Overview
Informed practice is fundamental to safe midwifery care. To achieve this, you require research skills and the ability to critique the research in order to provide the best care. This unit will develop your ability to critically analyse research for the purpose of enhancing your midwifery practice and critique current policy.
Details
Pre-requisites or Co-requisites
Pre-req MDWF12001 Midwifery - Past and Present
Important note: Students enrolled in a subsequent unit who failed their pre-requisite unit, should drop the subsequent unit before the census date or within 10 working days of Fail grade notification. Students who do not drop the unit in this timeframe cannot later drop the unit without academic and financial liability. See details in the Assessment Policy and Procedure (Higher Education Coursework).
Offerings For Term 2 - 2018
Attendance Requirements
All on-campus students are expected to attend scheduled classes – in some units, these classes are identified as a mandatory (pass/fail) component and attendance is compulsory. International students, on a student visa, must maintain a full time study load and meet both attendance and academic progress requirements in each study period (satisfactory attendance for International students is defined as maintaining at least an 80% attendance record).
Recommended Student Time Commitment
Each 6-credit Undergraduate unit at CQUniversity requires an overall time commitment of an average of 12.5 hours of study per week, making a total of 150 hours for the unit.
Class Timetable
Assessment Overview
Assessment Grading
This is a graded unit: your overall grade will be calculated from the marks or grades for each assessment task, based on the relative weightings shown in the table above. You must obtain an overall mark for the unit of at least 50%, or an overall grade of ‘pass’ in order to pass the unit. If any ‘pass/fail’ tasks are shown in the table above they must also be completed successfully (‘pass’ grade). You must also meet any minimum mark requirements specified for a particular assessment task, as detailed in the ‘assessment task’ section (note that in some instances, the minimum mark for a task may be greater than 50%). Consult the University’s Grades and Results Policy for more details of interim results and final grades.
All University policies are available on the CQUniversity Policy site.
You may wish to view these policies:
- Grades and Results Policy
- Assessment Policy and Procedure (Higher Education Coursework)
- Review of Grade Procedure
- Student Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure
- Monitoring Academic Progress (MAP) Policy and Procedure – Domestic Students
- Monitoring Academic Progress (MAP) Policy and Procedure – International Students
- Student Refund and Credit Balance Policy and Procedure
- Student Feedback – Compliments and Complaints Policy and Procedure
- Information and Communications Technology Acceptable Use Policy and Procedure
This list is not an exhaustive list of all University policies. The full list of University policies are available on the CQUniversity Policy site.
Feedback, Recommendations and Responses
Every unit is reviewed for enhancement each year. At the most recent review, the following staff and student feedback items were identified and recommendations were made.
Feedback from Moodle student evaluation survey
Comment was received that the unit content did not always align well with the assessment tasks.
The sequencing of unit content will be reviewed to optimize its alignment with the assessments set.
Feedback from Moodle student evaluation survey
The written assignment tasks were considered to lack clarity and to contain ambiguity in what was required
The assessment tasks will be reviewed to ensure clarity in the descriptions of the task set. It will also be considered how guidance to students in how to approach the written assessments can be improved.
Feedback from Moodle student evaluation survey
It was widely considered that the mandatory weekly discussion forum posts were too burdensome and time consuming.
The required frequency of discussion forum posts will be revised and it is likely that this will be reduced.
- Identify the concepts that underpin the types of evidence informing current midwifery practice.
- Demonstrate the ability to analyse current evidence for best practice in midwifery.
- Critique current policy relevant to midwifery practice.
- Recommend appropriate midwifery care informed by current research and ethical decision making.
NMBA Midwife Standards for Practice
Standard 1: Promotes evidence-based maternal health and wellbeing.
Standard 2: Engages in respectful partnerships and professional relationships.
Standard 3: Demonstrates the capability and accountability for midwifery practice.
Standard 5: Develops plans for midwifery practice.
Standard 6: Provides safe and quality midwifery practice.
Standard 7: Evaluates outcomes to improve midwifery practice.
