating research.

Very limited ability to identify and analyse problems, and limited evidence of formulating evidence-based approaches to critically evaluating research.

Demonstrate critical awareness in the selection and application of

appropriate qualitative methodology, methods, data collection and analysis for research studies relevant to their professional practice.

Comprehensive understanding demonstrated of the design of qualitative research studies. Originality in the approach to using established techniques in research enquiryExcellent understanding demonstrated of the design of qualitative research studies.

Originality in the approach to using established techniques in research enquiry, Good understanding demonstrated of the design of qualitative research studies.

High level of ability to use established techniques in research enquiry,

Appropriate understanding demonstrated of the design of qualitative research studiesAppropriate level of ability to use established techniques in research enquiry,

Poor understanding demonstrated of the design of qualitative research studiesInsufficient ability to use established techniques in research enquiry,

Inadequate understanding demonstrated of the design of qualitative research studies.

Failure to understand established techniques in research enquiry,

Quality of organisation of essay including presentation and written English (including spelling, grammar, and punctuation). Appropriate use of references including referencing system.

The communication of work including structure, coherence, accuracy and presentation is exemplary throughout and work is of a publishable/exhibitable standard. Correct use of referencing system. The communication of work including structure, coherence, accuracy and presentation is excellent throughout and there is potential for the work to be published/exhibited. Correct use of referencing system. The communication of work including structure, coherence, accuracy and presentation is very good. Correct use of referencing system.

The communication of work including structure, coherence, accuracy and presentation is sound. There may be some inconsistencies in the use of referencing system.

The communication of work including structure, coherence, accuracy and presentation may be adequate but may contain inaccuracies. There may be inaccuracies in the use of referencing system. The communication of work including structure, coherence, accuracy and presentation is inadequate and contains inaccuracies. Incorrect or incomplete use of referencing system.

HE707 Research theory and application

Qualitative Essay

You are asked to:

Devise a question relevant to an aspect of your practice and conduct a systematic search of the literature. Select a qualitative study, critically appraise it and discuss the merits of qualitative research to this aspect of your practice.

1500 words (NB This is an absolute limit you will lose marks if you exceed)

You need to first decide on a research question, that you may or may not want to pursue for your dissertation. There is no need to justify or explain the research question; you simply need to state it at the start of the essay and detail how you conducted the systematic search for your chosen research paper. The content should demonstrate the learning outcomes of the module. In the body of the essay you are required to critically evaluate and appraise your chosen article, highlighting its strengths and limitations. We want to know your thoughts on the quality and level of the research evidence you are presenting. Use the essay to demonstrate your knowledge and understanding - and that you have met the learning outcomes and other marking criteria (see rubric). For example, just stating the name of a research methodology used in a study does not demonstrate your understanding of it. The essay should conclude with a consideration of the merits of qualitative research to the aspect of your practice being investigated. To consider this fully, you will need to discuss the research approach used, discuss alternative qualitative approaches and include a fully referenced discussion of the strengths and limitations of these approaches to support your reasoning.

Essay content

Normally a coursework essay will have three broad sections: an introduction, the main body of the text and a conclusion.

The introduction provides a clear outline of what the essay covers. It relates the content of the essay to the broader context. It might also include the search strategy that you use, including how this relates to your practice.

The body of the essay includes all the content and arguments you wish to put forward. As this section will be lengthy it will often be divided into sub-sections, which may be several paragraphs long and headings may provide the reader with helpful signposting. Each sub-section will highlight the salient points and there will be obvious connections to what has gone before and what will follow. Vague generalisations are best avoided. It is usually best to say what you mean clearly and concisely. Statements will be supported by evidence or referenced to some authority as appropriate. Each paragraph should be offering a key point and so with several paragraphs an argument is being developed. The text should flow from one sentence to the next and from one paragraph to the next, so the reader can follow your argument.

The conclusion summarises what has been said and, where appropriate, indicates what can be deduced from the arguments. New information will not be introduced at this stage. The conclusion is very important, if it is well written it will leave the reader with a lasting and favourable impression of your work. It is certainly worthwhile spending plenty of time on this section.

Format of submission

Neither your name nor your student number should not appear on the front sheet or anywhere else on the assignment

The document in size 11 font with 1.5 line spacing. The left-hand margin will be justified with an inch margin

Do not write a contents page

New paragraphs will be separated by one-line space

Essays can be written in the first or third person

In the footer add page numbers (bottom right)

Spacing between sub-sections may be used

Figures, if used, should be numbered and have a title; a reference may also be appropriateFor referencing style we advise you to use Harvard Style using Macmillan Cite them Right. Other styles may be used if recognised and applied consistently.

No more than one or at most two direct quotations will be used.

