The Advancing Professional 66-607210

Module Title:

The Advancing Professional

Code:

66-607210

Level:

6 40 credits

Module Leader/ Assessment set by:

The assessment has been developed in conjunction with the various subject teams across the College.

The module lead for the module is Victoria Cadman (ODP), v.cadman@shu.ac.uk

You will also have a lead from your own professional group.

Assessment title:

Primary research proposal

or

Extended literature review

or

Service evaluation proposal

or

Service improvement proposal

Mode of submission:

You should submit your assessment electronically via the submission link provided in the Assessment section of the module Blackboard site.

Task details and instructions:

The assessment is either a project report OR a detailed proposal, to address the question/aim that you have identified through your Task 1 work.

The precise nature of the project is negotiated and agreed with your supervisor.

This assignment will enable you to either:

undertake (literature reviews only)

OR

design (primary research, service evaluation, service improvement)

a project that addresses the question/aim identified in relation to your chosen topic of interest through your Task 1 work.

To achieve a pass, you should pay close attention to the following points:

? There is no requirement to provide a full introduction for this task as your Task 1 work acts as this. However, please provide 2-3 sentences stating your research question/project aim and chosen type of project.

? If you have refined your project question/aim since your Task 1 submission as a result of engaging with tutorials with your supervisor, you should provide the rationale for this, and state your new research question/project aim as the opening paragraph of your work.

? Provide justification for your chosen type of project (ie research proposal, extended literature review, service evaluation proposal, service improvement proposal). Why have you opted for this approach to addressing your question/aim?

? Demonstrate a sufficient understanding of the methods and skills employed/proposed within your project and why these were selected over alternatives. You may find it useful to refer to the methods sections of reporting guidelines/checklists such as CONSORT, STROBE, SQUIRE, SRQR, SPIRIT. Links to checklists for different study designs can be found via the Equator network: https://www.equator-network.org//reporting-guidelines/

These will help you to structure your work appropriately following accepted academic practices and enable you to check that you have considered the key elements for your project type. For extended literature reviews, PRISMA, or a suitable alternative agreed with your supervisor, should be used.

? Demonstrate a satisfactory application of the knowledge and understanding of methods and skills relating to your chosen project through the creation of essential related documents that would be submitted as part of a literature review/project proposal in practice. This will vary depending on type of project but is likely to include the following; participant information sheet, participant consent form, recruitment documents, data collection tools (eg surveys, interview topic guides, validated assessment tools), exemplar ethics application, data extraction table, exemplar completed critical appraisal tool, process map.

Such documents should be referred to within the body of your work at the relevant points and provided in the appendices as support/evidence for your discussion and application of knowledge.

? Demonstrate an understanding of ethics and related processes. You must adhere to any processes relevant to your project.

For extended literature reviews, this includes the timely submission of the relevant UREC form for approval before you start to conduct your search strategy. You must receive approval from your supervisor as a signature on your form before you proceed with your search.

For all other projects, as these are proposals only, you must not collect any data.

Failure to follow (non-compliance with) University ethics protocols constitutes Academic Misconduct and will be treated accordingly.

? Demonstrate a satisfactory level of critical analysis/appraisal, and synthesis of research methods/service evaluation/service improvement literature to inform the design of your project and/or meet your project aim. You should provide justification for each aspect of your study design based on your critical analysis of the relevant literature.

? Provide an informed discussion on the potential impact on patients/service users/professionals/service provision. This could be in relation to the findings of the work, and/or in the context of participation in proposed projects as appropriate for your chosen project type. Explain how findings/potential findings and conclusions drawn from your project could inform practice/service provision and/or future research. It may also be relevant to identify and suggest opportunities for future research and what the value of such work would be.

? Throughout your work, you should emphasise points and opportunities for collaborative working including opportunity for coproduction and input from patients/service users, stakeholders, and other relevant third parties. How does the work you are doing inform the work of other professions and wider practice? How does work from other professions inform the context of your chosen project? Which other professions/services do you need to consider for undertaking your project? Identify points of collaboration and explain the benefits to patients/service users/staff/service provision. Are there any barriers to this way of working and how does your chosen project design enable you to overcome these?