Alignment of Assessment Tasks to Learning Outcomes
| Assessment Tasks | Learning Outcomes | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | |
| 1 - Group Discussion - 30% | ||||
| 2 - Written Assessment - 30% | ||||
| 3 - Written Assessment - 40% | ||||
Alignment of Graduate Attributes to Learning Outcomes
| Graduate Attributes | Learning Outcomes | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | |
| 1 - Communication | ||||
| 2 - Problem Solving | ||||
| 3 - Critical Thinking | ||||
| 4 - Information Literacy | ||||
| 5 - Team Work | ||||
| 6 - Information Technology Competence | ||||
| 7 - Cross Cultural Competence | ||||
| 8 - Ethical practice | ||||
| 9 - Social Innovation | ||||
| 10 - Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Cultures | ||||
Alignment of Assessment Tasks to Graduate Attributes
| Assessment Tasks | Graduate Attributes | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | |
| 1 - Group Discussion - 30% | ||||||||||
| 2 - Written Assessment - 30% | ||||||||||
| 3 - Written Assessment - 40% | ||||||||||
Textbooks
Midwifery : Preparation for Practice
3rd edition (2015)
Authors: Pairman, Pincombe, Thorogood & Tracy
Elsevier
Sydney, Sydney, , Australia
Binding: Paperback
IT Resources
- CQUniversity Student Email
- Internet
- Unit Website (Moodle)
All submissions for this unit must use the referencing style: American Psychological Association 6th Edition (APA 6th edition)
For further information, see the Assessment Tasks.
a.baldwin@cqu.edu.au
Module/Topic
Introduction to MDWF12004
Chapter
6 in:
S. Pairman, J. Pincombe, C. Thorogood, & S. Tracy (Eds.), Midwifery: preparation for practice (3rd ed.) Elsevier Churchill Livingstone, Sydney.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Evidence Based Midwifery
Chapter
6 in:
S. Pairman, J. Pincombe, C. Thorogood, & S. Tracy (Eds.), Midwifery: preparation for practice (3rd ed.) Elsevier Churchill Livingstone, Sydney.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Assessment 1 - Online Discussion Forum (1) due Friday 20th July (Week 2)
Module/Topic
Qualitative Research
Chapter
6 in:
S. Pairman, J. Pincombe, C. Thorogood, & S. Tracy (Eds.), Midwifery: preparation for practice (3rd ed.) Elsevier Churchill Livingstone, Sydney.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
PICO and Database searching
Chapter
6 in:
S. Pairman, J. Pincombe, C. Thorogood, & S. Tracy (Eds.), Midwifery: preparation for practice (3rd ed.) Elsevier Churchill Livingstone, Sydney.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Assessment 1 - Online Discussion Forum (2) due Friday 3rd August (Week 4)
Module/Topic
Statistics
Chapter
6 in:
S. Pairman, J. Pincombe, C. Thorogood, & S. Tracy (Eds.), Midwifery: preparation for practice (3rd ed.) Elsevier Churchill Livingstone, Sydney.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Randomised Controlled Trials
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Appraising Randomised Controlled Trials
Chapter
6 in:
S. Pairman, J. Pincombe, C. Thorogood, & S. Tracy (Eds.), Midwifery: preparation for practice (3rd ed.) Elsevier Churchill Livingstone, Sydney.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Ethics and cohort studies
Chapter
6 in:
S. Pairman, J. Pincombe, C. Thorogood, & S. Tracy (Eds.), Midwifery: preparation for practice (3rd ed.) Elsevier Churchill Livingstone, Sydney.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Systematic Reviews
Chapter
6 in:
S. Pairman, J. Pincombe, C. Thorogood, & S. Tracy (Eds.), Midwifery: preparation for practice (3rd ed.) Elsevier Churchill Livingstone, Sydney.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Assessment 1 - Online Discussion Forum (3) due Friday 14th September (Week 9)
Module/Topic
Policies and Clinical Practice Guidelines
Chapter
6 in:
S. Pairman, J. Pincombe, C. Thorogood, & S. Tracy (Eds.), Midwifery: preparation for practice (3rd ed.) Elsevier Churchill Livingstone, Sydney.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Implementation
Chapter
6 in:
S. Pairman, J. Pincombe, C. Thorogood, & S. Tracy (Eds.), Midwifery: preparation for practice (3rd ed.) Elsevier Churchill Livingstone, Sydney.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Informed Choice
Chapter
6 in:
S. Pairman, J. Pincombe, C. Thorogood, & S. Tracy (Eds.), Midwifery: preparation for practice (3rd ed.) Elsevier Churchill Livingstone, Sydney.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
1 Group Discussion
MDWF12004 Critical Enquiry and Midwifery Practice
Assessment One: Online Group Discussion
Total weighting 30%
Objectives: This assessment relates to learning outcome one (1).
