2- Research Methods

Assessment Brief and Feedback Form
Module title: Research Methods
Assessment point: Second Assessment point (Week 8)
Assessment task: Report – Research Proposal
Word count limit: 2000 words (+/-10%) (excluding references and front pages)
Weight: 50% of overall module grade
Submission deadline: Please consult VLE
Submission procedure: Please submit via the submission link on the VLE
Submission Record
Extenuating circumstances
Ensure you are familiar with the process for submitting a claim for extenuating circumstances.
If you experience any extenuating circumstances that may have affected your ability to attempt
or submit the present assignment please follow the relevant instruction on the VLE in order to
submit your claim for extenuating circumstances prior to your submission deadline.
Academic misconduct including plagiarism
Ensure that you are familiar with the relevant regulations regarding academic misconduct. By
submitting the present assignment you declare that it is your own work and that the material
and sources of information used, including internet sources, have been fully identified and
properly acknowledged. In addition, you confirm that the presented work has not been
submitted for any other assessment. You also acknowledge that the faculty reserves the right
to investigate allegations of plagiarism and other forms of academic misconduct which, if
proven and dependent on the severity level of the offence, may result in a penalty that could
affect your progress.
By submitting your work, you acknowledge that you have read and agreed with the above
statements.
Late submissions
Note that all work handed in up to 3 working days after the submission deadline will be accepted
and marked by the mark will be capped at 50% (if the work) passes unless you have been
granted an extension to the submission deadline or a deferral in accordance with the
Extenuating Circumstances Policy. Work submitted more than 3 working days after the
submission deadline without a granted extension to the submission deadline or a deferral in
accordance with the Extenuating Circumstances Polity will not be accepted and will be recorded
as 0%.
By submitting your work you acknowledge that you have read and agreed with the above
statements.
General Guidance
Your assignment should be MS Word processed (handwritten assignments are not accepted),
using Times New Roman size 12 font, double spaced, with numbered pages and your student
number printed as a footer on every page. Note this is a report supported by academic research
so you should adhere to the appropriate referencing guidance.
The word limit stated for this assignment excludes the list of references at the end of the
assignment but includes all text in the main body of the assignment (including direct quotations,
in-text citations, footnotes, tables, diagrams and graphs).
Please be aware that exceeding the word limit will affect the academic judgement of the piece
of work and may result in the award of a lower mark.
Appendices are not considered a supplement and will not be assessed as part of the content of
the assignment. As such, they will not contribute to the grade awarded; however, it may be
appropriate to use an Appendices section for any material which is a useful reference for the
reader. Please note that appendices are not included in the word count.
The majority of references should come from primary sources (e.g. journal articles, conference
papers, reports, etc.) although you can also utilise area specific textbooks. You must ensure that
you use the University of Suffolk’s Harvard style of referencing.
Please indicate the word count length at the end of your assignment.
Marking and assessment
This assignment will be marked out of 100%
This assignment contributes 50% of the total module marks
The pass mark for the module is 50%. However, it is important to note that students must also
achieve at least 50% for each component in order to pass the module. The marking rubric is
attached, and it offers guidance on the assessment criteria and weighting.
Learning outcomes applied in this assessment
1. Demonstrate a range of qualitative and quantitative research skills
2. Critically evaluate a range of research methods/techniques, both qualitative and
quantitative; and understand their strengths and weaknesses as practical tools for
inquiry
3. Demonstrate an awareness of core ethical issues that arise in research and secure that
your methodology complies with the requirements of your programme
Assessment guidelines
Task: You will prepare a report outlining further details of your chosen research that will form
the basis of your Dissertation/Management Project.
Format: You should use the following structure for your Report – Research Proposal. You should
present your proposal in a single document with an appropriate front page, contents page,
headings and a correctly formatted reference list (University of Suffolk Harvard style).
The proposal should include the following:
● Section 1: Research topic, aim and objectives
○ Identify your proposed research topic and offer a clear rationale, along with aim
and objectives
■ In this section you should present your research topic and explain the
topic area. The section should include appropriate background
information and it should explain the rationale for selecting this research
topic and what is the potential contribution of the proposed research.
Also, the section should clearly present the aim and objectives of the
proposed research.