? Communicate work in a clear, balanced, and coherent manner. The checklists mentioned earlier in the brief may help you with this as they provided structure and key points.

? Follow appropriate academic writing conventions and agreed referencing requirements.

For all work; SHU standard for referencing (APA) will be required. Further guidance can be found here https://libguides.shu.ac.uk/referencing

Presentation of written work:

? Your work MUST be presented electronically

? Use a clear font such as Arial, Verdana or Times New Roman using font size 12 and black text colour.

? Your work should be submitted in Microsoft Word format for example .doc or .docx file type. All SHU computers have Microsoft Word installed. If you are using your home computer and you do not have Word installed or use a Mac you can either use your free SHU Office 365 account to create your assignments in Word online, download and then upload the document to grade centre OR to create the assignment in Pages and export to Word then upload.

? Text should be presented using double line spacing except for quotes over two lines long which should be indented and single spaced as per SHU referencing Guidelines.

? Pages must be clearly numbered.

? Avoid using bullet points. It is preferable to express your ideas using complete and structured sentences.

? Leave yourself time to proofread for errors and omissions. Marks will be lost if assignments contain numerous errors of grammar, spelling and style, or, if cited references and the reference list do not match or the source material is not properly incorporated in the text.

? If you have a Learning Contract, please ensure that you copy the wording of the sticker given to you by the disabled student support team onto the front page of your assignment

? IT problems are not a valid reason for late submission - it is your responsibility to ensure that you leave plenty of time to cope with unforeseen delays.

? The submission deadline is always 3.00pm on the due date. Please leave yourself ample time to submit PRIOR to 3.00pm.

Please remember:

? Check your hand-in date and time carefully; late assignments will not be accepted, unless there is an approved extension. Late submissions without an extension in place will be marked as 0.

? Keep a copy of all your work and back-up with a USB stick. You should also keep a hard copy of all your submitted work.

? Do not lend your work to another student and do not leave your work (USB stick) where it can be accessed by others.

? Ensure that you are familiar with the Cheating and Plagiarism Regulations

? Ensure that you have accurately referenced all quotations within the assignment and that all references used in the text are accurately identified in the reference list.

? Ensure that you have included a full reference list at the end of your assignment and that you have followed the University guidelines for referencing.

Any reference to workplaces, patients, clients, carers and their family must maintain anonymity and confidentiality. Failure to maintain confidentiality will result in academic misconduct proceedings.

Module

learning outcomes:

On successful completion of this assessment, you will be able to:

Module Learning Outcomes

2. Identify and justify and appropriate study design and suitable methods including ethical issues relating to the chosen area.

3. Conduct or design a study an appropriate analysis and draw reasoned conclusions to make recommendations for practice.

4. Communicate your findings within accepted academic and professional conventions in a suitable format.

Engaging with the University Grade Descriptor 3 (marking grid)

To develop the summative assessment, you should engage with the University Grade Descriptor (see Assessment tab on Blackboard), where you will see the expectations for the different range of marks that will inform your work and other supporting documents. The UGD3 information should be used alongside engagement with areas such as;

assessment brief, which will clearly detail the assessment task

learning material

learning outcomes for the module (these will be reflected in the task)

feedback from previous formative/summative assessment

study skills

Weighting within module:

This task carries 80% of the final module grade.

You must achieve 40% or above overall to pass the task.

You must pass both tasks to pass the module.

Word count/ duration (if applicable)

This assignment should be 4000 words in length. This word limit relates to the word count given by the word count tool in Microsoft Word and should be included on the front cover page

For work that is >10% over the word limit, the marker will not review any content beyond this point ie it will not be marked.

Note that all text (including tables) is included in the word count, from the point of the initial introduction which means the initial title page is not included. At the end, the list of references is also not included.

You can make use of appendices (also not included in the word count) but these should be used appropriately and not used simply as a means of managing the word limit (your supervisor can provide further guidance).

Formative Feedback

To support your completion of the assessment process you are offered the opportunity of formative feedback and guidance from your supervisor during designated tasks and sessions throughout the module. You will also have the opportunity for 1:1 supervision time and a supervision record to help you plan towards completing the module assessment successfully.

Marking

Your assignment will be marked using the University Grade descriptor (UGD3). The UGD marking grid (see extract below), can be found in the Assessment Tab, this explains the expectations for the marking bands to support you in developing your summative assessment.