Unit Learning Outcomes
1. Identify the concepts that underpin the types of evidence informing current midwifery practice
Task Description
You are required to participate in an online group discussion via Moodle that will be directed by the Unit Coordinator. The online activities will require you to participate in a group discussion on set topics/questions posed in your study guide. Marks will be awarded for your online participation in the group discussion. Group discussion subjects will be set for study weeks 2, 4, 9 & 12.
Contribution to the online discussion is to add to the question being posed in the study guide and to contribute to the discussion generated by your colleagues. Simply stating ‘yes I agree with previous statements’ will not be considered to be contributing to the discussion.
Individual online submission is due by the Friday of the corresponding week at 11:45pm AEST.
Length of Post/Discussion: 250-300 words
FINAL Assessment Due Date: Week 12 Friday 5th October, 2018, 11:45PM AEST
The Unit co-ordinator will collate your responses and complete the final submission.
Assessment Criteria
Your written online discussion will be evaluated on the following assessment criteria:
Comprehension of Topic: 30%
Critical Thinking: 40%
Week 12 Friday (5 Oct 2018) 11:55 pm AEST
Within three weeks following due date for submission
| HD | D | C | P | F | % | |
| COMPREHENSION OF TOPIC | Comprehensively addresses all aspects of the questions raised by the lecturer in the weekly online lecture material/course resources. Thorough comprehension of relevance of content clearly evident. | Extensively addresses the majority of the aspects for the questions raised by the lecturer in the weekly online lecture material/course resources and effectively comprehends relevance of content. | Broadly addresses most aspects of the questions raised by the lecturer in the weekly online lecture material/course resources. Generally demonstrates comprehension of how content is relevant. | Content basically addresses aspects of the questions raised by the lecturer in the weekly online lecture material/course resources. Demonstrates limited comprehension of how content is relevant. | Content does not address all aspects of the questions raised by the lecturer in the weekly online lecture material/course resources Inadequate comprehension of required content. | 30 |
| CRITICAL THINKING | Clear, coherent and convincing critical thought. Comprehensively inclusive of concepts and evidence. | Clear, coherent critical thought that is well developed and logically builds each point on the last. Effectively inclusive of both concepts and evidence. | Clear, critical and logically developed thought presented. Generally inclusive of concepts and evidence. | Critical thought discernible. Generally demonstrates logical flow although some reliance on descriptive discussion. | Discussion is poorly developed or absent. No or minimal evidence of critical thought. | 40 |
| ONLINE POSTING | Postings are made in a timely manner providing other students with the opportunity to respond. Postings consistently respond directly to course content material and demonstrate a critical and thoughtful approach to the content. Critical and mindful connections are made to other student’s discussion. | Other students are given the opportunity to respond as postings are made in a timely manner. Postings largely respond directly to course content material and demonstrate a critical and thoughtful approach. Mindful connections are made to other student’s discussion in the majority of postings. | Other students are given the opportunity to respond as postings are made in a timely manner. Postings in the majority of the time respond directly to course content material and demonstrate a thoughtful approach. Connections are made to other student’s discussion in some of postings. | Other students are given the opportunity to respond as postings are made in a timely manner. Postings in the majority of the time respond directly to course content material. However could demonstrate a more thoughtful approach. Connections are made to other student’s discussion in the majority of postings. | Other students are not given the opportunity to respond as postings are not made in a timely manner. Postings in the majority of the time do not respond directly to course content material. Connections are not made to other student’s discussion in the majority of postings | 30 |
- Identify the concepts that underpin the types of evidence informing current midwifery practice.