Abbreviations will be only be provided when they are in common use - such as LBP (and should be given in full on first use).

Correct any grammar or spelling errors before submission.

The front sheet should use the following layout and include a hyperlink to the article you have chosen to critique. If the essay is being re-submitted, Resubmission will be given on the front sheet.

University of Brighton

School of Sport and Health Sciences

HE707 Research Methods for Health Professionals

Assignment title

Month and Year of submission

Word count = xxxxFull reference to the article considered

Word count is 1500 words, excluding references and appendices (please note appendices are optional and since they are above the word count will not be marked).

The stated length of written coursework must not be exceeded. Any material beyond the stated length of written coursework will normally be disregarded.

Check that you have selected an appropriate qualitative article:

If you wish you can email Josh Cameron j.cameron@brighton.ac.uk a link to the article your propose to consider for confirmation that it is an appropriate qualitative research article.

Submitting essay drafts

You can submit a one-page plan for your essay for feedback (email to Josh Cameron: j.cameron@brighton.ac.uk ) . The deadline for submitting this draft is 12 noon on Mon 14th November. The aim is to provide feedback on these by Mon 21st November.

Submitting your assignment

Please submit your assignment via Turnitin. This can be done using Word or Adobe acrobat (on university computers) or other software (please see My Studies (Assessment section) for instructions as to how this can be done).

You must upload your assignment in the module drop box in student central by the deadline - so that we can do plagiarism checks with JISC software (see below)

The submission date for this work is 4pm on Monday 5th December 2022 (LSPs and agreed extensions 4pm on Monday 19th December 2022).

Late Submission - normally if you hand in your work late you will fail the module, have to resubmit the work and receive a mark capped at 50%.

Results and feedback

Results of marked assignments can normally be viewed on My Studies within 20 working days following the hand in date. Please note the mark is subject to ratification of the examination board.

Extension to the deadline and/or additional considerations

Information about requests for an extension beyond the deadline and/or additional considerations (previously known as mitigating circumstances) can be found here: https://www.brighton.ac.uk/brighton-students/your-learning/problems-with-your-course/index.aspx

Academic Misconduct

The University takes breaches of academic conduct very seriously and all allegations of academic misconduct will be investigated according to the regulations set out in this section and with full regard to the principles of equity and fairness. There can be severe penalties, including the denial of an award, if charges are proved. Academic misconduct includes plagiarism and collusion, where a student submits work originated in sum or in part by someone else, with or without their consent but without acknowledgement (General Examination and Assessment Regulations for Taught Courses: GEAR).

Plagiarism

The School of Sport and Health Sciences reserves the right to use specialist software to help to detect and combat plagiarism. This means that samples of work for each module may be subject to scrutiny using the JISC software.

The University of Brighton is registered with the JISC Plagiarism Detection Service.

The University reserves the right to use the JISC Plagiarism Detection Service and students work submitted for assessment purposes may be submitted for checking to the service. This use will only be within the Universitys Academic Misconduct procedure (General Examination and Assessment Regulations for Taught Courses).

The service complies with UK Data Protection Law.

HEM707 2022/23

Quantitative assessment briefing

Ref

Beigel. J.H. et al (2020). Remdesivir for the treatment of COVID-19 final report. The New England Journal of Medicine.

You can find the full text version of this article on google scholar. Please download the pdf.

This looks like a complex article at first glance, but the principles on which it is based are straight forward. You dont need to investigate details of the physiology or the pharmacology of this work we are interested in the research design, the analysis of the data and the interpretation of the findings.

You will need to look up odds ratio, which are also presented as recovery rate ratio and hazard ratios. I dont expect you look into the specific model used. I also do not expect you to read the supplementary appendix with details of planned analysis.

Please write full answers to the following questions related to this paper:

Explain and justify the design of this study.

From Table 1, give a full account of the following data:

Age data

Time from symptom onset to randomization

From Table 2, give a full account of the data under the heading Recovery for the overall group. Please include all three rows of data in your answer.

From Figure 3, please give a full account of the data for geographical region. Please include an explanation of how you have interpreted the figure.

This paper doesnt give details of the inferential analysis used. Using the stats decision chart that I gave you in class, which of these tests would be most appropriate to look for differences between the Remdesivir and placebo groups, and why?

Your answers should not exceed 1500 words in total and you do not need to use references in your answers. This is not an essay so you dont need an introduction or a conclusion. Short factual answers are fine.

The focus of this assessment is your understanding of this research and interpretation of the data presented in this paper. Make sure that you dont misuse technical terms, precision in the use of language is important to show that you understand the concepts of research and data analysis. Please use your own words so that you demonstrate your understanding of these concepts please note that your work will be checked for plagiarism.