Your results will be published with the percentage point eg 62%

Feedback arrangements:

You can expect to receive feedback within 15 working days of the submission date, taking into account any bank holidays and university holidays. The grade will be indicated on grade centre.

Feedback occurs across teaching and learning, formative, and summative assessment spaces to support your development and understanding. Feedback in your final work will illustrate key areas, together with summary comments. A range of media may be used to support this.

Refer attempt Feedback will consist of a revised mark and summary comments.

If there are any aspects of your feedback that you do not understand then you can contact your marker for clarification.

Feedback is normally accessed via My Grades in Blackboard.

Please note that feedback practice may vary in module where circumstances require.

All marks and feedback are internally moderated and a sample is seen by the external examiner.

If you require the reassessment attempt

You will be able to arrange a one to one tutorial with your marker to gain further clarification of the modifications that you need to do to your work to enable you to reach the required standard.

Support arrangements:

You can obtain support for this assessment in several ways:

By attending the introduction and assessment guidance session at the beginning of the module.

By attending timetabled sessions.

By engaging with your supervisor to seek advice for any aspects related to the specific content of your assignment and undertaking any advised activities for the development of your work.

By attending skills workshops provided by library services specifically for this module (details on the module Blackboard site).

Assessment padlet of the module Blackboard site.

Library Services

There is a wealth of information and support available from the learning centre. Details of how they can support you are available here: https://library.shu.ac.uk/index.html.

Academic Misconduct

Academic misconduct is any action, attempted action or omission that may result in you gaining an unfair advantage over other students in an assessment, where there is evidence to demonstrate that your actions or behaviour arose from an intention to deceive the marker. It is a breach of the Code of Academic Conduct and as such will be investigated under the Academic Conduct Regulation. It is a serious matter and has the potential to result in a number of sanctions which could impact on your ability to progress academically. Further information on misconduct can be found by typing Academic Misconduct into the search tab in Blackboard.

Breaches of confidentiality and unethical practices

The University takes this very seriously and failure to follow confidentiality, anonymity, or follow research ethics protocols can result in a student having to go before an Academic Conduct Panel. This is important information for students at the Dissertation phase of their studies.

? Breaches of confidentiality and unethical practices include the following:

? Non- compliance with university ethics procedures.

? Failure to gain ethics approval prior to undertaking research.

? Conducting research in a way that could threaten national or international security.

? Direct naming of an individual or organisation (where local protocols prohibit).

? Inclusion of documentation that links to privileged information.

? Provision of information that could lead to identification of a service user or organisation e.g. date of birth, hospital record numbers, addresses or reference to unusual circumstances that could lead to identification of individuals or organisations.

Please do not disclose the name of any Trusts, personnel, and participants or disclose any information that would mean an organisation, service or person can be identified.

Assessment Information

If you have any questions about assessment rules, you can be found by typing Assessment Regulations into the search tab in Blackboard.

Extensions and exceptional circumstances

There may be circumstances where you need to apply for an extension, that is typically a 5 working day extension or exceptional circumstances. Further information on how to do this can be found by typing Extension into the search tab in Blackboard.

Who to contact

If you have any queries about this assessment, in the first instance please contact the module lead for your profession (identified at the beginning of your module teaching), before contacting the overall module lead. Contact details are available on the module Blackboard site.

Reassessment:

The minimum pass mark for this module is 40% and you must pass both tasks.

If you do not achieve the minimum pass criteria (40%) you are entitled to a reassessment at the end of the module for any tasks that you referred (unless due to academic conduct).

If you are referred you will be given one final attempt after the assessment board has ratified the mark.

The maximum overall mark you can be awarded in a referred assessment task that you pass is 40%.

Reassessment will be a rework of your existing work.

Please note, if you do refer, the submission date will not show on your Assessment Statement until your first submission has been through the Assessment Board, and the submission may be due soon afterwards. Due to the possible short timeframes from the Assessment Board to submission, consider how you will manage your time and the assessment task following the release of unratified marks.

If you are repeating this module, a new assessment task/ scenario will be given. Please contact the module leader.

Failure to pass both tasks at 40% following the refer attempt will result in a failure of the module.