- Communication
- Critical Thinking
- Information Literacy
2 Written Assessment
MDWF 12004 – Critical Enquiry and Midwifery Practice
ASSESSMENT 2 – WRITTEN ESSAY
Weighting 30%
Word Count 1500 words (+/- 10%)
Due Date Friday 10th August (week 5)
Objectives This assessment relates to learning outcomes 1, 2, 3, and 4.
Unit Learning Outcomes:
1. Identify the concepts that underpin the types of evidence informing current midwifery practice.
2. Demonstrate the ability to analyse current evidence for best practice in midwifery
3. Critique current policy relevant to midwifery practice
4. Recommend appropriate midwifery care informed by current research and ethical decision making.
Assessment task:
Using Lesley Page’s “5 steps to evidence based midwifery,” you are required to write a script for a role play of how you would interact with the woman in one of the following scenarios to provide evidence based midwifery care.
Clinical scenarios (choose one)
1. Alison is a 32 year old woman, pregnant with her second baby, who is unsure about whether to have a caesarean or a vaginal birth. She is currently 26 weeks pregnant and she and her baby are well. Last time she had a caesarean section birth because her baby was in a breech position at term and the local hospital did not have any skilled caregivers who could offer her a vaginal breech birth.
2. 35 year old Lee is 40 weeks pregnant with her first baby, she and the baby are well. The local protocol is to book her in for an induction at 41 weeks. She is keen for a water birth, wants to avoid pharmacological pain management and does not want a medical or surgical induction.
See week 2 study guide for Page’s “5 steps to evidence based midwifery.”
The following role play script template may assist you.
Roles: 1 woman, 1 midwife
Step 1: asking what is important to the woman:
Midwife: Hello, [woman’s name], how are you today, may I ask if there is anything important to you that you would like to discuss?
Woman: Hello, yes there is, I would like to ask about… [Draw upon your chosen scenario]
Step 2: clinical history
Ask for her basic clinical/obstetric history [draw upon your chosen scenario]
Step 3: seeking the evidence
After the appointment you look for some evidence to answer her question. Outline here what you found after doing a search of local protocols and guidelines, as well as relevant literature.
Step 4: talking it through
Write a script of what information you would share with the woman to help facilitate an informed decision making process.
Step 5: reflection
Critically reflect upon the process
(Due to the nature of this assignment it is acceptable for you to write in the ‘first person’ perspective where appropriate).
Additional Information
Review the marking criteria rubric. Consider that your paper's grade will be derived from criteria outlined in that sheet and thus clear explanations of the expectations for varying grades are provided for both your direction and the assessment of your paper.
Click here to show marking criteria rubric.
Presentation Requirements
· Your essay is to follow academic conventions of structure with an introduction, body (script) and conclusion.
· Double Line spacing throughout 2.0 (including reference list)
· Font size 12, easily readable style (e.g. Arial, Times Roman, Calibri)
· Word count must be within 10% plus or minus of the given word count. For this essay words in excess of 1,650 cannot contribute to your mark.
· Provide a cover sheet which includes your name, student number, the unit code, the assessment item number and word count.
Referencing
· APA Style (check guidelines here: https://moodle.cqu.edu.au/pluginfile.php/973846/mod_resource/content/1/APA%20Abridged%20Guide.pdf
· Use a separate page for reference list and ensure it is APA style also.
· Use references that are from contemporary and valid sources such as peer reviewed journals; or evidence based websites (e.g. government bodies, professional organizations). Avoid websites that end in ".com” as academic sources.