I will be looking for the following in your answer paper:

Clear statistical explanation of the tests used

Clear justification for the use of the tests in this case

Demonstration of the understanding of the data in statistical terms

Demonstration of the understanding of the data in the context of the paper

An explanation of how the analysis adds to your understanding of the data outputs from this study.

You can find the marking criteria for this work on my studies.

You can send a single page draft of this work to me for feedback with a deadline of the 14th November 2022.

The submission date for this work is 5th December 2022 by 4.00 pm.

Marking descriptors for HE707 and HE706

Quantitative assessment 80-100 (A+) First class/Distinction: An outstanding response to the task. All criteria have been achieved to an exceptionally high level 70-79 (A A-) First class/Distinction: An excellent response to the task. All criteria have been achieved to a high standard and many at an exceptionally high level 60-69 (B+ B B-) Upper Second class/ Merit: A good to very good response to the task. All criteria have been met fully at a good or a very good standard 50-59 (C+ C C-) Lower Second class/Pass: A sound, competent response to the task. All criteria have been met and some may have been achieved at a good standard

40-49 Fail

An unsatisfactory response to the task

One or more of the criteria have not been met 0-39 (E+ E E-) Fail:

An unsatisfactory response to the task

Most of the criteria have not been met

Clear justification for the use of the statistical tests in this study with this data

A comprehensive contextual justification of the choice of statistical test in this study with this data

An excellent contextual justification of the choice of statistical test in this study with this data

A good contextual justification of the choice of statistical test in this study with this data

A sound contextual justification of the choice of statistical test in this study with this data

A poor contextual justification of the choice of statistical test in this study with this data, may contain incorrect information

A very poor contextual justification of the choice of statistical test in this study with this data, containing incorrect information

Clear explanation of the statistical tests used

Authoritative knowledge and critical understanding of the principles and concepts of statistical analysis. Excellent knowledge and critical understanding of the principles and concepts of statistical analysis. Good to very good knowledge and understanding of the principles and concepts of statistical analysis. Sound knowledge and understanding of the principles and concepts of statistical analysis.

Limited knowledge and understanding of the principles and concepts of statistical analysis. May demonstrate some inaccuracies and incorrect information

Very limited knowledge and understanding of the principles and concepts of statistical analysis. Explanations demonstrate inaccuracies and incorrect information

Demonstration of the understanding of the statistical outputs in mathematical terms

Comprehensive mathematical explanation of the statistical outputs. Excellent mathematical explanation of the statistical outputs, Good mathematical explanation of the statistical outputs,

Sound mathematical explanation of the statistical outputs, Poor mathematical explanation of the statistical outputs,

Very poor / no mathematical explanation of the statistical outputs,

Demonstration of the understanding of the statistical outputs in the context of the data sets used

Comprehensive interpretation of the meaning of the data generated by the statistical tests, showing clear understanding of the data Excellent interpretation of the meaning of the data generated by the statistical tests, showing clear understanding of the data Good interpretation of the meaning of the data generated by the statistical tests, showing understanding of the data Sound interpretation of the meaning of the data generated by the statistical tests, showing understanding of the data Poor interpretation of the meaning of the data generated by the statistical tests, showing a lack of understanding of the data Ver poor interpretation of the meaning of the data generated by the statistical tests, showing a lack of understanding of the data

An explanation of how the outcome of analysis adds to your understanding of the findings from this study.

Exceptional exploration of the context of the data outputs, demonstrating how the statistical results add to the understanding of the outcome of the study.

Excellent analysis of the context of the data outputs, demonstrating how the statistical results add to the understanding of the outcome of the study.

Good analysis of the context of the data outputs, demonstrating some awareness about how the statistical results add to the understanding of the outcome of the study. Sound analysis of the context of the data outputs, demonstrating some awareness about how the statistical results add to the understanding of the outcome of the study. Limited analysis of the context of the data outputs, demonstrating a lack of awareness about how the statistical results add to the understanding of the outcome of the study.

No analysis of the context of the data outputs, demonstrating no/little awareness of the meaning of the statistical outputs.

Writing style, including the use of technical language The communication of work including structure, coherence, accuracy and presentation is exemplary throughout. Correct use of language throughout. The communication of work including structure, coherence, accuracy and presentation is excellent throughout. Correct use of language throughout.

The communication of work including structure, coherence, accuracy and presentation is very good. Correct use of language.

The communication of work, including structure, coherence, accuracy and presentation is sound. Mostly correct use of language.

The communication of work, including structure, coherence, accuracy and presentation is adequate but may contain inaccuracies of meaning and language. The communication of work including structure, coherence, accuracy and presentation is inadequate and contains inaccuracies of meaning and language