This is a 2,000 word systematic critique of one research paper from a choice provided by the module leader, using Caldwell et al’s (2005) critiquing tool.
You are expected to:
Identify a research study from the selection of papers found on the NS521 Blackboard shell within the assignment Folder. The papers will be uploaded during week 4 of the module.
You will be expected to critique the identified research paper using Caldwell et al’s (2005) critiquing tool. This can also be found in the assignment folder. You must also reference according to the Harvard referencing system.
The essay should include:
1. Introduction – Clear indication of the research paper selected with a rationale for choosing. Make reference to the critiquing tool.
2. Highlight which aspects of the critiquing tool will be focused upon. Critical evaluation of the research paper systematically utilising the critiquing tool.
3. Analysis of the research findings and the implications (or not) for clinical practice.
4. Conclusion – A summary of the main findings.
Learning outcomes
This assignment has been designed to provide you with an opportunity to demonstrate your achievement of the following module learning outcomes:
- Demonstrate knowledge and understanding of research methodologies used in health care settings.
- Demonstrate an ability to underpin critical arguments with an appropriate range of contemporary literature.
- Critically appraise research literature using the required critiquing tool.
Task requirements
Your submitted work must be presented in size 12, Arial font with 1.5 line spacing. The assignment has a word count of 2,000 with + or – 10%. Each page must be numbered. On the title page you must include the following elements:
– Your student number and cohort.
– Module code and name.
– The actual word count.
– The submission date.
– Your seminar leader and module leader’s name.
This assignment should be presented in essay format, with a clear introduction and conclusion. You should avoid use of the 1st and 2nd person and use an appropriately formal academic style, avoiding contractions (e.g., don’t, won’t, etc.) and informal or spoken forms of language. Essays do not typically use headings and sub-headings.
Be sure not to identify any individual or organisation directly or by implication in your work (NMC, 2015).
Equally, unless crucial to the argument and/or where the information is already in the public domain, refer to organisations only in the most general terms, e.g., an NHS trust.
Referencing and research requirements
Please reference your work according to the Harvard style as defined in Cite Them Right Online (http://www.citethemrightonline.com). This information is also available in book form: Pears, R. and Shields, G. (2016) Cite them right: the essential reference guide. 10th edn. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Copies are available via the university library.
How your work will be assessed
Your work will be assessed on the extent to which it demonstrates your achievement of the stated learning outcomes for this assignment (see above) and against other key criteria, as defined in the University’s institutional grading descriptors. If it is appropriate to the format of your assignment and your subject area, a proportion of your marks will also depend upon your use of academic referencing conventions.
This assignment will be marked according to the grading descriptors for Level 5.
Submission details
Submission date and time
Work that is submitted up to 10 working days beyond the submission date will be accepted as a late submission. Late submissions will be marked and the actual mark recorded, but will be capped at the pass mark (typically 40%), provided that the work is of a passing standard. Work submitted after this period will not be marked and will be treated as a non-submission.
Feedback and marks for this assignment will be available after 2.00pm on 4th February 2020.
Referral Information:
|