Week 5 Friday (10 Aug 2018) 11:55 pm AEST
Week 7 Friday (31 Aug 2018)
Within 3 weeks of submission due date
MDWF 12004 - CRITICAL INQUIRY AND MIDWIFERY PRACTICE - Assessment Criteria Sheet – Assessment 2 – Written Assessment
Student Name:
| HD | D | C | P | F | |
| Structure (15%) | |||||
| Clear and succinct introduction that introduces the topic and outlines the direction of the paper. (5%) | Clear and appropriate introduction that introduces the topic and outlines the direction of the paper | Appropriate introduction that introduces the topic and outlines the direction of the paper | Introduction is apparent and the topic is introduced but there is not clear direction to the paper | No recognisable introduction-the topic is not introduced and/or there is no direction of the paper | |
| Clear and succinct conclusion that outlines the main points and brings the argument to a logical close. (5%) | Clear and appropriate conclusion that outlines the main points and brings the argument to a close | Conclusion outlines most of the main points and brings some sense of closure | Conclusion apparent and outlines most of the main points and endeavours to bring the argument to a close-there may be some incongruity | No recognisable conclusion-little reference to the main points and no clear conclusion to the paper | |
| Excellent presentation of assignment, double spaced with 12 point font. Consistently accurate with spelling, grammar and paragraph structure. (5%) | Well-presented assignment, double spaced with 12 point font. 1 or 2 errors spelling, grammar and paragraph structure. | Well-presented assignment, double spaced with 12 point font. 3 or 4 consistent errors with spelling, grammar and paragraph structure. | Well-presented assignment, double spaced with 12 point font. 3 or 4 inconsistent errors with spelling, grammar and paragraph structure | Poorly presented assignment. Double spacing not used. 12 point font not used. Many inaccuracies with spelling, grammar and paragraph structure. (> 5 errors). | |
| Approach & Argument (75%) | |||||
| Content is clearly relevant to the topic, the approach comprehensively answers the question in relation to current midwifery practice and the discourse proceeds logically and is within the set word limit. (10%) | Content is relevant to the topic, the approach clearly answers the question in relation to current midwifery practice and the discourse proceeds logically. Word count is within the set word limit. | Content is appropriate and answers the question in relation to current midwifery practice and the discourse for the most part proceeds logically. Word count is within the set word limit. | Content answers the question in relation to current midwifery practice but the discourse is at times repetitive or lacks cohesion. Word count is within the set word limit. | Content is irrelevant and or does not answer the question in relation to current midwifery practice. The discourse lacks cohesion. The word limit has not been adhered to, the word limit is well over or under the 10% allowance. | |
| An articulate and comprehensive investigation and analysis of the clinical issue in the chosen scenario. (30%) | A well-developed discussion that investigates and evaluates the clinical issue in the scenario. | A logical discussion that demonstrates a competent investigation and evaluation of the clinical issue in the chosen scenario. | A disjointed discussion that demonstrates a generalised or limited investigation and evaluation of the clinical issue in the chosen scenario. | An inadequate investigation and evaluation of the clinical issue in the chosen scenario. | |
| An insightful, clear and comprehensive script of the information to be conveyed to the woman to facilitate informed choice. (25%) | A clear and comprehensive script of the information to be conveyed to the woman to facilitate informed choice. | A logical and appropriate script of the information to be conveyed to the woman to facilitate informed choice. There are some omissions. | A disjointed and limited script of the information to be conveyed to the woman to facilitate informed choice. There are key omissions. | An inadequate script of information to be conveyed to the woman to facilitate informed choice. There are major omissions | |
| An insightful and articulate reflection on the process. (10%) | A clear and articulate reflection on the process. | A clear and meaningful reflection on the process. | Limited reflection on the process. | Inadequate reflection on the process. | |
| Referencing (10%) | |||||
| Consistently integrates up-to-date references to support and reflect all ideas, factual information and quotations. (5%) | Generally integrates up-to-date references to support and reflect ideas, factual information and quotations, with 1 or 2 exceptions. | Frequently integrates up-to-date references to support and reflect ideas, factual information and quotations, with 3 or 4 exceptions. | Occasionally integrates up-to-date references to support and reflect ideas, factual information and quotations, with 5 or 6 exceptions. | Fails to or infrequent attempts (>7 errors) to integrate up-to-date references to support and reflect ideas, factual information and quotations. | |
| Consistently accurate with referencing. A minimum of 10 references used including 7 journal articles and relevant web-sites. (5%) | 1 or 2 consistent referencing errors identified. A minimum of 10 references used including 6 journal articles and relevant web-sites. | 3 or 4 consistent referencing errors identified. A minimum of 10 references used including 5 journal articles and relevant web-sites. | 3 or 4 inconsistent referencing errors identified. A minimum of 10 references used including 4 journal articles and relevant web-sites. | Many inaccuracies with referencing (>5). Less than 10 references used. Less than 4 journal articles not sourced. Relevant web-sites not included. | |
This assignment is worth 30% of the total assessment for this subject. /100
- Identify the concepts that underpin the types of evidence informing current midwifery practice.