● Section 2: Methodology, methods and ethical considerations
○ Identify and justify a research methodology appropriate to your proposed
research
○ Identify and justify research methods and data appropriate to your proposed
research
○ Identify key ethical considerations relevant to your proposed research
■ In this section you should discuss your research methodology. You should
consider your epistemological approach and how this impacts your
research design. Also, you should discuss your data collection methods as
well as the types of data that you will collect for your research and the
sources of this data. You should be able to justify your choice of
methodology and methods referring to your research aim and objectives.
Also, you should comment on the feasibility of your research and your
ability to access the required data. Finally, this section should outline the
ethical considerations related to your research.
● Section 3: Research schedule/plan
○ Induce a provisional project schedule/plan for your proposed research
■ In this section you should outline the key milestones for the completion
of your research project and propose the length of time that each
milestone will require to complete. You should try to be as realistic as you
can and you should consider things like work schedule and busy periods
at work as well as holidays and other breaks. It will be useful to present
your schedule/plan on a table listing the milestones, the duration of each
milestone as well as a brief note for each milestone that will offer a
description of the role of the milestone in the process and a justification
for the assigned duration, including any concerns, contingency plans, or
limitations to completing the milestone.
The research topic area will be based on your Week 3 Individual Written Task submission.
Your Research Proposal should follow this structure:
Section/Aspect Content to cover Marks
available
Research topic, aim
and objectives (900
words)
● Research topic clearly framed and presented
● Clear and consistent research aim and objectives
● The section provides relevant background
information and explains the rationale for selecting
the research topic
● The section is supported with relevant literature
and evidence
35 marks
Research
Methodology,
Methods and
ethical
considerations
(900 words)
● Clearly identifies the research methodology and
provides justification for the selection, on the basis
of relevant evidence and support from outside
sources and the nature of the research topic
● Clearly identifies research methods, data and data
sources and justifies the selection, using evidence
and support from outside sources
● Clearly identifies key ethical considerations
relevant to your proposed research, using evidence
and support from outside sources
40 marks
Research
Schedule/Plan (200
words)
● Clear and consistent plan of work
● Realistic milestones
● Relevant comments explaining the milestones
10 marks
Formatting and
Referencing (list of
references not
included in word
count)
High quality presentation of the material that conforms to
principles of academic writing and contains minimal errors
in sentence construction, grammar and punctuation. The
assignment followed appropriate academic conventions
regarding in-text citations and referencing.
15 marks
Total: 2000 words 100 Marks
Marking Criteria
Level 7
In accordance with the FHEQ, at the end of Level 7 students should have a systematic understanding of knowledge, and a critical
awareness of current problems and/or new insights, much of which is at, or informed by, the forefront of their academic discipline, field
of study or area of professional practice. They will be able to demonstrate originality in the application of knowledge, together with a
practical understanding of how established techniques of research and enquiry are used to create and interpret knowledge in the discipline.
They should have a conceptual understanding that enables them to evaluate critically current research and advanced scholarship
in the discipline and to evaluate methodologies and develop critiques of them and, where appropriate, to propose new hypotheses.
They will also be able to deal with complex issues both systematically and creatively, make sound judgements in the absence
of complete data, and communicate their conclusions clearly to specialist and non-specialist audiences. In addition, they will be able
to demonstrate self-direction and originality in tackling and solving problems, and act autonomously in planning and implementing tasks
at a professional or equivalent level.
Assessment category
Coherent and
detailed knowledge
and understanding of
the subject area, at
least some of which is
informed by the latest
research and/or
advanced scholarship
within the discipline
Cognitive and intellectual skills Application of theory to
practice (for courses with a
professional practice element)
THIS ASSESSMENT
CATEGORY IS NOT
APPLICABLE
Reading and referencing Presentation, style and
structure
Work that significantly
exceeds the specified
word limit may be
penalized Pass mark, demonstrating achievement of all associated learning outcomes 90%-100%
Exemplary
systematic,
theoretical and
conceptual
understanding of
knowledge at or
informed by the
forefront of the
field of study,
demonstrating
highly
sophisticated
grasp of the
subject matter
Exceptional critical
evaluation and
awareness of current
problems, and
contemporary issues and
debates that draws on
new insights or
perspectives within the
field. Work
demonstrates exemplary
ability to synthesise
current research and
advanced scholarship in
an original, creative and
innovative manner.
Sophisticated, systematic
and innovative
application of
knowledge and theory to
professional practice
within the discipline.