- Demonstrate the ability to analyse current evidence for best practice in midwifery.
- Critique current policy relevant to midwifery practice.
- Recommend appropriate midwifery care informed by current research and ethical decision making.
- Communication
- Problem Solving
- Critical Thinking
- Information Literacy
- Ethical practice
3 Written Assessment
MDWF 12004 – Critical Enquiry and Midwifery Practice
ASSESSMENT 3 – WRITTEN ESSAY
Weighting 40%
Word Count 2500 words (+/- 10%)
Due Date Friday 28th September (week 11)
Objectives This assessment relates to learning outcomes 2, 3 and 4.
Unit Learning Outcomes:
· Demonstrate the ability to analyse current evidence for best practice in midwifery
· Critique current policy relevant to midwifery practice.
· Recommend appropriate midwifery care informed by current research and ethical decision making.
Assessment Task:
You are required to:
1. Outline and evaluate the research evidence that relates to one aspect of normal midwifery clinical practice during labour and/or birth (for example: water immersion during labour, continuous support in labour, immediate skin to skin contact after birth)
2. In the process of analysing the issue or practice, choose one quantitative, and one qualitative article from the research evidence you have gathered, and evaluate the quality of each article using the relevant CASP appraisal tool.
3. Discuss current practice, and in the light of the evidence reviewed, make a recommendation on whether a change to current practice should occur. You must provide a rationale for the recommendation in the context of an evidence based approach, (that is one which integrates the available evidence, woman-centred midwifery philosophy and available resources.)
Additional Information
Review the marking criteria rubric. Consider that your paper's grade will be derived from criteria outlined in that sheet and thus clear explanations of the expectations for varying grades are provided for both your direction and the assessment of your paper.
Click here to show marking criteria rubric.
Presentation Requirements
· Your essay is to follow academic conventions of structure with an introduction, body and conclusion.
· Double Line spacing throughout 2.0 (including reference list)
· Font size 12, easily readable style (e.g. Arial, Times Roman, Calibri)
· Word count must be within 10% plus or minus of the given word count. For this essay words in excess of 2750 cannot contribute to your mark.
· Use quotations sparingly and only to illustrate a point that cannot be made with equal impact in your own words – if used, give page numbers.
· Provide a cover sheet which includes your name, student number, the unit code, the assessment item number and word count.
Referencing
· APA Style (check guidelines here: https://moodle.cqu.edu.au/pluginfile.php/973846/mod_resource/content/1/APA%20Abridged%20Guide.pdf
· Use a separate page for reference list and ensure it is APA style also.
· Use references that are from contemporary and valid sources such as peer reviewed journals; or evidence based websites (e.g. government bodies, professional organizations). Avoid websites that end in ".com” as academic sources.
Week 11 Friday (28 Sept 2018) 11:55 pm AEST
Exam Week Friday (19 Oct 2018)
Within 3 weeks of essay submission due date
MDWF 12004 - CRITICAL INQUIRY AND MIDWIFERY PRACTICE - Assessment Criteria Sheet – Assessment 3 – Written Assessment
Student Name:
| HD | D | C | P | F | |
| Structure (15%) | |||||
| Clear and succinct introduction that introduces the topic and outlines the direction of the paper. (5%) | Clear and appropriate introduction that introduces the topic and outlines the direction of the paper | Appropriate introduction that introduces the topic and outlines the direction of the paper | Introduction is apparent and the topic is introduced but there is not clear direction to the paper | No recognisable introduction-the topic is not introduced and/or there is no direction of the paper | |
| Clear and succinct conclusion that outlines the main points and brings the argument to a logical close. (5%) | Clear and appropriate conclusion that outlines the main points and brings the argument to a close | Conclusion outlines most of the main points and brings some sense of closure | Conclusion apparent and outlines most of the main points and endeavours to bring the argument to a close-there may be some incongruity | No recognisable conclusion-little reference to the main points and no clear conclusion to the paper | |
| Excellent presentation of assignment, double spaced with 12 point font. Consistently accurate with spelling, grammar and paragraph structure. (5%) | Well-presented assignment, double spaced with 12 point font. 1 or 2 errors spelling, grammar and paragraph structure. | Well-presented assignment, double spaced with 12 point font. 3 or 4 consistent errors with spelling, grammar and paragraph structure. | Well-presented assignment, double spaced with 12 point font. 3 or 4 inconsistent errors with spelling, grammar and paragraph structure | Poorly presented assignment. Double spacing not used. 12 point font not used. Many inaccuracies with spelling, grammar and paragraph structure. (> 5 errors). | |
| Approach & Argument (75%) | |||||
| Content is clearly relevant to the topic, the approach comprehensively answers the question in relation to current midwifery practice and the argument proceeds logically. Specific recommendations for change have been made if appropriate, or specific reference to current evidence based practice has been made. Word count is within the set word limit. (20%) | Content is relevant to the topic, the approach clearly answers the question in relation to current midwifery practice and the argument proceeds logically. Recommendations for change have been made if appropriate, or current evidence based practice has been acknowledged. Word count is within the set word limit. | Content is appropriate and answers the question in relation to current midwifery practice and the argument for the most part proceeds logically. Recommendations for change have been made if appropriate, or current evidence based practice has been acknowledged. Word count is within the set word limit. | Content answers the question in relation to current midwifery practice but the argument is at times repetitive or lacks cohesion. Recommendations for change have been not made in specific terms, or current evidence based practice has not been acknowledged with clarity. Word count is within the set word limit with a 10% allowance (under or over the set limit). | Content is irrelevant and or does not answer the question in relation to current midwifery practice. The argument lacks cohesion. Recommendations for change have been not made. Current practice has not been acknowledged. The word limit has not been adhered to, the word limit is well over or under the 10% allowance. | |
| An articulate and comprehensive investigation and analysis of a clinical example taken from normal midwifery clinical practice in labour and/or birthing (25%) | A well-developed discussion that outlines and evaluates a clinical example taken from normal midwifery clinical practice in labour and/or birthing. | A logical discussion that demonstrates a competent outline and evaluation of a clinical example taken from normal midwifery clinical practice in labour and/or birthing. | A disjointed discussion that demonstrates a generalised or limited outline and evaluation of a clinical example taken from normal midwifery clinical practice in labour and/or birthing. | An inadequate discussion of the clinical example taken from normal midwifery clinical practice in labour and/or birthing. | |
| Comprehensive and articulate analysis and discussion that critically evaluates the quality of one quantitative article using the relevant CASP appraisal tool (15%) | Clear and well-developed analysis and discussion that critically evaluates the quality of one quantitative article using the relevant CASP appraisal tool. | Broad discussion with limited analysis and critical evaluation of one quantitative article using the relevant CASP appraisal tool. | Disjointed discussion with minimal critical evaluation of one quantitative article using the relevant CASP appraisal tool. | Inadequate analysis and discussion (which at times is repetitive) with inadequate critical evaluation of one quantitative article using the relevant CASP appraisal tool. | |