Flawless use of
systematically selected
literature to justify and
express reasoned
judgements and
decisions in relation to
complex issues and
problems at a
professional level
A very high level of
critical engagement
across a systematic
and fully appropriate
range of relevant and
current academic,
research, policy- and
practice-related
literature
demonstrating deep
and selective reading
and initiative along
with highly
consistent accurate
referencing
Exemplary
presentation of
work that is fluent
and flawless
throughout. 80%-89%
Excellent
systematic,
theoretical and
conceptual
understanding of
knowledge at or
informed by the
forefront of the
field of study and
showing
sophisticated
depth, breadth,
detail and clarity
Sophisticated critical
evaluation and
awareness of current
problems, and
contemporary issues and
debates that draws on
new insights or
perspectives within the
field. Work
demonstrates a very high
level of originality and
creativity in the
student’s approaches to
synthesising current
research and advanced
scholarship within the
subject area
An excellent level of
originality and
innovation in the
application of
knowledge and theory to
professional practice
within the discipline.
Demonstration of
excellent critical
awareness and
evaluation and the
ability to effectively
critique and employ
current academic
literature in making
reasoned judgements
and decisions in relation
to complex issues and
problems at a
professional level
A very high level of
critical engagement
across an extensive
range of relevant and
current academic,
research, policy- and
practice-related
literature
demonstrating deep
and appropriate
reading and initiative
along with highly
consistent accurate
referencing
Outstanding
presentation of
work that is
logically and
coherently
structured with a
strong or original
central
argument(s),
conveyed with a
high level of
fluency and
eloquently
communicates
compelling,
coherent
conclusions to
specialist and nonspecialist
audiences
Level 7
Coherent and
detailed
knowledge and
understanding
Cognitive and
intellectual skills
Application of theory to
practice
THIS ASSESSMENT
CATEGORY IS NOT
APPLICABLE
Reading and
referencing
Presentation, style
and structure Pass mark, demonstrating achievement of all associated learning outcomes 70% – 79%
A high level of
systematic,
theoretical and
conceptual
understanding of
knowledge at or
informed by the
forefront of the
field of study and
showing
considerable
depth, breadth,
detail and clarity
A high level of critical
evaluation and
awareness of current
problems, and
contemporary issues
and debates that draws
on new insights or
perspectives within the
field. Work
demonstrates a
significant level of
originality and
creativity in
synthesising current
research and advanced
scholarship within the
subject area
A high level of originality
and innovation in the
application of knowledge
and theory to professional
practice within the
discipline. Demonstration
of excellent critical
awareness and evaluation
and the ability to select
and use academic
literature in making
reasoned judgements and
decisions in relation to
complex issues and
problems at a professional
level
A high level of
critical engagement
across an extensive
range of relevant and
current literature
demonstrating wide
and appropriate
reading and initiative
along with highly
consistent accurate
referencing
Excellent
presentation of
work that is
logically and
coherently
structured with a
strong or original
central
argument(s),
conveyed with a
high level of clarity
of expression and
which clearly
communicates
valid, coherent
conclusions to
specialist and nonspecialist audiences 60% – 69%
An effective,
systematic,
theoretical and
conceptual
understanding of
knowledge
mostly at or
informed by the
forefront of the
field of study and
showing good
depth, breadth,
detail and clarity
An effective level of
critical evaluation and
awareness of current
problems and
contemporary issues
and debates that draws
on new insights or
perspectives within the
field. Work
demonstrates some
effective originality
and creativity in
synthesising current
research and
scholarship within the
subject area
A good level of originality
and innovation in the
application of knowledge
and theory to professional
practice. Demonstration of
consistently good critical
awareness and evaluation
and reasonable ability to
use the academic literature
in making reasoned
judgements and decisions
in relation to complex
issues and problems at a
professional level
A good level of
critical engagement
across a good range
of relevant and
current academic,
research, policy- and
practice-related
literature
demonstrating
appropriate reading
and some initiative
along with consistent
accurate referencing
High quality
presentation of
work that is largely
logically and
coherently
structured with a
generally strong
central argument
conveyed with a
clarity of
expression and
which
communicates clear
conclusions to
specialist and nonspecialist audiences 50% – 59%
A sufficient but
limited level of
systematic,
theoretical and
conceptual
understanding of
knowledge at
times at or
informed by the
forefront of the
field of study but
showing
adequate depth,
breadth, detail
and clarity
A sufficient but