| Comprehensive and articulate discussion that critically evaluates the quality of one qualitative article using the relevant CASP appraisal tool. (15%) | Clear and well-developed analysis and discussion that critically evaluates the quality of one qualitative article using the relevant CASP appraisal tool. | Broad discussion with limited analysis and critical evaluation of one qualitative article using the relevant CASP appraisal tool. | Disjointed discussion with limited analysis and critical evaluation of one qualitative article using the relevant CASP appraisal tool. | Inadequate analysis and discussion with limited analysis and critical evaluation of one qualitative article using the relevant CASP appraisal tool. | |
| Referencing (10%) | |||||
| Consistently integrates up-to-date references to support and reflect all ideas, factual information and quotations. (5%) | Generally integrates up-to-date references to support and reflect ideas, factual information and quotations, with 1 or 2 exceptions. | Frequently integrates up-to-date references to support and reflect ideas, factual information and quotations, with 3 or 4 exceptions. | Occasionally integrates up-to-date references to support and reflect ideas, factual information and quotations, with 5 or 6 exceptions. | Fails to or infrequent attempts (>7 errors) to integrate up-to-date references to support and reflect ideas, factual information and quotations. | |
| Consistently accurate with referencing. A minimum of 10 references used including 7 journal articles and relevant web-sites. (5%) | 1 or 2 consistent referencing errors identified. A minimum of 10 references used including 6 journal articles and relevant web-sites. | 3 or 4 consistent referencing errors identified. A minimum of 10 references used including 5 journal articles and relevant web-sites. | 3 or 4 inconsistent referencing errors identified. A minimum of 10 references used including 4 journal articles and relevant web-sites. | Many inaccuracies with referencing (>5). Less than 10 references used. Less than 4 journal articles not sourced. Relevant web-sites not included. | |
This assignment is worth 40% of the total assessment for this subject. /100
- Demonstrate the ability to analyse current evidence for best practice in midwifery.
- Critique current policy relevant to midwifery practice.
- Recommend appropriate midwifery care informed by current research and ethical decision making.
- Communication
- Problem Solving
- Critical Thinking
- Information Literacy
- Ethical practice
As a CQUniversity student you are expected to act honestly in all aspects of your academic work.
Any assessable work undertaken or submitted for review or assessment must be your own work. Assessable work is any type of work you do to meet the assessment requirements in the unit, including draft work submitted for review and feedback and final work to be assessed.
When you use the ideas, words or data of others in your assessment, you must thoroughly and clearly acknowledge the source of this information by using the correct referencing style for your unit. Using others’ work without proper acknowledgement may be considered a form of intellectual dishonesty.
Participating honestly, respectfully, responsibly, and fairly in your university study ensures the CQUniversity qualification you earn will be valued as a true indication of your individual academic achievement and will continue to receive the respect and recognition it deserves.
As a student, you are responsible for reading and following CQUniversity’s policies, including the Student Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure. This policy sets out CQUniversity’s expectations of you to act with integrity, examples of academic integrity breaches to avoid, the processes used to address alleged breaches of academic integrity, and potential penalties.
What is a breach of academic integrity?
A breach of academic integrity includes but is not limited to plagiarism, self-plagiarism, collusion, cheating, contract cheating, and academic misconduct. The Student Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure defines what these terms mean and gives examples.
Why is academic integrity important?
A breach of academic integrity may result in one or more penalties, including suspension or even expulsion from the University. It can also have negative implications for student visas and future enrolment at CQUniversity or elsewhere. Students who engage in contract cheating also risk being blackmailed by contract cheating services.
Where can I get assistance?
For academic advice and guidance, the Academic Learning Centre (ALC) can support you in becoming confident in completing assessments with integrity and of high standard.
What can you do to act with integrity?