limited level of critical
evaluation and
awareness of current
problems and
contemporary issues
and debates, with
some reference to new
insights or
perspectives within the
field. Limited evidence
of
originality and
creativity in
synthesising current
research and
scholarship within the
subject area
A reasonable but limited
level of originality and
innovation in the
application of knowledge
and theory to professional
practice within the
discipline. Demonstration
of some good critical
awareness and evaluation
and some ability to use the
academic literature in
developing judgements
and decisions in relation to
complex issues and
problems at a professional
level
Sufficient critical
engagement with a
reasonable range of
relevant and current
academic, research,
policy- and practicerelated literature
demonstrating
mainly appropriate
reading but limited
initiative and/or
some minor
inconsistencies and
inaccuracies in
referencing
Generally good
presentation of
work that is
sufficiently logical
and coherent in
structure with a
discernible central
argument. May
present limited
originality and lack
some clarity of
expression, but an
identifiable
conclusion
reasonably
communicated to
specialist and nonspecialist audiences
Level 7
Coherent and
detailed
knowledge and
understanding
Cognitive and
intellectual skills
Application of theory to
practice
THIS ASSESSMENT
CATEGORY IS NOT
APPLICABLE
Reading and
referencing
Presentation, style
and structure Marginal fail 45% – 49%
Knowledge and
understanding of
the subject matter
is incomplete,
uninformed or
limited in its
scholarship
within the field of
study, or lacking
sufficient depth,
breadth, detail
or clarity
Critical evaluation is
limited or lacks
awareness of current
problems and
contemporary issues
and debates.
Insufficient reference
made to new insights
or perspectives within
the field, or
insufficient evidence
of originality and
creativity in
synthesising current
research and
scholarship within the
subject area
Insufficient degree of
originality or innovation in
the application of
knowledge and theory to
professional practice
within the discipline.
Demonstration of poor
critical awareness and
evaluation or a lack of
ability to use the academic
literature in developing
judgements and decisions
in relation to complex
issues and problems at a
professional level
Insufficient critical
engagement with
relevant and current
academic, research,
policy- and practicerelated literature.
Lack of evidence of
wider reading or a
lack of initiative or
inconsistent and
inaccurate
referencing
Presentation of
work shows
insufficient
organisation or
central argument,
and is lacking in
logical and
coherent structure.
Poor clarity of
expression weakly
communicating to
specialist or nonspecialist audiences Fail 30% – 44%
Limited
knowledge and
understanding of
the subject matter
shown. Work is
not sufficiently
informed by
scholarship
within the field of
study and is
insufficient in
depth, breadth,
detail or clarity
Insufficient evidence
of critical evaluation
and awareness of
current problems and
contemporary issues
and debates.
Insufficient reference
to new insights or
perspectives within the
field and lacking in
originality and
creativity in
synthesising current
research and
scholarship within the
subject area
Little evidence of
originality and innovation
and a significant lack of
application of knowledge
and theory to professional
practice demonstrating
little critical awareness and
evaluation and a lack of
ability to use the academic
literature to make
judgements and decisions
in relation to complex
issues and problems at a
professional level
Little evidence of
critical engagement
with relevant and
current literature.
Poor use of
appropriate sources
and/or inconsistent
and inaccurate
referencing
Often poorly
presented work that
is disorganised, has
an ill-formed
central argument,
and lacks a logical
and coherent
structure. A lack of
clarity of
expression or fails
to communicate
effective
conclusions to
specialist or nonspecialist audiences < 30% Inadequate and limited knowledge and understanding of the subject matter shown. Work is not informed by scholarship within the field of study and significantly lacks depth, breadth, detail or clarity Descriptive work with little or no evidence of critical evaluation and awareness of current problems and contemporary issues and debates. No evidence of awareness of new insights or perspectives within the field. Little or no synthesis of current research and scholarship within the subject area No evidence of originality and innovation and little to no application of knowledge and theory to professional practice. Demonstrates no critical awareness and evaluation and a distinct lack of ability to use the academic literature in an effective manner No evidence of critical engagement with relevant and current literature. Lack of use of appropriate sources and inconsistent and inaccurate referencing Poorly presented and disorganised work that lacks a logical and coherent structure, lacks a well-formed central argument and shows a significant lack of clarity of expression with very weak or irrelevant conclusions, that may be incoherent to specialist or nonspecialist audiences